P. 1
Hegel on Religion

Hegel on Religion

|Views: 55|Likes:
Published by oldsoothsayer

More info:

Published by: oldsoothsayer on Apr 03, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/02/2012

pdf

text

original

HEGEL on RELIGION __________

PHENOMENOLOGY OF MIND PHILOSOPHY OF MIND LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION PHILOSOPHY OF SPIRIT - Subjective spirit - Objective spirit - Absolute Spirit

I II III

From THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF MIND

VII. RELIGION RELIGION IN GENERAL In the forms of experience hitherto dealt with--which are distinguished broadly as Consciousness, Self-consciousness, Reason, and Spirit--Religion also, the con sciousness of Absolute Being in general, has no doubt made its appearance. But t hat was from the point of view of consciousness, when it has the Absolute Being for its object. Absolute Being, however, in its own distinctive nature, the Self -consciousness of Spirit, has not appeared in those forms. Even at the plane of Consciousness, viz. when this takes the shape of "Understan ding", there is a consciousness of the supersenuous, of the inner being of objec tive existence. But the supersensible, the eternal, or whatever we care to call it, is devoid of selfhood. It is merely, to begin with, something universal, whi ch is a long way still from being spirit knowing itself as spirit. Then there was Self-consciousness, which came to its final shape in the "unhappy consciousness"; that was merely the pain and sorrow of spirit wrestling to get itself out into objectivity once more, but not succeeding. The unity of individu al self-consciousness with its unchangeable Being, which is what this stage arri ves at, remains, in consequence, a "beyond", something afar off. The immediate existence of Reason (which we found arising out of that state of s orrow), and the special shapes which reason assumes, have no form of religion, b ecause self-consciousness in the case of reason knows itself or looks for itself in the direct and immediate present. On the other hand, in the world of the Ethical Order, we met with a type of reli gion, the religion of the nether world. This is belief in the fearful and unknow n darkness of Fate, and in the Eumenides of the spirit of the departed: the form er being pure negation taking the form of universality, the latter the same nega tion but in the form of individuality. Absolute Being is, then, in the latter sh

ape no doubt the self and is present, as there is no other way for the self to b e except present. But the individual self is this individual ghostly shade, whic h keeps the universal element, Fate, separated from itself. It is indeed a shade , a ghost, a cancelled and superseded particular, and so a universal self. But t hat negative meaning has not yet turned round into this latter positive signific ance, and hence the self, so cancelled and transcended, still directly means at the same time this particular being, this insubstantial reality. Fate, however, without self remains the darkness of night devoid of consciousness, which never comes to draw distinctions within itself, and never attains the clearness of sel f-knowledge. This belief in a necessity that produces nothingness, this belief in the nether world, becomes belief in Heaven, because the self which has departed must be uni ted with its universal nature, must unfold what it contains in terms of this uni versality, and thus become clear to itself. This kingdom of belief, however, we saw unfold its content merely in the element of reflective thought (Denken), wit hout bringing out the true notion (Begriff); and we saw it, on that account, per ish in its final fate, viz. in the religion of enlightenment. Here in this type of religion, the supersensible beyond, which we found in "understanding", is rei nstate, but in such a way that self-consciousness rests and feels satisfied in t he mundane present, not in the "beyond", and knows the supersensible beyond, voi d and empty, unknowable, and devoid of all terrors, neither as a self nor as pow er and might. In the religion of Morality it is at last reinstated that Absolute Reality is a positive content; but that content is bound up with the negativity characteristi c of the enlightenment. The content is an objective being, which . at the same t ime taken back into the self, and remains is there enclosed, and is a content wi th internal distinctions, while its parts are just as immediately negated as the y are posited. The final destiny, however, which absorbs this contradictory proc ess, is the self conscious of itself as the controlling necessity (Schicksal) of what is essential and actual. Spirit knowing its self is in religion primarily and immediately its own pure se lf-consciousness. Those modes of it above considered--"objective spirit", "spiri t estranged from itself" and "spirit certain of its self"--together constitute w hat it is in its condition of consciousness, the state in which, being objective ly opposed to its own world, it does not therein apprehend and consciously posse ss itself. But in Conscience it brings itself as well as its objective world as a whole into subjection, as also its idea(1) and its various specific conception s;(2)and is now self-consciousness at home with itself. Here spirit, represented as an object, has the significance for itself of being Universal Spirit, which contains within itself all that is ultimate and essential and all that is concre te and actual; yet is not in the form of freely subsisting actuality, or of the apparent independence of external nature. It has a shape, no doubt, the form of objective being, in that it is object of its own consciousness; but because this consciousness is affirmed in religion with the essential character of being sel f-consciousness, the form or shape assumed is one perfectly transparent to itsel f; and the reality spirit contains is enclosed in it, or transcended in it, just in the same way as when we speak of "all reality"; it is "all reality", but uni versal reality only in the sense of an object of thought. Since, then, in religion, the peculiar characteristic of what is properly consci ousness of spirit does not have the form of detached independent otherness, the existence of spirit is distinct from its self-consciousness, and its actual real ity proper falls outside religion. There is no doubt one spirit in both, but its consciousness does not embrace both together; and religion appears as a part of existence, of acting, and of striving, whose other part is the life lived withi n spirit's own actual world. As we now know that spirit in its own world and spi rit conscious of itself as spirit, i.e. spirit in the sphere of religion, are th

e same, the completion of religion consists in the two forms becoming identical with one another: not merely in its reality being grasped and embraced by religi on, but conversely--it, as spirit conscious of itself, becomes actual to itself, and real object of its own consciousness. So far as spirit in religion presents itself to itself, it is indeed consciousne ss, and the reality enclosed within it is the shape and garment in which it clot hes its idea of itself. The reality, however, does not in this presentation get proper justice done to it, that is to say, it does not get to be an independent and free objective existence and not merely a garment. And conversely, because t hat reality lacks within itself its completion, it is a determinate shape or for m, which does not attain to what it ought to reveal, viz. spirit conscious of it self. That spirit's shape might express spirit itself, the shape would have to b e nothing else than spirit, and spirit would have to appear to itself, or to be actual, as it is in its own essential being. Only thereby, too, would be attaine d--what may seem to demand the opposite--that the object of its consciousness ha s, at the same time, the form of free and independent reality. But only spirit w hich is object to itself in the shape of Absolute Spirit, is as much aware of be ing a free and independent reality as it remains therein conscious of itself. Since in the first instance self-consciousness and con- sciousness simply, relig ion, and spirit as it is externally in its world, or the objective existence of spirit, are distinct, the latter consists in the totality of spirit, so far as i ts moments are separated from each other and each is set forth by itself. These moments, however, are consciousness, self-consciousness, reason, and spirit--spi rit, that is, qua immediate spirit, which is not yet consciousness of spirit. Th eir totality, taken all together, constitutes the mundane existence of spirit as a whole; spirit as such contains the previous separate embodiments in the form of universal determinations of its own being, in those moments just named. Relig ion presupposes that these have completely run their course, and is their simple totality, their absolute Self and soul. The course which these traverse is, moreover, in relation to religion, not to be pictured as a temporal sequence. It is only spirit in its entirety that is in t ime, and the shapes assumed, which are specific embodiments Of the whole of spir it as such, present themselves in a sequence one after the other. For it is only the whole which properly has reality, and hence the form of pure freedom relati vely to anything else, the form which takes expression as time. But the moments of the whole, consciousness, self-consciousness, reason, and spirit, have, becau se they are moments, no existence separate from one another. Just as spirit was distinct from its moments, we have further, in the third plac e, to distinguish from these moments their specific individuated character. Each of those moments, in itself, we saw broke up again in a process of development all its own, and took various shapes and forms: as e.g. in the case of conscious ness, sensuous certainty and perception were distinct phases. These latter aspec ts fall apart in time from one another, and belong to a specific particular whol e. For spirit descends from its universality to assume an individual form throug h specific determination. This determination, or mediate element, is consciousne ss, self-consciousness, and so on. But individuality is constituted just bv the forms assumed by these moments. Hence these exhibit and reveal spirit in its ind ividuality or concrete reality, and are distinguished in time from one another. though in such a way that the succeeding retains within it the preceding. While, therefore, religion is the completion of the life of spirit, its final an d complete expression, into which, as being their ground, its individual moments , consciousness, self-consciousness, reason, and spirit, return and have returne d, they, at the same time, together constitute the objectively existing realizat ion of spirit in its totality; as such spirit is real only as the moving process of these aspects which it possesses, a process of distinguishing them and retur

ning back into itself. In the process of these universal moments is contained th e development of religion generally. Since, however, each of these attributes wa s set forth and presented, not only in the way it in general determines itself, but as it is in and for itself, i.e. as, within its own being, running its cours e as a distinct whole--there has thus arisen not merely the development of relig ion generally; those independently complete processes pursued by the individual phases or moments of spirit contain at the same time the determinate forms of re ligion itself. Spirit in its entirety, spirit in religion, is once more the proc ess from its immediacy to the attainment of a knowledge of what it implicitly or immediately, is; and is the process of attaining the state where the shape and form, in which it appears as an object for its own consciousness, will be perfec tly adequate to its essential nature, and where it will behold itself as it is. In this development of religion, then, spirit itself assumes definite shapes, wh ich constitute the distinc- tions involved in this process: and at the same time a determinate or specific form of religion has likewise an actual spirit of a s pecific character. Thus, if consciousness, self-consciousness, reason, and spiri t belong to self-knowing spirit in general, in a similar way the specific shapes , which self-knowing spirit assumes, appropriate and adopt the distinctive forms which were specially developed in the case of each of the stages--consciousness , self-consciousness, reason, and spirit. The determinate shape, assumed in a gi ven case by religion, appropriates, from among the forms belonging to each of it s moments, the one adapted to it, and makes this its actual spirit. Any one dete rminate attitude of religion pervades and permeates all aspects of its actual ex istence, and stamps them with this common feature. In this way the arrangement now assumed by the forms and shapes which have thus far appeared, is different from the way they appeared in their own order. On thi s point we may note shortly at the outset what is necessary. In the series we co nsidered, each moment, exhaustively elaborating its entire content, evolved and formed itself into a single whole within its own peculiar principle. And knowled ge was the inner depth, or the spirit, wherein the moments, having no subsistenc e of their own, possessed their substance. This substance, however, has now at l ength made its appearance; it is the deep life of spirit certain of itself; it d oes not allow the principle belonging to each individual form to get isolated, a nd become a whole within itself: rather it collects all these moments into its o wn content, keeps them together, and advances within this total wealth of its co ncrete actual spirit; while all its particular moments take into themselves and receive together in common the like determinate character of the whole. This spi rit certain of itself and the process it goes through-this is their true reality , the independent self-subsistence, which belongs to each individually. Thus while the previous linear series in its advance marked the retrogressive st eps in it by knots, but thence went forward again in one linear stretch, it is n ow, as it were, broken at these knots, these universal moments, and falls asunde r into many lines, which, being bound together into a single bundle, combine at the same time symmetrically, so that the similar distinctions, in which each sep arately took shape within its own sphere, meet together. For the rest, it is self-evident from the whole argument, how this co-ordination of universal directions, just mentioned, is to be understood; so that it become s superfluous to remark that these distinctions are to be taken to mean essentia lly and only moments of the process of development, not parts. In the case of ac tual concrete spirit they are attributes of its substance; in religion, on the o ther hand, they are only predicates of the subject. In the same way, indeed, all forms in general are, in themselves or for us, contained in spirit and containe d in every spirit. But the main point of importance, in dealing with its reality , is solely what determinate character it has in its consciousness, in which spe cific character it has expressed its self, or in what shape it knows its essenti al nature.

The distinction made between actual spirit and that same spirit which knows itse lf as spirit, or between itself qua consciousness and qua self-consciousness, is transcended and done away with in the case where spirit knows itself in its rea l truth. Its consciousness and its self-consciousness have come to terms. But, a s religion is here to begin with and immediately, this distinction has not yet r everted to spirit. It is merely the conception, the principle, of religion that is established at first. In this the essential element is self-consciousness, wh ich is conscious of being all truth, and which contains all reality within that truth. This self-consciousness, being consciousness [and so aware of an object], has itself for its object. Spirit, which knows itself in the first instance imm ediately, is thus to itself spirit in the form of immediacy; and the specific ch aracter of the shape in which it appears to itself is that of pure simple being. This being, this bare existence, has indeed a filling drawn neither from sensat ion or manifold matter, nor from any other one-sided moments, purposes, and dete rminations; its filling is solely spirit, and is known by itself to be all truth and reality. Such filling is in this first form not in adequate agreement with its own shape, spirit qua ultimate essence is not in accord with its consciousne ss. It is actual only as Absolute Spirit, when it is also for itself in its trut h as it is in its certainty of itself, or, when the extremes, into which spirit qua consciousness falls, exist for one another in spiritual shape. The embodimen t adopted by spirit qua object of its own consciousness, remains filled by the c ertainty of spirit, and this self-certainty constitutes its substance. Through t his content, the degrading of the object to bare objectivity, to the form of som ething that negates self-consciousness, disappears. The immediate unity of spiri t with itself is the fundamental basis, or pure consciousness, inside which cons ciousness breaks up into its constituent elements [viz. an object with subject o ver against it]. In this way, shut up within its pure self-consciousness, spirit does not exist in religion as the creator of a nature in general; rather what i t produces in the course of this process are its shapes qua spirits, which toget her constitute all that it can reveal when it is completely manifested. And this process itself is the development of its perfect and complete actuality through the individual aspects thereof, i.e. through its imperfect modes of realization . The first realization of spirit is just the principle and notion of religion its elf-religion as immediate and thus Natural Religion. Here spirit knows itself as its object in a "natural" or immediate shape. The second realization, is, howev er, necessarily that of knowing itself in the shape of transcended and supersede d natural existence, i.e. in the form of self. This therefore is Religion in the form of Art. For the shape it adopts is raised to the form of self through the productive activity of consciousness, by which this consciousness beholds in its object its own action, i.e. sees the self. The third realization, finally, canc els the one-sidedness of the first two: the self is as much as immediate self as the immediacy is a self. If spirit in the first is in the form of consciousness , and in the second in that of self-consciousness, it is in the third in the for m of the unity of both; it has then the shape of what is completely self-contain ed (An-und-Fersichseyns); and in being thus presented as it is in and for itself , this is Revealed Religion. Although spirit, however, here reaches its true sha pe, the very shape assumed and the conscious presentation are an aspect or phase still unsurmounted; and from this spirit has to pass over into the life of the Notion, in order therein completely to resolve the form of objectivity, in the n otion which embraces within itself this its own opposite. It is then that spirit has grasped its own principle, the notion of itself, as s o far only we [who analyse spirit] have grasped it; and its shape, the element o f its existence, in being the notion, is then spirit itself. 1. Vorstellung.

2. Begriff.

A. NATURAL RELIGION SPIRIT knowing spirit is consciousness of itself; and is to itself in the form o f objectivity. It is; and is at the same time self-existence (Fersichsein). It i s for itself; it is the aspect of self-consciousness, and is so in contrast to t he aspect of its consciousness, the aspect by which it relates itself to itself as object. In its consciousness there is the opposition and in consequence the d eterminateness of the form in which it appears to itself and knows itself. It is with this determinateness of shape that we have alone to do in considering reli gion; for its essential unembodied principle, its pure notion, has already come to light. The distinction of consciousness and self-consciousness, however, fall s at the same time within this notion. The form or shape of religion does not co ntain the existence of spirit in the sense of its being nature detached and free from thought, nor in the sense of its being thought detached from existence. Th e shape assumed by religion is existence contained and preserved in thought as w ell as a something thought which is consciously existent. It is by the determinate character of this form, in which spirit knows itself, t hat one religion is distinguished from another. But we have at the same time to note that the systematic exposition of this knowledge about itself, in terms of this individual specific character, does not as a fact exhaust the whole nature of an actual religion. The series of different religions, which will come before us, just as much sets forth again merely the different aspects of a single reli gion, and indeed of every single religion, and the imagery, the conscious ideas, which seem to mark off one concrete religion from another, make their appearanc e in each. All the same the diversity must also be looked at as a diversity of r eligion. For while spirit lives in the dis- tinction of its consciousness and it s self-consciousness, the process it goes through finds its goal in the transcen dence of this fundamental distinction and in giving the form of self-consciousne ss to the given shape which is object of consciousness. This distinction, howeve r, is not eo ipso transcended by the fact that the shapes, which that consciousn ess contains, have also the moments of self in them, and that God is presented a s self-consciousness. The consciously presented self is not the actual concrete self. In order that this, like every other more specific determination of the sh ape, may in truth belong to this shape, it has partly to be put into this shape by the action of self-consciousness, and partly the lower determination must sho w itself to be cancelled and transcended and comprehended by the higher. For wha t is consciously presented (vorgestellt) only ceases to be something "presented" and alien to spirit's knowledge, by the self having produced it, and so viewing the determination of the object as its own determination, and hence seeing itse lf in that object. By this operation, the lower determination [that of being som ething "presented"] has at once vanished; for doing anything is a negative proce ss which is carried through at the expense of something else. So far as that low er determination still continues to appear, it has withdrawn into the condition of unessentiality: just as, on the other hand, where the lower still predominate s, while the higher is also present, the one coexists in a self-less way alongsi de of the other. While, therefore, the various ideas falling within a single rel igion no doubt exhibit the whole course taken by the forms of religion, the char acter of each is determined by the particular unity of consciousness and self-co nsciousness; that is to say, by the fact that the self-consciousness has taken i nto itself the determination belonging to the object of consciousness, has, by i ts own action, made that determination altogether its own, and knows it to be th e essential one as compared with the others. The truth of belief in a given determination of the religious spirit shows itsel

f in this, that the actual spirit is constituted after the same manner as the sh ape in which spirit beholds itself in religion; thus e.g. the incarnation of God , which is found in Eastern religion, has no truth, because the concrete actual spirit of this religion is without the reconciliation this principle implies. It is not in place here to return from the totality of specific determinations b ack to the individual determination, and show in what shape the plenitude of all the others is contained within it and within its particular form of religion. T he higher form, when put back under a lower, is deprived of its significance for self-conscious spirit, belongs to spirit merely in a superficial way, and is fo r it at the level of presentation. The higher form has to be considered in its o wn peculiar significance, and dealt with where it is the principle of a particul ar religion, and is certified and approved by its actual spirit. a. GOD AS LIGHT SPIRIT, as the absolute Being,, which is self-consciousness-or the self-consciou s absolute Being, which is all truth and knows all reality as itself--is, to beg in with, merely its notion and principle in contrast to the reality which it giv es itself in the process of its conscious activity. And this notion is, as contr asted with the clear daylight of that explicit development, the darkness and nig ht of its inner life; in contrast to the existence of its various moments as ind ependent forms or shapes, this notion is the creative secret of its birth. This secret has its revelation within itself; for existence has its necessary place i n this notion, because this notion is spirit knowing itself, and thus possesses in its own nature the moment of being consciousness and of presenting itself obj ectively. We have here the pure ego, which in its externalization, in itself qua universal object, has the certainty of self; in other words, this object is, fo r the ego, the interfusion of all thought and all reality. When the first and immediate cleavage is made within self-knowing Absolute Spiri t, its shape assumes that character which belongs to immediate consciousness or to sense-certainty. It beholds itself in the form of being; but not being in the sense of what is without spirit, containing only the contingent qualities of se nsation--the kind of being that belongs to sense-certainty. Its being is filled with the content of spirit. It also includes within it the form which we. found in the case of immediate self-consciousness, the form of lord and master,(3) in regard to the self-consciousness of spirit which retreats from its object. This being, having as its content the notion of spirit, is, then, the shape of s pirit in relation simply to itself - the form of having no special shape at all. In virtue of this characteristic, this shape is the pure all-containing, all-su ffusing Light of the Sunrise, which preserves itself in its formless indetermina te substantiality. Its counterpart, its otherness, is the equally simple negativ e - Darkness. The process of its own externalization, its creations in the unres isting element of its counterpart, are bursts of Light. At the same time in thei r ultimate simplicity they are its way of becoming something for itself, and its return from its objective existence, streams of fire consuming its embodiment. The distinction, which it gives itself, no doubt thrives abundantly on the subst ance of existence, and shapes itself as the diverse forms of nature. But the ess ential simplicity of its thought rambles and roves about inconstant and inconsis tent, enlarges its bounds to measureless extent, and its beauty heightened to sp lendour is lost in its sublimity.(4) The content, which this state of pure being evolves, its perceptive activity, is , therefore, an unreal by-play on this substance which merely rises, without set ting into itself to become subject and secure firmly its distinctions through th e self. Its determinations are merely attributes, which do not succeed in attain ing independence; they remain merely names of the One, called by many names. Thi s One is clothed with the manifold powers of existence and with the shapes of re

ality, as with a soulless, selfless ornament; they are merely messengers of its mighty power,(5) claiming no will of their own, visions of its glory, voices in its praise. This revel of heaving life(6) must, however, assume the character of distinctive self-existence, and give enduring subsistence to its fleeting shapes. Immediate being, in which it places itself over against its own consciousness, is itself the negative destructive agency which dissolves its distinctions. It is thus in truth the Self; and spirit therefore passes on to know itself in the form of sel f. Pure Light scatters its simplicity as an infinity of separate forms, and pres ents itself as an offering to self-existence, that the individual may take susta inment to itself from its substance. b. PLANTS AND ANIMALS AS OBJECTS OF RELIGION(7) SELF-CONSCIOUS spirit, passing away from abstract, formless essence and going in to itself-or, in other words, having raised its immediacy to the level of Self-makes its simple unity assume the character of a manifold of self-existing entit ies, and is the religion of spiritual sense-perception. Here spirit breaks up in to an innumerable plurality of weaker and stronger, richer and poorer spirits. T his Pantheism, which, to begin with, consists in the quiescent subsistence of th ese spiritual atoms, passes into a process of active internal hostility. The inn ocence, which characterizes the flower and plant religions, and which is merely the selfless idea of Self, gives way to the seriousness of struggling warring li fe, to the guilt of animal religions; the quiescence and impotence of contemplat ive individuality pass into the destructive activity of separate self-existence. It is of no avail to have removed the lifelessness of abstraction from the thing s of perception, and to have raised them to the level of realities of spiritual perception: the animation of this spiritual kingdom has death in the heart of it , owing to the determinateness and the negativity, which overcome and trench upo n the innocent indifference [of the various species of plants] to one another. O wing to this determinateness and negativity, the dispersion of spirit into the m ultiplicity of the passive plant-forms becomes a hostile process, in which the h atred stirred up by their independent self-existence rages and consumes. The actual self-consciousness at work in this dispersed and disintegrated spirit , takes the form of a multitude of individualized mutually-antipathetic folk- sp irits, who fight and hate each other to the death, and consciously accept certai n specific forms of animals as their essential being and nature:(8) for they are nothing else than spirits of animals, or animal lives separate and cut off from one another, and with no universality consciously present in them. The characteristic of purely negative independent self-existence, however, consu mes itself in this active hatred towards one another; and through this process, involved in its very principle, spirit enters into another shape. Independent se lf-existence cancelled and abolished is the form of the object, a form which is produced by the self, or rather is the self produced, the self-consuming self, i .e. the self that becomes a "thing". The agent at work, therefore, retains the u pper hand over these animal spirits merely tearing each other to pieces; and his action is not merely negative, but composed and positive. The consciousness of spirit is, thus, now the process which is above and beyond the immediate inheren t [universal] nature, as well as transcends the abstract self-existence in isola tion. Since the implicit inherent nature is reduced, through opposition, to the level of a specific character, it is no longer the proper form of Absolute Spiri t, but a reality which its consciousness finds lying over against itself as an o rdinary existing fact and cancels; at the same time this consciousness is not me rely this negative cancelling self-existent being, but produces its own objectiv e idea of itself,-self-existence put forth in the form of an object. This proces

s of production is, all the same, not yet perfect production; it is a conditione d activity, the forming of a given material. c. THE ARTIFICER SPIRIT, then, here takes the form of the artificer, and its action, when produci ng itself as object, but without having as yet grasped the thought of itself, is an instinctive kind of working, like bees building their cells. The first form, because immediate, has the abstract character of "understanding" , and the work accomplished is not yet in itself endued with spirit. The crystal s of Pyramids and Obelisks, simple combinations of straight lines with even surf aces and equal relations of parts in which the incommensurability of roundness i s set aside--these are the works produced by this artificer, the worker of the s trict form. Owing to the purely abstract intelligible nature of the form, the wo rk is not in itself its own true significance; it is not the spiritual self. Thu s, either the works produced only receive spirit into them as an alien, departed spirit, one that has forsaken its living suffusion and permeation with reality, and, being itself dead, enters into these lifeless crystals; or they take up an external relation to spirit as something which is itself there externally and n ot as spirit--they are related to it as to the Orient Light, which throws its si gnificance on them. The separation of elements from which spirit as artificer starts--the separation of the implicit essential nature, which becomes the material it works upon, and independent self-existence, which is the aspect of the self-consciousness at wo rk-this division has become objective to spirit in its work. Its further endeavo ur has to be directed to cancelling and doing away with this separation of soul and body; it must strive to clothe and give embodied shape to soul per se, and e ndow the body with soul. The two aspects, in that they are brought closer to one another, bear towards each other, in this condition, the character of ideally p resented spirit and of enveloping shell. Spirit's oneness with itself contains t his opposition of individuality and universality. As the work comes closer to it self in the coming together of its aspects, there comes about thereby at the sam e time the other fact, that the work comes closer to the self-consciousness perf orming it, and that the latter attains in the work knowledge of itself as it tru ly is. In this way, however, the work merely constitutes to begin with the abstr act side of the activity of spirit, which does not yet know the content of this activity within itself but in its work, which is a "thing". The artificer as suc h, spirit in its entirety, has not yet appeared; the artificer is still the inne r, hidden reality, which qua entire is present only as broken up into active sel f-consciousness and the object it has produced. The surrounding habitation, then, external reality, which has so far been raised merely to the abstract form of the understanding, is worked up by the artificer into a more animated form. The artificer employs plant life for this purpose, w hich is no longer sacred as in the previous case of inactive impotent pantheism; rather the artificer, who grasps himself as the self existent reality, takes th at plant life as something to be used and degrades it to an external aspect, to the level of an ornament. But it is not turned to use without some alteration: f or the worker producing the self-conscious form destroys at the same time the tr ansitoriness, inherently characteristic of the immediate existence of this life, and brings its organic forms nearer to the more exact and more universal forms of thought. The organic form, which, left to itself, grows and thrives in partic ularity, being on its side subjugated by the form of thought, elevates in turn t hese straight- lined and level shapes into more animated roundness--a blending w hich becomes the root of free architecture.(10) This dwelling, (the aspect of the universal element or inorganic nature of spiri t), also includes within it now a form of individuality, which brings nearer to

actuality the spirit that was formerly separated from existence and external or internal thereto, and thus makes the work to accord more with active self-consci ousness. The worker lays hold, first of all, on the form of self-existence in ge neral, on the forms of animal life. That he is no longer directly aware of himse lf in animal life, he shows by the fact that in reference to this he constitutes himself the productive force, and knows himself in it as being his own work, wh ereby the animal shape at the same time is one which is superseded and becomes t he hieroglyphic symbol of another meaning, the hieroglyph of a thought. Hence al so this shape is no longer solely and entirely used by the worker, but becomes b lended with the shape embodying thought, with the human form.(11) Still, the wor k lacks the form and existence where self exists as self: it also fails to expre ss in its very nature that it includes within itself an inner meaning; it lacks language, the element in which the sense and meaning contained are actually pres ent. The work done, therefore, even when quite purified of the animal aspect, an d bearing the form and shape of self-consciousness alone, is still the silent so undless shape, which needs the rays of the rising sun in order to have a sound w hich, when produced by light, is even then merely noise and not speech, shows me rely an outer self, not the inner self.(12) Contrasted with this outer self of the form and shape, stands the other form, wh ich indicates that it has in it an inner being. Nature, turning back into its es sen- tial being, degrades its multiplicity of life, ever individualizing itself and confounding itself in its own process, to the level of an unessential encasi ng shell, which is the covering for the inner being. And as yet this inner being is still simple darkness, the unmoved, the black formless stone.(13) Both representations contain inwardness and existence--the two moments of spirit : and both kinds of manifestation contain both moments at once in a relation of opposition, the self both as inward and as outward. Both have to be united. The soul of the statue in human form does not yet come out of the inner being, is no t yet speech, objective existence of self which is inherently internal,--and the inner being of multiform existence is still without voice or sound, still draws no distinctions within itself, and is still separated from its outer being, to which all distinctions belong. The artificer, therefore, combines both by blendi ng the forms of nature and self-consciousness; and these ambiguous beings, a rid dle to themselves--the conscious struggling with what has no consciousness, the simple inner with the multiform outer, the darkness of thought mated with the cl earness of expression--these break out into the language of a wisdom that is dar kly deep and difficult to understand.(14) With the production of this work, the instinctive method of working ceases, whic h, in contrast to self-consciousness, produced a work devoid of consciousness. F or here the activity of the artificer, which constitutes self-consciousness, com es face to face with an inner being equally self-conscious and giving itself exp ression. He has therein raised himself by his work up to the point where his con scious life breaks asunder, where spirit greets spirit. In this unity of self-co nscious spirit with itself, so far as it is aware of being embodiment and object of its own consciousness, its blending and mingling with the unconscious state of immediate shapes of nature become purified. These monsters in form and shape, word and deed, are resolved and dissolved into a shape which is spiritual-an ou ter which has entered into itself, an inner which expresses itself out of itself and in itself,-they pass into thought, which brings forth itself, preserves the shape and form suited to thought, and is transparent existence. Spirit is Artis t.

B. RELIGION IN THE FORM OF ART(1)

When the shape has gained the form of self -conscious activity. and the plurality of rights and duties. but when this substance is said to have. in which the self does not know itself as free individual. in this inner subjectivity. and which . however. The artificer has given up the synthesizing activity. each with its particular way of act ing which co-operates to form the whole. it is quiet stability and solid truth. and the destined consummation (Schicksal) of the ethical world. what the actual spirit is. falls into r uins. as an objective fact for actual consc iousness. unity the self-existence of self-consciousness is contained only nega tively. which was the connecting medium of unstable extremes. and hence rests on the fact that the in dividual is contented with the limitation of his existence. the artificer has become a spiritual workman. t he religion characteristic of its sphere first appears in complete form in its p arting from its stable security. only transitorily. The religion of the ethical spirit. for the truth of the ethical spirit lies primarily just in this substantial objectivity and trust. Rather this spirit is a free nation. and beholds the lord and master of its reality. and is the return from its objectivity into pure knowledge of itself. If we next ask. and spirit produces such a shape for itself. Partly. But that serene immediate confide nce in the substance of this ethical life turns back into trust in self and cert ainty of self. as also on its organized distribut ion into the spheres of the various classes. It is for them neither the Light of the World. which finds in the religion of art th e consciousness of its Absolute. and the substance of the nation cracked. raises it above its actual realizat ion. For the reality of the ethical substance rests partly on its quiet unchangeableness as contrasted with the absolute process of self-consciousness. has attained to boundless cheerfulness of heart and the freest enjoyment of itself. that reality rests on its organi zation into a plurality of rights and duties. nor their subjection to "castes". into the latter. which is individualized. is the same dialectic process in the sphere of the ethical life as the plurality of "things" and their various "qualities"--a process which only comes to rest and stability in the simplicity of spirit certa in of self The complete fulfilment of the ethical life in free self-consciousness. that blending of the heter ogeneous forms of thought and nature. and the disap pearance of the ethical order. which together constitute the semblance of organization of a compl eted whole. this amounts to saying that the substance.SPIRIT has raised the shape in which it is object for its own consciousness into the form of consciousness itself. s pirit. being perfectly sure of itself. however. as well as absolute unrest. as well as the restricted particular action this involves. the condition is one of absolute levity on the part of the ethical spirit. is known by the individuals within it as their proper e ssence and their own achievement. and has not yet gras ped the unrestricted thought of his free self. This spirit is not merely the universal substance of all individuals . the form of consciousness. whose reality and existence each and every one knows to be his own will and his own deed. nor i s it the restless waste and destruction of hostile nations. where. in whose. Since then its trust is broken. and gone into itself. are therefore that indiv iduality which has entered into itself. Since an ethically constituted nation lives in direct unity with its own substance. however. has now come forwar d as an extreme--that of self-consciousness grasping itself as essential and ult . and the se parate spheres of its own articulated organization and. in which custom and order consti tute the common substance of all. and consequently on the fact that this self-consciousness ha s not yet left its serene life of customary convention and its confident securit y therein. again. the universal freedom of the individuals concerned i s wanting. therefore. it has dissipated and resolved into itself al l the firmly established distinctions constituting its own stability. It turns round. a nd does not contain the principle of pure individualism of self-consciousness. it turns out that this is the ethical or object ive spirit. in the self becoming free. This simple certainly of spirit within itself has a double meaning.

ness. then. is immediate in character--t he shape assumed is there as a "thing" in general. as regards t he self operating does not exercise free spiritual activity. and this unity com es out as a work. by having given himself over to which his sel f-consciousness loses freedom. This pure activity. abstract and particular. Becoming its master. It is not the crystal. its operation is steeped in existence. This shape assumed obtains its pure form. As regards itself. It is out of this night of pure cert ainty of self that the ethical spirit rises again in a shape freed from nature a nd its own immediate existence. while. but o f being. which mourns over the loss of its w orld. because immediate. which presents the inorganic nature in reference to the shape adopted. which spirit selects as the vessel for its sorrow. raised above actual reality. and given itself its content. conscious of its inalienable force. But that positive power belonging to the universa l is overcome by the pure self of the individual. wrestles with the unembodied essen tial being. Nor. the form belon ging to spirit. This is spirit certain within itself. a form w hich housed and covered a lifeless element. At such an epoch art in absolute form(2) comes on the scene. that of being not merely the substance born and produced out of the self. Later on. Spirit a cts in this individual as his universal and his power. belonging as we saw to the level of understanding. it does not find its substance in the free life of an ethical order. spirit goes beyond art in order to gain its higher manifestation. wor ks its way out of existence and works right into the existent. too. in its manifestation as object. it has to move away from this immediate and objective phase towards sel f-consciousness.imate. The existence of the pure notion into which spirit has fled from its bodily shap e. The first way in which the artistic spirit keeps as far as possible removed from each other its shape and its active consciousness. or is shone upon externally by a sou l. again. on the other side. At the earlier stag e it is instinctive in its operation. It breaks up into the distinc tion of individualness which has the shape of the self. and made itself subject. This form is the night in which the subst ance was betrayed. this negative activity has turned the element o f pathos into its own material. and now out of the purity of self produces its own essential being. viz. because th e individual in ethical obedience and service has so worked off every unconsciou s existence and every fixed determination. THE ABSTRACT WORK OF ART THE first work of art is. and hence. the ethical substance has withdrawn from its objective existence in to its pure self-conscious. is an individual. this very self. universal spirit individualized and consciously presented. and universality. as his element of "Pathos". or the activ ity with which spirit brings itself forth as object. is it that commingling of . which it at first gives itself in con trast to its own spirit. and is its envi ronment and habitation. it seeks at that higher level not merely to bring forth itself out of its own notion. so that the notion and the work of art produced may kno w each other reciprocally as one and the same. It is pure form. this is the aspect of the notion. and by so doing to produce a work of art inherently end owed with life. the latter for itself endeavours in t he "cult" to do away with the distinction. a. the negative power. from which he suffers vio lence.(3) Since. but to have its v ery notion as its shape. as the substance has itself become th is fluid and undifferentiated essence. by the whole being raised into the sphere of the pure notion.

(2) a nd has no longer a value on its own account. and. the essential reality. therefore. tha t element reflected back into spirit. just as its self-conscious act uality is a particular national spirit. and standing in contrast to th e work produced. By that very fact. however. tho ught's activity here being still an imitation. stands self-co nsciousness. is the moment of the notion existing qua notion. which operates with nece ssity only qua universal essence. are supplant ed by shapes. Ocean. the separation of the work and hi s self-conscious activity is not yet healed again. but has sunk into being a significa nt sign of something else. its essential nature-incommensurability-is preserved for understanding. it is a whole only when its process of coming to be is taken along with it. earth's blind typhonic Fire. being its source and origin. And if this notion. The essential being of the god. purifies the forms. divesting himself of his own being. as a specific individuality he gave in his work no reality. is the black stone extracted from the animal encase ment. has nothing left over for itsel f except to be pure activity. and so on. the non-ethical disordered realm of the Titans. What belongs to the substance. within it its nature element as something transcended. not b y itself really an animated thing. which is scattered and broken into pa rticular spheres of action and into individual centres of self-consciousness. as a shadowy. The utter chaos and confused struggle amongst the elements existing free and detache d from each other. the form assumed by the god in itself casts off even the restrictions of the natural con ditions of animal existence.(1) and suffused with the light of consciousness. its existence is one of the elements of nature. is unselfish e nough to declare the work of art to be per se absolutely animated. obscure memory. to the cloudy bounda ries of the world which finds itself in the sphere of spirit and is there at pea ce. The human form strips off the animal character with which it was mixed up. The animal form is for the god merely an accidental vestment. All this individuation the si mplicity of this form has abolished. still clinging to the forms. which do but darkly recall those earlier titans. and brought together into an individuality at peace with itself. qua the artist or spectator. which first arose in connexion with plants. Rather the notion strips off the remnant of root. confronting quiescent individuality. He could only confer completeness on it by relinquishing his particular nature. and leaves. These ancient gods. Sun.the forms of nature and thought. and also in the life of a nation. The indwelling god. but clear ethical spirits of self-conscious nations. The form of the gods retains. being in the first instance an individual shape . in this unity. and to forget . so that the animation of the o rganic is taken up into the abstract form of understanding. branches. the individuation both in the life of nature. to himself. In this first and immediate act of production. at the same tim e. which. nature made transparent by thought and uni ted with self-conscious life. At the same time. The obvious and common element in the case of a w ork of art. This simple shape has thus destroyed within itself the dispeace of endless indiv iduation. has become a mere symbol. and rising to the ab straction of pure action. an d has an existence manifold in action and meaning. the artist imparted entirely to his work. and hints at the internal arrangements of organic l ife melted down into the surface of the form. Heaven. and makes them into figures in which the crystal's straight lines and su rfaces are raised into incommensurable relations. Hence the condition of unrest stands contrasted with this form. but is contingent in its actual existence and process. that it is produced in consciousness and is made by the hand of man. therefore. Earth.(3) But the former is. is the unity of the universal existence of nature and of self-conscious spirit which in its actuality appears confronti ng the former. The work is. is vanquished and banished to the outskirts of self-transparent reality. first-born children of the union of Light with Darkness. however. the animal appears alongside its true form. however. and pertaining only to this surfac e. and which are no longer things of nature.

into externality. People may. is a spiritual stream which in all the manifold sel f-conscious units is conscious of itself as one and the same function in all ali ke and a simple state of being. in his work. When individual self-consc iousness exists in that way. however. whose inwardness gets at the same time express existence in th e Hymn. self -conscio usness. This kind of language is distinct from another way God speaks. The artist finds out.himself qua agent or onlooker. the notion of spirit has to be insisted on. judge the work. spirit cannot dispense with the moment of being conscious of itself. For God's very principle implies that God is a t once the essence of nature and of spirit. the speech of an alien and external self-conscio usness. . This higher element is that of Language-a way of existing which is directly self-conscious existence. and th eir return to the unity they started from has not yet come about. if they put themselves beneath it. the language used is. gives the two sides their abstract and specificall y contrasted characteristics of "doing" something and of being a "thing". he knows himself as the maste r of this. because spirit. nor the exertion and strai n of his own toil. God requires a nother way of going forth than this. a work whi ch directly in its existence contains the pure activity which was apart from and in contrast to the god when existing as a "thing" In other words. It is. which is not that of universal self-consciousness. since it renders him his self-cons ciousness merely in the way of admiration. The self is simple self-existence. But this way of animating his work. being this universal self-consciousness of every one. stands in contrast to the work. as against this. and hence has not merely natural but spiritual existence as well. in this its primary disruption. in which. then. pure tho ught or devotion. which is cut off from the self-consciousness of the communion. it is the soul existing as soul. Since his self comes back to him in the form of gladness in general. is rather a confession to the artist that the animated work is not on the same level as himself. endowed with a soul. when thus at home with itself in its essential nature. is the work of art inherently animated. it is at the same time directly a form of universal contagion. for th e religious self-consciousness. This moment. he knows how much more his act is than what they understand and say. that he did not produce a reality like himself. then. which takes language as its medium of emb odiment. he drops into the opposite. is primarily a mere individual self. kindled in every one. or endue it with their consciousness in whatever way they like--if the y with their knowledge set themselves over it. The god. In so far as this moment is merely implied as yet in God's principle and is not realized in religion. and thereby is altogether universal sel f-existence. or bring it offerings a nd gifts. is not yet there in the way its essential principle requires it shoul d be. Dev otion. holds in a single unity its pure inwardness as well as its objecti ve existence for others and the independent self-existence of the individual uni ts. Spirit. The hymn keeps within it the individuality of self-consciousness. however. that self. which is their own tru e nature. The work of art hence requires another element for its existence. The Oracle. is the necessary and th e first form of divine utterance. out of the depths of his creative night. moreover. then. he does not find therein the pa in of his self-discipline and the pain of production. and recog nize in it their own dominating essential reality. No doubt there comes back to him from his work a consciousness in the s ense that an admiring multitude honours it as the spirit. when its essential being becomes objective. and th is individual character is at the same time perceived to be there universal. remains in direct unison wit h itself. complete isolation of independent self-existent selves is at once fl uent continuity and universally communicated unity of the many selves. to the character of a "thi ng" with no self-consciousness. The self-consciousness which remains alien and foreign to its religious communion. both in the case of the god of the religions of art as well as of the preceding religions.

In the case of the former. The true self-conscious existence. is the Oracle.there just as soon as it is there. objectivity is set free and is without the immediate presen ce of a self of its own. It stands in cont rast to the statue. in the religion of art. Reflective thought. and knows that simplicity of truth to be the inherent reality (das Ansichseyende) which does not possess the form of contingent existence through an utterance of an alien self. Thus the universal spirit of the Sunrise. knowledge which his understanding supplies as to what is useful for the individual. treats the inherently contingent as an essential concern of his thought and knowledge. and selects. the pec uliar utterance of God. and is. This basis is just what is contingent. which has not yet particularized its existence. or good for one of his friends to go on a journey. and hen ce the ethical consciousness lets itself. which has the character of a "thing". which advances to being distinctively for itself. because of this universality. as if by a throw of the dice. As the universal truth. but yet to recognize that this very act ref lected on is something contingent. revealed by the "Light" of the world. whose substantial content is sublime in the simplicity of its truth. however. and that. because these are known as the essential inherent reality of the nation's life. Just as that wise man of old(4) searched in his own thought for what was worthy and good . se lf-consciousness. but is its very own. which is not the utterance of an alien and so accidental. but is the sure a nd unwritten law of the gods. the stea m from which deprives the self-conscious mind of its sanity of judgment. however. while the forme r. The religious Cult constitutes the process of the two sides--a process in which . settle t he matter in a manner that is similarly unreflective and extraneous. Higher than both. who is the spirit of an ethically constituted nation. is to make careful reflexi on the oracle for contingent action. The further developed self. and is extraneous. because Go d's shape has taken on consciousness and hence individuality in general. is hence just such a knowledge as that of "or acles" or of the "lot".e.The content of this its own peculiar and individual form of speech results from the general determinate character which the Absolute Spirit is affirmed to have in its religion as such. claims for it self the universal truths enun. not universal. thereby sh ows the ethical sentiment of indifference to what is accidental. so too. after consideration. or fermenting earth. by his understanding. which spirit receives in the form of speech. which knows its special circumstances and situation. trivial t o the self-consciousness developing further. gets the mastery over th e objectivity of the Light of the rising Sun. For wha t is accidental is not the object of sober reflexion. what is useful for him. the other is existence in a state of transience. and has thus got rid of the form of cont ingent appearance. because it refers to what is opportune and ha s a relation to what is particular. and no man knows what time it came". If the indi vidual. no longer. As the statue is exist ence in a state of rest. has here returned into what is within or what is beneath. on the contrary. in the latter. but at the same time appears. attains insufficiently to definite embodiment. and the utterance of them is thus for su ch reflexion no longer a strange and alien speech. i. a law that "lives for ever. and announces what is serviceable to its interests. it is the specific nature of his particu lar character which is the ground of this self-determination. on the other hand. in the same way the universal consciousness draws the kn owledge about the contingent from birds. and such l ike unimportant things. but left it to his "Daimon" to find out and decide the petty contingent conten t of what he wanted to know--whether it was good for him to keep company with th is or that person. utters about the Absolute equally simple and universal statements. or trees. only that he who questions the oracle or lot. objectivity is too mu ch confined within the self. ri ses above the pure "pathos" of [unconscious] substance. determines on a certain course. on the other hand.ciated. is the work of art which we met with before. like time.

the significance of being the inherently real. reflects the act into the unive rsal. the objective ultimate Being too is annihilated in that very process. a soul. for an unreal act is a contradiction in terms. which the owner. is immediately and only absolute Being . The practice of the religious Cult begins. through this mediating process of the cult. so far as it is actual consciousness. and raising it into universality. into the absolute Being rather than into himself. i. of relinquishing its particularity--the road by which it reaches the mansions and the fellowship of the blest. the self sacrifices the unessential aspect of nature to itself. and in so far as. the way of s piritual discipline in general. that external nature has the opposite significance for its pu re consciousness--viz. raises the self into being this pure divine element. apparently without any profit whatsoever to himself. The abst ract Cult. and thus combines and unites with actual reality. and stands for what has no existence per se. for which the self sacrifices its own [relative] unreality. this Bei ng descends.e. pours away or lets rise up in smoke. On the one hand. At the same time. which cleanses its exterior with the washing of water. merely in secret. and. The essential Being has in it the significance of a free object. and is one with absolute Being. It has to become a real act. therefore. and is thus merely th e night of the object's existence and the place prepared for its shape. on the other hand. This principle of the Cult is essentially contained and present already in the f low of the melody of the Hymn. and the unity. Here in the Cult. and its embodiment at rest in the element of thinghood. thereby receives the proper actuality of self-consciousness. in pure consciousness. becomes an existing fact. from its universality i nto individual form. The animal of fered up is the symbol of a god. in its first form. and robes it in white. through the actual cult this object tur ns back into the self. which is equally regarded as not essential. with the pure and simple " offering up" or "surrender" of a possession. the sel f gives itself a consciousness of the Divine Being descending from its remotenes s into it. i s not consciousness distinguishing its object from itself. just as. and reward. The soul.the divine embodiment in motion within the pure feeling-element of self-consciou sness. and knows itse lf as evil. and instead. By so do ing he renounces before the absolute Being of his pure consciousness all possess ion and right of property and enjoyment thereof. In the former die the powers of the upper law the [Olympians] whic . nature is its proper immediate reality a nd particularity. The s oul fulfils the attainment of this purity in a conscious way. Consciousness proper thereby rai ses itself to the level of its pure self-consciousness. in the purity it thus attains. therefore. Still the soul is not yet the self. which is the underlyi ng principle of their being. reciprocally aban don the different character each possesses. the fruits consumed are the actual living Ceres and Bacchus. however. and unreal in fact. is a fulfilme nt accomplished merely in idea. which was formerly the unreal and merely objec tive. while its innermost traverses the imaginatively presented path of labour. which. finds the ab solute Being manifesting itself as actual nature. Conversely. and is superseded. and m aking it something concrete and actual. These hymns of devotion are the way the self obta ins immediate pure satisfaction through and within itself. because it is this double-sided process of cancelling the abstra ction of absolute Being (which is the way devotion determines the object). On the other hand. nature belong s to self-consciousness as its possession and property. conversely. it has the signi ficance of absolute Being dwelling in its purity beyond actual reality. renounces personality and the r eversion of his action to his self. The act is thereby a spir itual movement. of cancelling th e actual (which is the way the agent determines the object and the self acting). It is something that merely is. which has descended to the depths of its being. punishment. The way the two sides make their appearance in the act is of such a character th at the self-conscious aspect. and this Divine Being. because of its abstract character. It is the soul purifi ed. This ceremonial cult is.

For the unity which has arisen. and sets before its own consciousness. The person making the offering at that first sacrifice reserves the greatest share f or his own enjoyment. At the festival season. This enjoyment is the negative power which cancels the absolut e Being as well as the singleness. the hon our which God enjoys in his decorative adornment. goes further. But it is not only the h onour of God which is brought about. is indeed an actual act. is not merely ne gative destructive fate. The Halls and Dwellings of God are for th e use of man. and replaces that i mmediate reality. and the self has consciousness of its un ity with its Absolute. for by thus dedicating his gifts and his labours the worker m akes God well disposed towards him and looks on his self as detached and apperta ining to God. This it has done in the fact that it has given itself definite existence. in consequence. At the same time. is the honour and glory of the artistic and magnanimous nation. partly the external objectivity of stat uary is cancelled. that of the self making the sacrifice. and made itself an individ ual animal and fruit of the earth. In this manner they receive a return for their gifts from a responsive and grateful God. That this concrete act may be possible. in testifying to His honour and in p resenting gifts. What pertains to devotion is not objectively pro duced. the people adorn their own dwellings. and is really the preparation of the offered substance for a meal. this particularity is dissolved in the universality. this i s only a trifling part. in the latter the powers of the lower law [the Furi es] which possesses in bloodless form secret and crafty power. for the rest. The self actively sacrificing demonstrates in actual existence. however. the treasures preserved there are in time of need his own. the work also has a meaning the reverse of the first which was that of self-renunciation and of hono ur done to what is alien and external. and reserves from the latter sacrifice what is useful for the same purpose. as well as God's establishments with furnish ings of elegance and grace. too. therefore. and. at the same time. just as the result when confined to the feeling of enjoyment(5) is robbed of its external existence. this already implicitl y completed self-renunciation on the part of absolute Being. and receive the proofs of His favour-wherei n the nation became bound to the God because of the work done for Him-not as a h ope and a deferred realization. which absolute Being has. this action is not the individual labour of the artis t. since the cult is the common task-or the individual takes for each and all to do -which produces for the honour and glory of God a House for Him to dwell in and adornment for His presence. but rather. it is only for that Being that the re flexion of personal possession and individual self-existence back into the Unive rsal is marked distinct from the self as such. This cult. the feast that cheats the act out of its negative significance. The Cult. viz. It is merely for the a bstract Being of the nether world that the sacrifice offered to it is wholly sur rendered and devoted. the nation finds directly and at once the enjoyment of its own wealth and adornment. The sacrifice of the divine substance. and the blessing of His countenance and fav our is not only shed in idea and imagination on the worker. but has a positive significance. By so doing. by the higher. in the first instance by giving its devotion an objective subsistence. the positive actual reality in which the objective existence of absolute Being is tr ansmuted into self-conscious existence. although its meaning lies for the most part only in devotion. and which is the outcome of transcending the singleness and separation of the two sides. and the other act of sacrifice is merely the destruction of what cannot be used. THE LIVING WORK OF ART . and this enjoyment is.h has blood and actual life. and replaces this defect. belongs to the si de of self-consciousness. so far as it is active. b. the absolute B eing must have from the start implicitly sacrificed itself. Partly. their own garments.

As a thing that can be used. The silent inner being of selfless nature attai ns in its fruits the stage where nature. to its votaries in the main merely this: that they are the nation of the ir god. this consciousness receives not merely the general title to its own subsistence. In its being useful for food and drink it reaches its highest perfection. But that Being. in the other the masculine principle. within it. and made manifest.THAT nation which approaches its god in the cult of the religion of art is an et hically constituted nation. it does not secure for them their actual self. This universal spirit. w hich has now "set" and disappeared within itself. wherein they disapp ear. on the other hand. Descending from its pure essentiality and becoming an objective force of nature and the expressions of t his force. For mysticism is not conce alment of a secret. it consists in the self knowing itself to be o ne with absolute Being. and has its own "setting". . it has not only exi stence which is seen. from objectivity which is overcome and superse ded. or ignorance. and. however. however. The religious cult of this simple unembodied ultimate Being gives back. self-consciousness that is at peace and satisfie d in its ultimate Being turns away. then. knowing its State and the acts of the State to be th e will and the achievement of its own self. which has not yet reconciled itself with its essential Being that is striving to become objective.(1) a Being. becoming revealed. in other words not k nowing the "depths" of its nature. duly self-prepared and digested. therefore. but no longer the straine d and striving individuality of the artist. confronting t he self-conscious nation. and comes in touch with spiritual existence. but also its self-conscious existence within it: just as. then. the night of mere "substance". co nsciousness finds itself at home with it when it appears. It has here traversed the process of its actualization. But it is just in such certainty that simple absolute Bei ng has been placed by the cult. this is indee d rejected. although not yet truth known explicitly. implies self. and in this latter. is consequently not the "Light-God". This place is. being self less does not contain the certainty of the individual selves. the nursing mother. and their simple su bstance as a whole. then. This "pathos" is. the Absolute has no being in a despised and outcast nation whose mere substance is acknowledg ed. whose reality is selfless. not as spirit. Only t he self is revealed to itself . is without that abstra ct simplicity of the absolute Being. offers itself as material for the life which has a self. it becomes one with the self. which. The cult. the Being of the Rising Sun. by itself. by actually being enjoyed. or what is manifest is so merely in the immediat e certainty of itself. which is directly at one with the self. it is the night [ substance] satisfied. is inherently spirit and co mprehending truth. it is an existence relative to an other. in the cult. conversely. or its pure individuality. that orient "Light" of the world is discovered for what it really is: Enjoyment is the Mystery of its being. partly spiritual ferment. and thereby disclosed comp letely to this self. by itself. It secures for them merely their stable subsistence. in the first case it is the feminine principle. Because this Absolute. the refore. the self-dr iving force of self-conscious existence. it is also object of desire. and. felt. For they revere their god as the empty profound. and so contains existence and reality. having its "pathos" within it and in want of nothing. In its metamo rphosis the spirit of the earth has developed and become partly a silently energ izing substance. but in the nation whose self is acknowledged as l iving in its substance. smelt. but is only their universal ultimate Being and the dominating imperious power. and therefore without its "profundity". an objective existence for t he self by which it is consumed. of the religion of art. In this enjoyment. as also does the god that has entered into s elf-consciousness as into its place of habitation. For therein it is the possibility o f a higher existence. sel f-consciousness. From the ceremonial cult. tasted. beca use it comes back from intuition.

Spirit has not yet qua self-con scious spirit offered itself up to it. and this has been revealed partly as the proces s of passing out of its dark night of concealment up to the level of consciousne ss. surrendering itself to self-consciousness. must produce a work which confronts it as the statue stands over against the enthusiasm of the artist in the previous case. one of them comes prominently forward wh o is the very embodiment of the movement. which m atches strength with its beauty. as an essential moment. is the variously named "Light" of the Rising Sun and its tumult of h eaving life. "it is manifest to reason. is simple absolute Being.e. revealed to self-conscious spirit within i tself. however. through the cult. What has thus been. though not yet imparting to a cult of that kind the significance of t he Absolute Being. both the certainty regarding what is objective. Its self-conscious life is therefore merely the mystery of the Bread and the Wine. In the case of the bacchic(5) revelling enthusiasm the self is beside itself. the highest bodily representation of what the essential Being of th e nation is. whose individuality includes. however. gods [of Olympus]. self-consciousness as such. and the enthusiasm. as a reward for his force and energy. But this cul t provides the basis for this revelation. The more conspicuous moving impuls e. of Ceres and Bacchus. partly. into the emotional inwardne . Thus we here get the abstract moment of the living embodiment of ultimate Being. fervid women. the strictly higher. however. but they still lack their due balance and equilibrium.(3) attained there to its pro per realization.. as the proces s of losing itself again in nether darkness. (4) Still. not of the other. is not only immediate and unrefl ecting. which. h as first embodied itself in objective existence in the fruits of the earth. In the place of the statue man thus puts himself as the figure elaborated and moulded for perfectly free movement. with which the statue was honoured [in the former typ e of religion]. and of waiting above m erely with the silent yearning of motherhood. The dim obscurity of consciousness in the one case and its wild s tammering utterance. which have just come before us. for it is the ultimate Being that is first revealed to him. and to him is given. it is in poin t of fact still secret. He is a lively and living work of art. amongst his own nation. to the heart". instead of a g od in stone. w hich did not reach consciousness. a certainty which in religion. that is discovered to consciousness: i. must be taken up into the transparent existence of the latt er. and lays out its moments individually and separately. the adornment.When we say of anything. in bodily beauty of form it is spiritual Being that is o utside itself. just as the stat ue is the perfectly free state of quiescence.--a work indeed that is equally complete and finished. not as spirit per se. it is only Absolute Spirit in the sense of this simple abstract Being. If every individual knows how to p lay the part at least of a torchbearer. the fluent ene rgy and force of all the members. having likewise desisted from its abstract state of being. the unrestrained revel of nature in self-conscious form. n ot yet Spirit--not such a Being as essentially takes on human form. in the self. Such a cult is the Festival which man makes in his o wn honour. the smooth elaboration. the spirit of nature. and the mystery of bread and wine is not yet the mystery of flesh and blood. just as formerly we had the unity of both in the state of uncon strained emotional fervency. for it still lacks the actual certainty of immediate exi stence. it is mer ely immediate spirit. however. This unstable divine revel must come to rest as an object. In both the representations. and now it curvets and careers about in the guise of a crowd of excited. yet not as an inherently lif eless but as a living self.(2) a nd then. and the honour of being. and the certainty of enj oyment. there is present th e unity of self-consciousness and spiritual Being. but at the same time purely cognitive certainty of self. and the clear but spiritless form of the latter. to be there its silently nurturing substance.

to begin with. THE SPIRITUAL WORK OF ART THE national spirits. in a common undertaking. throug h nature and natural conditions. t he special tones and chords of that nature which it. with which those universal entities are concerned. nevertheless. which is to the honour of man. take in the decisions and acts of its government. partly in the direct share which all. and the inner charac ter of the spirit which underlies the particular mode of life. Pure intuition of self in the sense of universal human nature takes. includes. the ele ment and habitation of which is Language. has not yet built up a sing le state out of these separate national elements. and which.ss of the former. nor is it the meaningless stammer of delirious bacchantic revelry. and conceals their essential unity in the first instance under the guise of a friendly external relation bet ween both worlds. a collective heaven. starts from the individuality of ethical life. and. when the national spirit is actualized. this form : the national spirit combines with the others (which with it constitute. The perfect element in which the inwardness is as external as the externality is inward. c. The assembly of national spirits constitutes a circle of forms and shapes. as well as the whole ethical world. The finely built warrior is indeed the honour and glory of his pa rticular nation. but rather of having laid this aside. Its content is clear. to which spirit attains in its existence. entirely contingent in its content and altogether individual in character. and worked himself into a definite shape. in the first instance. is. which merely contain a national spirit. This. seems to unite in a merely ac cidental way all that they variously accomplish. Its content is universal. one people). The ethical life of an actual national spirit rests partly on the immediate confiding trust of the individuals in the whole of their nation. but he is a physical or corporeal individuality in which are su nk out of sight the expanse and the seriousness of meaning. for the artificer has passed out of the previous state of entirely substantial enth usiasm. not in the first instance to secure a permanent order but merely for a co mmon act. nor is it the emotional hymn sung in praise of a merely individual g od. mere ly this first universality. for in this festival. is once again Language. which is his own proper existe nce. constitutes the moving fo rce. a determinate character o f the godhead. in spite of differences of class. which wou ld rob the individuals of their self-conscious share in the will and act of the whole. and o f the universality of its human existence. has not yet overcome its immediacy. which become conscious of their being in the shape of some particular animal. It has at tained to its clear and universal content and meaning. which. they are the universal substances embodying what the self-conscious es sential reality inherently is and does. is no longer conscious in this spirit of its special particular character. They too are under the supreme command rather than the supreme dominion of the One. and for t his task builds up a collective nation. at least the centre. and is that of his contemporaries. therefore. the peculiar peti tions. as the actual spirit of the nation. But it is the return of the div ine Being to self-consciousness which already contains the reason that self-cons ciousness forms the centre for those divine forces. . to begin with. there vanishes the onesidedness peculiar to figures represent ed in statues. therefore. By th emselves. This first community of life is. with that. spirit has laid aside the particular impressions. But it is neither the languag e of the oracle. Thi s universality. an assemblage of ind ividualities rather than the dominion and control of abstract thought. the needs and the customs of his nation. and. permeated through all its movements by self-conscious soul. In the union. which now embraces the whole of nature. that freedom of participation on the part of each and all is for the n once set aside. however. Its nation.(1) Thus it is that the sepa rate artistically beautiful national spirits combine to form a Pantheon. coalesce into one single spirit. In relinquishing all this for co mplete corporeal embodiment.

and the "pathos" of action. it is an action which is not indeed raised as yet to the level of the notion. The relation of the two is. The act is the violation of the peacefu l earth. preserves itself in its purity. remains unrestricted and unconstrained in its own character. Hence both gods and men have done one and the sa me thing. extinguishes the atomic singleness of the indivi dual acting and his various features. and awakens the essential Being. the Epic as such. His "pathos" is not the deafening power of nature. is connected with individuality. are the natural in ner principle and the substance of all events. the relation of the divine to the human. and in a needless fashion throws the act fr om one side over to the other. the minstrel. which illogica lly divides the unity of the action. and dissol . The middle term is the nation in its heroes. is present in fact. it is not his own self which is of any accoun t. while the strain and toil of the latter again is a n equally useless effort. are at the same time the mighty self that brings into subjection the universal beings. It is no longer the concrete acts of the cult. Overzea lous mortal creatures. and thereby at the same ti me universal like the free extreme of universality. at any rate universal in the sense of completeness of the w orld presented. since they are in point of fact the moving force of the individ ualities engaged in the acts. calls fort h the spirits of the departed. who are individu al men like the minstrel. the gods. as a subject of this world. the synthetic connexion of s elf-conscious and external existence. the world of gods. and procures for them actual reality and an interest in acting. which withdraws from and avoids this connexion. since the former direct and manage everything. vivified by the blood of the living. who are as nothing. as also the ethical material. offends the gods. is set forth and displayed as a whole to consciousness. though not in the sense of universality of thought. h owever. therefore. The element in which these presented ideas exist.. The relation of the two. this seems to proceed as entirely from them and to be as free as in the case of men. then. The universal powers have the form of individual beings. it is the trench which. Just as. and who receive it in the action of self-consciousness. which belongs to this content. language. i. took. He is the organ and instrum ent whose content is passing away. it i s produced. Recollection. and. and by whom it is borne. The content is an "act"(2) of the essential Being conscious of itself. but only to that of ideas. attaches necessarily also to that form of consciousness in which the content appears.The same universality. these impotent universal beings. but his muse. what is inherently established in the cult. of being a process of ideal presentation. who are thirsting for life. who procure their sustenance fro m the gifts of men and through men first get something to do. is the earliest language. What. however. his universal song. In this Epic. it is also the ca se that they are the universal. the memory of an essential mode of being once directly present. conversely. and opened up into the manifold wor ld of natural powers and ethical forces. a gradually evolved inwardness. as we saw just now. but Mnemosyne. a commingling of both. On this specific character depends the judgment regarding this world. If their cosmic natures first get reality and a sphere of effectual operation through the free self of individuality. which contains th e universal content. the character of being the synthetic connexion of universal and individual. these p owerless gods.e. by the unconqu erable elasticity of its unity. The Minstrel is the individual and actual spirit from whom. through the middle term of particularity. when they e ffect anything. The seriousness with which those divine powers go to work is ridiculou sly unnecessary. where the one extreme of universality.(3) There are two sides to the business the un iversal activity is concerned to accomplish: the side of the self-in virtue of w hich it is brought about by a collection of actual nations with the prominent in dividualities at the head of them. and the side of the universal--in virtue of w hich it is brought about by their substantial forces. by this means. but only ideally presented. Acting d isturbs the peace of the substance. and by so d oing its simple unity is divided into parts. has the form of an inferential process. and thus have in them the principle from which action comes.

that of Tragedy. in the same way their universality comes into conflic t with their own specific character and the relation in which it stands to other s. which have not yet found each other and unit ed. into its shapes and forms. But the universal self. and in their ambiguity blend together. Bu t they are at the same time determinate elements. the abstract unreal moment. and over which it can in no way prevail. and in its specific limitation has the independence of the whole individual ity. gathers and keeps more closely together t he dispersed and scattered moments of the inner essential world and the world of action. and if that independent self-confidence outweighs and overbalances the element of determinateness. the minstrel. who keeps himself outside it. t . then. as against the individual self of mortals. This necessity. gathering round the ind ividuality of some hero. Just as the gods fall into this contradictory relation with the antithetic natur e having the form of self. The content of the world of imagination carries on its process in the middle element [term] detached by itself. however. and as the contradiction between the purpose and result . and the sportive character of their acts receives its serious value i n those acts themselves. the language here ceases to be narra tive. and transforms the pretence of se riousness in the act into a harmless. and moreover with a power to which it must finall y submit. the negative elem ent. self-confident piece of sport with no resu lt and no issue.ves all that is individual in the current of its own continuity. owing to this whole. is one of strife. and t he positive. If. and thus stan d in relation to others. being directed against an "other" and so against an invincible divine force. who. the other. appears merely as the inconsis tency of their activity.who are also spe ctators . But that relation to others. and mourns the early death he sees ahead of him. is a comic self-forgetfulness of their e ternal nature. who exist in their own calm . The one individual element.-a mere happening to which they stand related selfless and sorrowing. and disappears in what he imaginatively presents. is the unity of the notion. particular gods. their characters at once lose the sharpness of their d istinctive peculiarity. is necessity which s hares in the life of the mediating term just as little as does the other. And the content formerly left to itsel f must acquire in itself the certainty and the fixed character of the negative. in virtue of the fact that it enters into the content. the one. Both extremes must get nearer the content. in the nature of their divinity. The determinateness they possess is rooted in the divine subsiste nce. are a contingent and futil e piece of bravado. just as the content ceases to be merely one that is ideally imagined. however. This higher language. for that reason.self-conscious human beings. For individuality. the specific determinateness of that nature. in virtue of the op position it involves. and severed into its moments. f irmly established and real in itself. a unity dominating and cont rolling the contradictory independent subsistence of the individual moments a un ity in which the inconsistency and fortuitousness of their action is coherently regulated. which passes away at once. which. the co ncrete real individual element. One purpose of their activity and their activity itself. The hero is himself the spoke sman. They are the universal. and is for them the unintelligible void of Necessity. by that very fact. hovers ove r them [the gods in Homer] and over this whole world of imagination to which the entire content belongs. must have a share in it. and the representation given brings before the audience . necessity. In regard to form. has to get filled with it. however feels the strength and splendour of his li fe broken. the language of the minstrel. is isolated and excluded to the utmost ext reme. and their movement is likewise in conf ormity with that notion. They are the eternal and resplendent individuals. in accordance with the nature of the notion. which cannot hold out ag ainst their power and might. who know their own rights and purposes. the pure force of negativity confr onts and opposes their nature. The substance of the divine falls apart. for these d eterminate natures do not find themselves in this purely formal necessity. and are removed from the changes of time and the influence of alien forces.

It is the commonalty in general.--there it is not itself the negative power interfering by action. as it were. it detects the seriousness of the notion. it is in actual human beings that these characters get existence. nor as the action of t he absolute Being within itself. a nd represent them in actual speech. whose work is a pprehended neither as the necessary act of the character. and is presented before a crowd of spectators. The general ground. Spirit does not appear in its dissociated multiplicity on the plane of this onlo oking consciousness [the chorus]. merely torn asunder into i ts two extreme powers. who find in the chorus their im age and counterpart. so is the actor essential to his mask--not as an external condition. to the immediate reality of existence proper . as will be remembered. which is. or r eveals itself to its consciousness in its purer form and its simpler mode of emb . They are artists who do not express with unconscious naivete and natur alness the merely external aspect of what they begin and what they decide upon. object to itself here. it allows each individual mom ent to go off its own way. whose wisdom finds utterance in the Chorus of the Elders. human beings who impersonate the heroes. and produces the empty wish to tranquillize. the indifferent ground. free from all accident of circumstance and the particular peculiarities of personalities. Lastly. The content and movement of the spirit. and feeble ineffective talk intende d to appease. find therein determinateness of character. and in its hymns of honour and reverence praises each individual moment as an independent god. or so far as abstraction mu st certainly be made. whom it knows at once to be the same with itself--it is conscious of nothing but ineffec tive horror of this whole process. Just as it is essential for a statue to be made by human h ands. or rather their own thought giving itself expression. and constitute the effe ctive activity and reality of these powers. the mere empty peace of resignation to necessity. not in the form of a narrative. artistically considered. These elementary universal beings are. is the consciousness expressed in the imaginative language of th e Epic. they prove the righteousness of their actio n. we thereby state just that art does not yet contain in it the true and proper self. they make the very inner being external. which are the immediate ar ms of the substance. on which the movement of these shapes produced from the noti on takes place. but keeps itself within the abstract selfless thought of such power. in its compassion for these living beings. therefore. have be en already considered as the nature and realization of the substance of ethical life. In its form of religion spirit attains to consciousness about itself. as is the case in the language accompanying ordinary action in actual life. as t he end of all. where the detail of the content is loosely spread out with no unifying s elf. Wh ere. it is unable to hold together and keep within bou nds the riches and varied fullness of divine life. self-conscious individualities--heroes who put their conscious life into one of these powers. Its substance manifests itself. it comes on the scene in the simple diremption of t he notion. from which. we have to abstract. at the same time. confines itself to the consciousness of alien and external destiny. conscious of equally helpless pity. in its terror before their struggle with one another. which crushes them as well as the livin g beings bound up with them. and who know how to st ate them. and perceives how the no tion marches onward shattering these forms as it goes along. and where it comes to see how badly its praised and honoured gods come off when they venture on the ground where the notion holds sway. This universal individualization des cends again. and b efore the simple self of that necessity. and. on which t he presentation takes place. Lacking t he power to negate and oppose. but speaking in their own person. in the powerlessness of this chorus the generality finds its rep resentative. now this god and now again another. however. and the "pathos" controlling them is soberly asserted and definitely expresse d in its universal individuality. In its terror before the higher powers. because the common people itself compose merely the positive and pa ssive material for the individuality of the government confronting it.he power and the will belonging to their specific nature.

For the previ ous dispersion of the whole into manifold abstract forces. PhÏbus and Zeus. into two powers--which were defined as divine and human law. which appear hypostat ized. a further distinction of characters than that just named i s to be reckoned as contingent and inherently external personality. the god of the Oracle. he knows merely the one p ower of substance. are really deceptiv e and fallacious. For this knowledge is. in consequence. la w of the nether world and law of the upper world. and institutes other proofs in addition-for the reason that the spirit giving the revelation might possibly be the devi l. because consciousness in acting is inherently this opposition. in its very principle. who as regards its natural aspect [Light] has sprung from the all-illuminating Sun. the one the family. more thorough. knows all and reveals all. its law merely a law of its own character. the other remains for him concealed and out of sight. qua consciousness.(7) who drive their victim to crime by their promises. Th e agent finds himself thereby in the opposition of knowing and not knowing. therefore. which insists that actuali ty is nothing per se in opposition to absolute law. The lower right sits with Zeus enthroned. is determined as the negative of the knowing agent. and individuality is therefore only the superficial form of these entities. If. deceive the King when he rel ies upon the manifest and obvious meaning of what they say. which owing to this feature are brought closer to individuality proper. The one is the substance. He. the essential nature [in the case of ethical substance] gets d ivided in its form.e.(4) wh o had the power to unlock the riddle of the sphinx. The act itself is this inversio n of what is known into its opposite. the other state sovereignty. This type of consciousness. the previously multiform circle of gods. Ethical rightness. i. equivo cal character of what they gave out as a certainty. is the dissolution of the subject which comprehends them merely as moments in its self. There is a type of c onsciousness that is purer than the latter(8) which believes in witches. and enjoys equal respect and homage with the god revealed and knowing.(9) therefore. the first bearing the impress and character of woman. and knows it to be essential ethical fa ct. turns round what is right from the point of view of character and knowledge into the right of th e very opposite with which the former is bound up in the essential nature of the substance--turns it into the "Furies" who embody the right of the other power a nd character awakened into hostility. The one is the aspect of light. But the commands o f this truth-speaking god. as rega rds its content. and the objecti ve essential reality on the other. and his proclamations of what is. through whose mouth the beautiful god spe aks.odiment. into objective existence. The priestess. le ts his revenge tarry for the revelation which the spirit of his father makes reg arding the crime that did him to death. is one thing in itself. the oth er that of man--in the same way. Conversely. and he too who trusted with childlike confidence. over against the object on which its activity is directed. and mor e sober. because the knowing consciousness takes its stan d on the opposition between certainty of itself on the one hand. with i ts wavering and unsteady characteristics. This mistrust has good grounds. appears.(5) are. To these three supernatural Beings the world of the gods of the chorus is limite d and restricted by the acting individuality. He t akes his purpose from his own character. by the double-tongued. The higher and lower right come to signify in this connexion the power that know s and reveals itself to consciousness. The pre sent reality. the ethical substance by its very principle broke up. the powe . finds out that its knowledge is onesided. and the power concealing itself and lurki ng in the background.(6) is in nothing different from the equivocal sisters of fate. a nd which. At the same time. with respect to knowledge. and more solid than the former which puts its trust in t he priestess and the beautiful god. who is his Father. then. but owing to the determinateness of his character. and that it has laid ho ld of merely one of the powers of the substance. and another for consciousness. and who. Spirit when acting. confines itself to these powers. directly not kno wledge. therefore. both sent to destruction through what t he god reveals to them.

thus already has its beginning in tragedy in g eneral. Since this distinct ion belongs to the substance as such. it really seized hold of what is not revealed. each its own particular form: the one that of the god revealed. the distinction between knowing and not knowing falls within each of the actual self-consciousnesses. contingent. unworthy of itself. and hence includes essentially the whole of the distinction belonging to t he form. but its substance is determinate. not from guilt (for consciousness cannot deny its guilt. has its basis in that inner being which destroys it. which have m con crete reality no separate individuality peculiarly their own. the disappearance of the reality and action of the powers of the substance. dreams. as well as the universal power pervading state and government. they are admonitory signs of deception. through doing something. for in dividuality. the form assumed by the substance. the other that of the Furies keeping themselves concealed. that the disti nction. it. and so on. through and in which actual consciousness exists. and hid from itself what was revealed. receive. but finds its truth in what is simple. whethe r law of the family or law of the state. Th e reconciliation of the opposition with itself is the Lethe of the nether world in the form of Death-or the Lethe of the upper world in the form of absolution. as regards its inner nature. The substance is the relation tha t knowledge is for itself. to one of th e attributes of substance. because the act was don e). and the equal honour and consequent indifferent unreality of Apollo and the Furies. which was demanded by the philosophers of antiquity. that the clear conscious assurance of certainty h as its confirmation in forgetfulness. when attaching in a merely superficial way to absolute Being. and an admonition thereanent to be given. Or. but from the crime. of the opposing powers of content and consciousness is the final r esult. of their component individualities. through the fact that the division of the substance is controlled by the . The tr uth. and being committed. is present as express law and authentic right. the voices of trees and bi rds. The frenz y of the priestess. of want of judgment. while again. The process of action proves their uni ty in the mutual overthrow of both powers and both self-conscious characters. that both are equally right. hence. Acti ng in accordance with the knowledge revealed. t he immovable unity of Fate. the quiescent existence (and hence want of activity and vitality) of the family and government. however. it did violence to the other and thereby gave the lat ter right as against itself. in their opposition (which comes about through action) are equally wrong. Consciousness disclosed this opposition by action. and pays the penalty for havi ng trusted the knowledge. Both are forgetfulness. For the self of the hero only exists as a whole conscious ness. the inhuman shape of the witches. but has in actual realit y the two persons of its characters. is un essential. ultimate Being--a blending whereby the action of this absolu te Being appears as something incoherent. and only one side of the content dist inguished belongs to him. The expulsion of such unreal insubstantial ideas. On the other hand. in the element of universality. and. does it get divided into two individual shapes. what comes to the same thing. not in dividualized in two distinct shapes [of the substance]. In part both enjoy e qual honour. and the return of their spiritua l life and activity into Zeus solely and simply. while consciousness. Hence the two sides of consciousness. which c onsciousness has violated. For none of them by itself is the r eal essence: this consists in the undisturbed calm of the whole within itself. on the other hand.. and in the form of the peace of soul which atones for th e crime. When following that god who knows and reveals himse lf. finds out the deceptiveness of that knowledge. pursued its own proper knowledge. when idea lly represented. an d only in abstraction. are not ways in which truth appears.r presiding over the hearth and home and the spirit worshipped by the family. whose equivocal character (since this is its very natu re) it also had to discover. when dramatically presented. and of the powe rs of the abstract thought of good and evil. it is. the opposite power. Zeus. is the necess ity of the relation of the two to one another. of the individual and accidental chara cter of knowledge. This destiny completes the depopulation of Heaven-of that unthinking blending of individuality and.

the simple certainty of self. is raised above such a moment. is not yet p resent. that of self. is a hy pocrisy--because the true union. it is seen to be caught and held in a concrete rea lity. T his Zeus is known and acknowledged only as the power of the state or of the hear th and home. then. in the opposition belonging to knowledge. The self-consciousness represented in tragedy knows and acknow. t he universal consciousness. breaks up into his mask and the actor. Zeus. appearing here in its significance as something actual. This necessity has. The further moments taken fro m the notion (Begriff) and dispersed in the form of ideal presentation (Vorstell ung). therefore. as something closely touching themselves. but it breaks away from th is seeming and pretence just as quickly again. nor of being expressed and revered by them as their real natu re. it is partly the chorus. first of all. the Zeus of what is univ ersal. as well as the characters of its substance. but this is in their case merely put on.--a knowledge assuming a figure in the drama :--and again as the Zeus of the oath and of the Furies. plays with the mask which it once puts on. and hence individuality is the essential individuality. are. Comedy has. indeed. in so far as the content possesses its more . so far as consciousness co-operates and belongs to the various characters. and are not actual. on the other hand. and as being no longer separated from the chorus. but which are not capable of constituting the ch aracter of heroes. this alliance is of an external kind. in contrast to self-consciousness. fate. it is the spiritual unity into which everything returns.ledges on that account only one highest power. moments which the chorus permits to hold good one after the other. qua universal m oments. not the "pathos" of the hero. a power in which they do not recognize themselves. who appears before the onlookers. and hence more petulant and bitter. is in point of fact t he negative power. and. which the impe rsonal chorus no doubt praises. and not as the mediating factor of the proc ess. just when it wants to be something genuine. The self-consciousness of the heroes must step forth from its mask and be repres ented as knowing itself to be the fate both of the gods of the chorus and of the absolute powers themselves. and comes out in its own nakednes s and commonness. as it would be above a particular quality. the characteristic of being the negative power of all the shapes that appear. the unity of Zeus. merely as the Father of the knowledge of the particular. and when clothed with this mask gives utterance to the irony of such a property trying to be something on its own acc ount. But. but perish therein. endowed with the form of individuality. and lets the mask drop. Beca use actual self-consciousness is still distinguished from the substance and fate . Partly again. the persons of the divine Being itself.notion. This general dissolution. whom this movement of the divine life fills with fear as being something alien and strange. They are. The subject. and substance. or rather the crowd looking on. and does not re ally and truly belong to them. produces merely the e mo. The hero. into the person of the play and the actual self. they sink to the level of passion s in the hero--to the level of accidental.tion of passive pity. or in who m this movement. of the inner being dwelling in concealment. which it shows not to be distinct from the proper self. no definite self. which the formally embodied essential nature as a whol e undergoes when it assumes individuality. The pretentious claims of the universal abstract nature are shown up and d iscovered in the actual self. becomes in its content more serious. These elemental Beings are. coalesce into the simplicity of what is devoid of consciousnes s. insubstantial moments. further. the aspect that actual self-consciousness repres ents itself as the fate of the gods. But self-consciousness. The actual self has no such abstract moment as it s substance and content. The self appears as merely allott ed amongst the different characters. and the specifi c determinations are absolute characters. nor again from the onlooker. the ac tor. The se lf. the unity of the substantial essence and a bstract necessity. in order to be its own person.

serious and necessary meaning. The divine substance combines the meaning of natu ral and ethical essentiality. As regards the natural element, actual self-consciousness shows in the very fact of applying elements of nature for its adornment, for its abode and so on, and again in feasting on its own offering, that itself is the Fate to which the secr et is betrayed, no matter what may be the truth as regards the independent subst antialitv of nature. In the mystery of the bread and wine it makes its very owm this self-subsistence of nature together with the significance of the inner real ity; and in Comedy it is conscious of the irony lurking in this meaning. So far, again, as this meaning contains the essence of ethical reality, it is pa rtly the nation in its two aspects of the state, or Demos proper, and individual family life; partly, however, it is self-conscious pure knowledge, or rational thought of the universal. Demos, the general mass, which knows itself as master and governor, and is also aware of being the insight and intelligence which dema nd respect, exerts compulsion and is befooled through the particularity of its a ctual life, and exhibits the ludicrous contrast between its own opinion of itsel f and its immediate existence, between its necessity and contingency, its univer sality and its vulgarity. If the principle of its individual existence, cut off from the universal, breaks out in the proper figure of an actual man and openly usurps and administers the commonwealth, to which it is a secret harm and detrim ent, then there is more immediately disclosed the contrast between the universal in the sense of a theory, and that with which practice is con- cerned; there st and exposed the entire emancipation of the ends and aims of the mere individual from the universal order, and the scorn the mere individual shows for such order .(10) Rational thinking removes contingency of form and shape from the divine Being; a nd, in opposition to the uncritical wisdom of the chorus--a wisdom, giving utter ance to all sorts of ethical maxims and stamping with validity and authority a m ultitude of laws and specific conceptions of duty and of right--rational thought lifts these into the simple Ideas of the Beautiful and the Good. The process of this abstraction is the consciousness of the dialectic involved in these maxims and laws themselves, and hence the consciousness of the disappearance of that a bsolute validity with which they previously appeared. Since the contingent chara cter and superficial individuality which imagination lent to the divine Beings, vanish, they are left, as regards their natural aspect, with merely the nakednes s of their immediate existence; they are Clouds,(11) a passing vapour, like thos e imaginative ideas. Having passed in accordance with their essential character, as determined by thought, into the simple thoughts of the Beautiful and the Goo d, these latter submit to being filled with every kind of content. The force of dialectic knowledge(12) puts determinate laws and maxims of action at the mercy of the pleasure and levity of youth, led astray therewith, and gives weapons of deception into the hands of solicitous and apprehensive old age, restricted in i ts interests to the individual details of life. The pure thoughts of the Beautif ul and the Good thus display a comic spectacle:--through their being set free fr om the opinion, which contains both their determinateness in the sense of conten t and also their absolute determinateness, the firm hold of consciousness upon t hem, they become empty, and, on that very account, the sport of the private opin ion and caprice of any chance individuality. Here, then, the Fate, formerly without consciousness, consisting in empty rest a nd forgetfulness, and separated from self-consciousness, is united with self-con sciousness. The individual(13) self is the negative force through which and in w hich the gods, as also their moments, (nature as existent fact and the thoughts of their determinate characters), pass away and disappear. At the same time, the individual self is not the mere vacuity of disappearance, but preserves itself in this very nothingness, holds to itself and is the sole and only reality. The religion of art is fulfilled and consummated in it, and is come full circle. Thr

ough the fact that it is the individual consciousness in its certainty of self w hich manifests itself as this absolute power, this latter has lost the form of s omething ideally presented (vorgestellt), separated from and alien to consciousn ess in general--as were the statue and also the living embodiment of beauty or t he content of the Epic and the powers and persons of Tragedy. Nor again is the u nity the unconscious unity of the cult and the mysteries; rather the self proper of the actor coincides with the part he impersonates, just as the onlooker is p erfectly at home in what is represented before him, and sees himself playing in the drama before him. What this self-consciousness beholds, is that whatever ass umes the form of essentiality as against self-consciousness, is instead dissolve d within it--within its thought, its existence and action,--and is quite at its mercy. It is the return of everything universal into certainty of self, a certai nty which, in consequence, is this complete loss of fear of everything strange a nd alien, and complete loss of substantial reality on the part of what is alien and external. Such certainty is a state of spiritual good health and of self-aba ndonment thereto, on the part of consciousness, in a way that, outside this kind of comedy, is not to be found anywhere.(14)

C. REVEALED RELIGION(1) THROUGH the Religion of Art spirit has passed from the form of substance into th at of Subject; for art brings out its shape and form, and imbues it with the nat ure of action, or establishes in it the self-consciousness which merely disappea rs in the awesome substance and in the attitude of simple trust does not itself comprehend itself. This incarnation in human form of the Divine Being begins wit h the statue, which has in it only the outward shape of the self, while the inne r life thereof, its activity, falls outside it. In the case of the cult, however , both aspects have become one; in the outcome of the religion of art this unity , in being completely attained, has at the same time also passed over to the ext reme of self; in the spirit, which is perfectly certain of itself in the individ ual existence of consciousness, all essential content is swallowed up and submer ged. The proposition, which gives this light-hearted folly expression, runs thus : "The Self is Absolute Being." The Being which was substance, and in which the self was the accidental element, has dropped to the level of a predicate; and in this self-consciousness, over against which nothing appears in the form of obje ctive Being, spirit has lost its aspect of consciousness.(2) This proposition, "The Self is Absolute Being", belongs, as is evident on the fa ce of it, to the non-religious, the concrete actual spirit; and we have to recal l what form of spirit it is which gives expression to it. This form will contain at once the movement of that proposition and its conversion, which lowers the s elf to a predicate and raises substance into subject. This we must understand to take place in such a way that the converse statement does not per se, or for us , make substance into subject, or, what is the same thing, does not reinstate su bstance again so that the consciousness of spirit is carried back to its commenc ement in natural religion; but rather in such a way that this conversion is brou ght about for and through self-consciousness itself. Since this latter conscious ly gives itself up, it is preserved and maintained in thus relinquishing itself, and remains the subject of the substance; but as being likewise self-relinquish ed, it has at the same time the consciousness of this substance. In other words, since, by thus offering itself up, it produces substance as subject, this subje ct remains its own very self. If, then, taking the two propositions, in the firs t the subject merely disappears in substantiality, and in the second the substan ce is merely a predicate, and both sides are thus present in each with contrary inequality of value--the result hereby effected is that the union and transfusio n of both natures [subject and substance] become apparent. In this union both, w ith equal value and worth, are at once essential and also merely moments. Hence

it is that spirit is equally consciousness of itself as its objective substance, as well as simple self-contained self-consciousness. The religion of art belongs to the spirit animating the ethical sphere, the spir it which we formerly saw sink and disappear in the condition of right,(3) i.e. i n the proposition: "The self as such, the abstract person, is absolute Being." I n ethical life the self is absorbed in the spirit of its nation, it is universal ity filled to the full. Simple abstract individuality, however, rises out of thi s content, and its lightheartedness clarifies and rarifies it till it becomes a "person" and attains the abstract universality of right. Here the substantial re ality of the ethical spirit is lost, the abstract insubstantial spirits of natio nal individuals are gathered together into a pantheon; not into a pantheon repre sented in idea (Vorstellung), whose impotent form lets each alone to do as it li kes, but into the pantheon of abstract universality, of pure thought, which dise mbodies them, and bestows on the spiritless self, on the individual person, comp lete existence on its own account. But this self, through its being empty, has let the content go; this consciousne ss is Being merely within itself. Its own existence, the legal recognition of th e person, is an unfulfilled empty abstraction. It thus really possesses merely t he thought of itself; in other words, as it there exists and knows itself as obj ect, it is something unreal. Consequently, it is merely stoic independence, the independence of thought; and this finds, by passing through the process of scept icism, its ultimate truth in that form we called the "unhappy self-consciousness "--the soul of despair. This knows how the case stands with the actual claims to validity which the abst ract [legal] person puts forward, as also with the validity of this person in pu re thought [in Stoicism]. It knows that a vindication of such validity means rea lly being altogether lost; it is just this loss become conscious of itself, and is the surrender and relinquishment of its knowledge about itself. We see that t his "unhappy consciousness" constituted the counterpart and the complement of th e perfectly happy consciousness, that of comedy. All divine reality goes back in to this latter type of consciousness; it means, in other words, the complete rel inquishment and emptying of substance. The former, on the contrary, is conversel y the tragic fate that befalls certainty of self which aims at being absolute, a t being self-sufficient. It is consciousness of the loss of everything of signif icance in this certainty of itself, and of the loss even of this knowledge or ce rtainty of self-the loss of substance as well as of self; it is the bitter pain which finds expression in the cruel words, "God is dead".(4) In the condition of right or law, then, the ethical world has vanished, and its type of religion has passed away in the mood of Comedy. The "unhappy consciousne ss" the soul of despair, is just the knowledge of all this loss. It has lost bot h the worth and dignity it attached to its immediate personality [as a legal per son] as well as that attaching to its personality when reflected in the medium o f thought [in the case of Stoicism]. Trust in the eternal laws of the Gods is li kewise silenced, just as the oracles are dumb, who pretended to know what to do in particular cases. The statues set up are now corpses in stone whence the anim ating soul has flown, while the hymns of praise are words from which all belief has gone. The tables of the gods are bereft of spiritual food and drink, and fro m his games and festivals man no more receives the joyful sense of his unity wit h the divine Being. The works of the muse lack the force and energy of the spiri t which derived the certainty and assurance of itself just from the crushing rui n of gods and men. They are themselves now just what they are for us--beautiful fruit broken off the tree; a kindly fate has passed on those works to us, as a m aiden might offer such fruit off a tree. Their actual life as they exist is no l onger there, not the tree that bore them, not the earth, and the elements, which constituted their substance, nor the climate that determined their constitutive character, nor the change of seasons which controlled the process of their grow

th. So too it is not their living world that Fate preserves and gives us with th ose works of ancient art, not the spring and summer of that ethical life in whic h they bloomed and ripened, but the veiled remembrance alone of all this reality . Our action, therefore, when we enjoy them is not that of worship, through whic h our conscious life might attain its complete truth and be satisfied to the ful l: our action is external; it consists in wiping off some drop of rain or speck of dust from these fruits, and in place of the inner elements composing the real ity of the ethical life, a reality that environed, created and inspired these wo rks, we erect in prolix detail the scaffolding of the dead elements of their out ward existence,--language, historical circumstances, etc. All this we do, not in order to enter into their very life, but only to represent them ideally or pict orially (vorstellen) within ourselves. But just as the maiden who hands us the p lucked fruits is more than the nature which presented them in the first instance --the nature which provided all their detailed conditions and elements, tree, ai r, light, and so on--since in a higher way she gathers all this together into th e light of her self-conscious eye, and her gesture in offering the gifts; so too the spirit of the fate, which presents us with those works of art, is more than the ethical life realized in that nation. For it is the inwardizing in us, in t he form of conscious memory (Er-Innerung), of the spirit which in them was manif ested in a still external way;--it is the spirit of the tragic fate which collec ts all those individual gods and attributes of the substance into the one Panthe on, into the spirit which is itself conscious of itself as spirit. All the conditions for its production are present, and this totality of its cond itions constitutes the development of it, its notion, or the inherent production of it. The cycle of the creations of art embraces in its scope all forms in whi ch the absolute substance relinquishes itself. The absolute substance is in the form of individuality as a thing; as an object existing for sense experience; as pure language, or the process of that form whose existence does not get away fr om the self, and is a purely evanescent object; as immediate unity with universa l self-consciousness when inspired with enthusiasm; as mediated unity when perfo rming the acts of the cult; as corporeal embodiment of the self in a form of bea uty; and finally as existence lifted into ideal representation (Vorstellung) and the expansion of this existence into a world which at length gathers its conten t together into universality, a universal which is at the same time pure certain ty and assurance of itself. These forms, and, on the other side, the world of pe rsonality and legal right, the wild and desert waste of content with its constit uent elements set free and detached, as also the thought-constituted personality of Stoicism, and the unresting disquiet of Scepticism--these compose, the perip hery of the circle of shapes and forms, which attend., an expectant and eager th rong, round the birthplace of spirit as it becomes self-consciousness. Their cen tre is the yearning agony of the unhappy despairing self-consciousness, a pain w hich permeates all of them and is the common birthpang at its production,--the s implicity of the pure notion, which contains those forms as its moments. Spirit, here, has in it two sides, which are above represented as the two conver se propositions: one is this, that substance empties itself of itself, and becom es self-consciousness; the other is the converse, that self-consciousness emptie s itself of itself and makes itself into the form of "thing", or makes itself un iversal self. Both sides have in this way met each other, and in consequence, th eir true union has arisen. The relinquishment or "kenosis" on the part of the su bstance, its becoming self-consciousness, expresses the transition into the oppo site, the unconscious transition of necessity, in other words, that it is implic itly self-consciousness. Conversely, the emptying of self-consciousness expresse s this, that implicitly it is Universal Being, or--because the self is pure self -existence, which is at home with itself in its opposite-that the substance is s elf-consciousness explicitly for the self, and, just on that account, is spirit. Of this spirit, which has left the form of substance behind, and enters existen ce in the shape of self-consciousness, we may say, therefore-if we wish to use t erms drawn from the process of natural generation--that it has a real mother but

a potential or an implicit father. For actual reality, or self-consciousness, a nd implicit being in the sense of substance are its two moments; and by the reci procity of their kenosis, each relinquishing or "emptying" itself of itself and becoming the other, spirit thus comes into existence as their unity. In so far as self-consciousness in a one-sided way grasps only, its own relinqui shment, although its object is thus f or it at once both existence and self and it knows all existence to be spiritual in nature, yet true spirit has not become thereby objective for it. For, so far, being in general or substance, would not essentially from its side be also emptied of itself, and become self-consciousn ess. In that case, then, all existence is spiritual reality merely from the stan dpoint of consciousness, not inherently in itself. Spirit in this way has merely a fictitious or imaginary existence.(5) This imagination is fantastic extravaga nce of mind, which introduces into nature as well as history, the World and the mythical ideas of early religions, another inner esoteric meaning different from what they, on the face of them, bear directly to consciousness, and, in particu lar, in the case of religions, another meaning than the self-consciousness, whos e religions they were, actually knew to be there. But this meaning is one that i s borrowed, a garment, which does not cover the nakedness of the outer appearanc e, and secures no belief and respect; it is no more than murky darkness and a pe culiar crazy contortion of consciousness. If then this meaning of the objective is not to be bare fancy and imagination, i t must be inherent and essential (an sich), i.e. must in the first place arise i n consciousness as springing from the very notion, and must come forth in its ne cessity. It is thus that self-knowing spirit has arisen; it has arisen through t he knowledge of immediate consciousness, i.e. of consciousness of the existing o bject, by means of its necessary process. This notion, which, being immediate, h ad also, for its consciousness, the shape of immediacy, has, in the second place , taken on the form of self-consciousness essentially and inherently, i.e. by ju st the same necessity of the notion by which being or immediacy, the abstract ob ject of self-consciousness, renounces itself and becomes, for consciousness, Ego . The immediate entity (Ansich), or [objectively] existent necessity, is, howeve r, different from the [subjective] thinking entity, or the knowledge of necessit y--a distinction which, at the same time, does not lie outside the notion, for t he simple unity of the notion is itself immediate being. The notion is at once w hat empties or relinquishes itself, or the explicit unfolding of directly appreh ended (angeschaut) necessity, and is also at home with itself in that necessity, knows it and comprehends it. The immediate inherent nature of spirit, which tak es on the form of self-consciousness, means nothing else than that the concrete actual world-spirit has reached this knowledge of itself. It is then too that th is knowledge first enters its consciousness, and enters it as truth. How that ca me about has already been explained. That Absolute Spirit has taken on the shape of self-consciousness inherently, an d therefore also consciously to itself--this appears now as the belief of the wo rld, the belief that spirit exists in fact as a definite self-consciousness, i.e . as an actual human being; that spirit is an object for immediate experience; t hat the believing mind sees, feels, and hears this divinity.(6) Taken thus it is not imagination, not a fancy; it is actual in the believer. Consciousness in th at case does not set out from its own inner life, does not start from thought, a nd in itself combine the thought of God with existence; rather it sets out from immediate present existence, and recognizes God in it. The moment of immediate existence is present in the content of the notion, and p resent in such a way that the religious spirit, on the return of all ultimate re ality into consciousness, has become simple positive self, just as the actual sp irit as such, in the case of the "unhappy consciousness", was just this simple s elf-conscious negativity. The self of the existent spirit has in that way the fo rm of complete immediacy. It is neither set up as something thought, or imaginat

ively represented, nor as something produced, as is the case with the immediate self in natural religion, or again in religion as art. Rather, this concrete God is beheld sensuously I and immediately as a self, as a real individual human be ing, only so is it a self-consciousness. This incarnation of the Divine Being, its having essentially and directly the sh ape of self-consciousness, is the simple content of Absolute Religion. Here the Divine Being is known as Spirit; this religion is the Divine Being's consciousne ss concerning itself that it is Spirit. For spirit is knowledge of self in a sta te of alienation of self: spirit is the Being which is the process of retaining identity with itself in its otherness. This, however, is Substance, so far as in its accidents substance at the same time is turned back into itself; and is so, not as being indifferent towards something unessential and, consequently, as fi nding itself in some alien element, but as being there within itself, i.e. so fa r as it is subject or self. In this form of religion the Divine Being is, on that account, revealed. Its bei ng revealed obviously consists in this, that what it is, is known. It is, howeve r, known just in its being known as spirit, as a Being which is essentially self -consciousness. There is something in its object concealed from consciousness if the object is f or consciousness an "other", or something alien, and if consciousness does not k now the object as its self. This concealment, this secrecy, ceases when the Abso lute Being qua spirit is object of consciousness. For here in its relation to co nsciousness the object is in the form of self; i.e. consciousness immediately kn ows itself there, or is manifest, revealed, to itself in the object. Itself is m anifest to itself only in its own certainty of self; the object it has is the se lf; self, however, is nothing alien and extraneous, but inseparable unity with i tself, the immediately universal. It is the pure notion, pure thought, or self-e xistence, (being-for-self), which is immediately being, and, therewith, being-fo r-another, and, qua this being-for-another, is immediately turned back into itse lf and is at home with itself (bei sich). It is thus the truly and solely reveal ed. The Good, the Righteous, the Holy, Creator of Heaven and Earth, etc.--all th ese are predicates of a subject, universal moments, which have their support on this central point, and only are when consciousness goes back into thought. As long as it is they that are known, their ground and essential being, the Subj ect itself, is not yet revealed; and in the same way the specific determinations of the universal are not this universal itself. The Subject itself, and consequ ently this pure universal too, is, however, revealed as self; for this self is j ust this inner being reflected into itself, the inner being which is immediately given and is the proper certainty of that self, for which it is given. To be in its notion that which reveals and is revealed--this is, then, the true shape of spirit; and moreover, this shape, its notion, is alone its very essence and its substance. Spirit is known as self-consciousness, and to this self-consciousnes s it is directly revealed, for it is this self-consciousness itself. The divine nature is the same as the human, and it is this unity which is intuitively appre hended (angeschaut). Here, then, we find as a fact consciousness, or the general form in which Being is aware of Being--the shape which Being adopts--to be identical with its self-c onsciousness. This shape is itself a self-consciousness; it is thus at the same time an existent object; and this existence possesses equally directly the signi ficance of pure thought, of Absolute Being. The absolute Being existing as a concrete actual self-consciousness, seems to ha ve descended from its eternal pure simplicity; but in fact it has, in so doing, attained for the first time its highest nature, its supreme reach of being. For only when the notion of Being has reached its simple purity of nature, is it bot

h the absolute abstraction, which is pure thought and hence the pure singleness of self, and immediacy or objective being, on account of its simplicity. What is called sense-consciousness is just this pure abstraction; it is this kin d of thought for which being is the immediate. The lowest is thus at the same ti me the highest: the revealed which has come forth entirely to the surface is jus t therein the deepest reality. That the Supreme Being is seen, heard, etc., as a n existent self-consciousness this is, in very truth, the culmination and consum mation of its notion. And through this consummation, the Divine Being is given a nd exists immediately in its character as Divine Being. This immediate existence is at the same time not solely and simply immediate con sciousness; it is religious consciousness. This immediacy means not only an exis tent self-consciousness, but also the purely thought-constituted or Absolute Bei ng; and these meanings are inseparable. What we [the philosophers] are conscious of in our conception,--that objective being is ultimate essence,--is the same a s what the religious consciousness is aware of. This unity of being and essence, of thought which is immediately existence, is immediate knowledge on the part o f this religious consciousness just as it is the inner thought or the mediated r eflective knowledge of this consciousness. For this unity of being and thought i s self-consciousness and actually exists; in other words, the thought-constitute d unity has at the same time this concrete shape and form of what it is. God, th en, is here revealed, as He is; He actually exists as He is in Himself; He is re al as Spirit. God is attainable in pure speculative knowledge alone, and only is in that knowledge, and is merely that knowledge itself, for He is spirit; and t his speculative knowledge is the knowledge furnished by revealed religion. That knowledge knows God to be thought, or pure Essence; and knows this thought as ac tual being and as a real existence, and existence as the negativity of itself, h ence as Self, an individual "this" and a universal self. It is just this that re vealed religion knows. The hopes and expectations of preceding ages pressed forward to, and were solely directed towards this revelation, the vision of what Absolute Being is, and the discovery of themselves therein. This joy, the joy of seeing itself in Absolute Being, becomes realized in self-consciousness, and seizes the whole world. For the Absolute is Spirit, it is the simple movement of those pure abstract moments , which expresses just this-that Ultimate Reality is then, and not till then, kn own as Spirit when it is seen and beheld as immediate self-consciousness. This conception of spirit knowing itself to be spirit, is still the immediate no tion; it is not yet developed. The ultimate Being is spirit; in other words, it has appeared, it is revealed. This first revelation is itself immediate; but the immediacy is likewise thought, or pure mediation, and must therefore exhibit an d set forth this moment in the sphere of immediacy as such. Looking at this more precisely, spirit, when self-consciousness is immediate, is "this" individual self-consciousness set up in contrast to the universal self-c onsciousness. It is a one, an excluding unit, which appears to that consciousnes s, for which it exists, in the as yet impervious form of a sensuous other, an un resolved entity in the sphere of sense. This other does not yet know spirit to b e its own; in other words spirit, in its form as an individual self, does not ye t exist as equally universal self, as all self. Or again, the shape it assumes h as not as yet the form of the notion, i.e. of the universal self, of the self wh ich in its immediate actual reality is at once transcended, is thought, universa lity, without losing its reality in this universality. The preliminary and similarly immediate form of this universality is, however, n ot at once the form of thought itself, of the notion as notion; it is the univer sality of actual reality, it is the "allness", the collective totality, of the s elves, and is the elevation of existence into the sphere of figurative thought (

Vorstellung); just as in general, to take a concrete example, the "this" of sens e, when transcended, is first of all the "thing" of "perception", and is not yet the "universal" of "understanding". This individual human being, then, which Absolute Being is revealed to be, goes through in its own case as an individual the process found in sense existence. H e is the immediately present God; in consequence, His being passes over into His having been. Consciousness, for which God is thus sensuously present, ceases to see Him, to hear Him: it has seen Him, it has heard Him. And it is because it o nly has seen and heard Him, that it first becomes itself spiritual consciousness ;(7) or, in other words, He has now arisen in Spirit, as He formerly rose before consciousness as an object existing in the sphere of sense. For, a consciousnes s which sees and hears Him by sense, is one which is itself merely an immediate consciousness, which has not cancelled and transcended the disparateness of obje ctivity, has not withdrawn it into pure thought, but knows this objectively pres ented individual, and not itself, as spirit. In the disappearance of the immedia te existence of what is known to be Absolute Being, immediacy acquires its negat ive moment. Spirit remains the immediate self of actual reality, but in the form of the universal self-consciousness of a religious communion,(8) a self-conscio usness which rests in its own proper substance, just as in it this substance is universal subject: it is not the individual subject by himself, but the individu al along with the consciousness of the communion, and what he is for this commun ion is the complete whole of the individual spirit. The conditions "past" and "distance" are, however, merely the imperfect form in which the immediateness gets mediated or made universal; this is merely dipped s uperficially in the element of thought, is kept there as a sensuous mode of imme diacy, and not made one with the nature of thought itself. It is lifted out of s ense merely into the region of pictorial presentation; for this is the synthetic [external] connexion of sensuous immediacy and its universality or thought. Pictorial presentation constitutes the characteristic form in which spirit is co nscious of itself in this its religious communion. This form is not yet the self -consciousness of spirit which has reached its notion as notion; the mediating p rocess is still incomplete. In this connexion of being and thought, then, there is a defect; spiritual life is still cumbered with an unrecon- ciled diremption into a "here" and a "beyond". The content is the true content; but all its momen ts, when placed in the element of mere imaginative presentation, have the charac ter, not of being conceptually comprehended, but of appearing as completely inde pendent aspects, externally related to one another. In order that the true content may also obtain its true form for consciousness, the latter must necessarily pass to a higher plane of mental development, where the absolute Substance is not intuitively apprehended but conceptually comprehen ded and where consciousness is for itself brought to the level of its self-consc iousness;-as this has already taken place objectively or for us [who have analys ed the process of experience]. We have to consider this content as it exists in its consciousness. Absolute Spi rit is content; that is how it exists in the shape of its truth. But its truth c onsists not merely in being the substance or the inherent reality of the religio us communion; nor again in coming out of this inwardness into the objectivity of imaginative thought; but in becoming concrete actual self, reflecting itself in to self, and being Subject. This, then, is the process which spirit realizes in its communion; this is its life. What this self-revealing spirit is in and for i tself, is therefore not brought out by the rich content of its life being, so to say, untwined and reduced to its original and primitive strands, to the ideas, for instance, presented before the minds of the first imperfect religious commun ion, or even to what the actual human being [incarnating the Divine Spirit] has spoken.(9) This reversion to the primitive is based on the instinct to get at th

e notion, the ultimate principle; but it confuses the origin, in the sense of th e immediate, existence of the first historical appearance, with the simplicity o f the notion. By thus impoverishing the life of spirit, by clearing away the ide a of the com- munion and its action with regard to its idea, there arises, there fore, not the notion, but bare externality and particularity, merely the histori cal manner in which spirit once upon a time appeared, the soulless recollection of a presumably (gemeinten) individual historical figure and its past.(10) Spirit is content of its consciousness to begin with in the form of pure substan ce; in other words, it is content of its pure consciousness. This element of tho ught is the process of descending into existence, or individuality. The middle t erm between these two is their synthetic connexion, the consciousness of passing into otherness, the process of imaginative presentation as such. The third stag e is the return from this presentation and from that otherness; in other words, it is the element of self-consciousness itself. These three moments constitute the life of spirit. Its resolution in imaginative thought consists in its taking on a determinate mode of being; this determinate ness, however, is nothing but one of its moments. Its detailed process thus cons ists in spreading its nature out in each of its moments as in an element in whic h it lives: and in so far as each of these spheres completes itself in itself, t his reflexion into itself is at the same time the transition into another sphere of its being. Imaginative presentation constitutes the middle term between pure thought and self-consciousness as such, and is merely one of the determinate fo rms. At the same time however, as has been shown, the character belonging to suc h presentation--that of being "synthetic connexion"--is spread over all these el ements and is their common characteristic. The content itself, which we have to consider, has partly been met with already, as the idea of the "unhappy" and the "believing" consciousness. In the case of the "unhappy" consciousness, however, the content has the characteristic of bein g produced from consciousness and for which it yearns, a content wherein the spi rit can never be satiated nor find rest because the content is not yet its own c ontent inherently and essentially, or in the sense of being its substance. In th e case of the "believing" consciousness, again, this content was regarded as the impersonal Being of the World, as the essentially objective content of imaginat ive thought--a pictorial thinking that seeks to escape the actual world altogeth er, and consequently has not the certainty of self-consciousness, a certainty wh ich is cut off from it, partly as being conceit of knowledge, partly as being pu re insight. The consciousness of the religious communion, on the other hand, pos sesses the content as its substance, just as the content is the certainty the co mmunion has of its own spirit. Spirit, represented at first as substance in the element of pure thought, is, th us, primarily the eternal essential Being, simple, self-identical, which does no t, however, have this abstract meaning of essential Being, but the meaning of Ab solute Spirit. Yet spirit consists, not in being a meaning, not in being the inn er, but in being the actual, the real. "Simple eternal essential Being" would, t herefore, be spirit merely in empty phrase, if we remained at the level of picto rial thought, and went no further than the expression of "simple eternal essenti al Being". "Simple essential Being", however, because it is abstraction, is in p oint of fact the inherently negative, is indeed the negativity of reflective tho ught, or negativity as found in Being per se; i.e. it is absolute distinction fr om itself, is pure process of becoming its other. Qua essential Being, it is mer ely implicit, or for us: but since this purity of form is just abstraction or ne gativity, it is for itself, it is the self, the notion. It is thus objective; an d since pictorial thinking apprehends and expresses as an event what has just be en expressed as the necessity of the notion, it will be said that the eternal Be ing begets for itself an other. But in this otherness it has likewise, ipso fact o, returned into itself again; for the distinction is distinction in itself, i.e

. the distinction is directly distinguished merely from itself, and is thus the unity returned into itself. There are thus three moments to be distinguished: Essential Being; explicit Self -existence, which is the express otherness of essential Being, and for which tha t Being is object; and Self-existence or Self-knowledge in that other. The essen tial Being beholds only itself in its Self-existence, in its objective otherness . In thus emptying itself, in this kenosis, it is merely within itself: the inde pendent Self-existence which excludes itself from essential Being is the knowled ge of itself on the part of essential Being. It is the "Word", the Logos, which when spoken empties the speaker of himself, outwardizes him, and leaves him behi nd emptied, but is as immediately perceived, and only this act of self-perceivin g himself is the actual existence of the "Word". Hence, then, the distinctions w hich are set up are just as immediately resolved as they are made, and are just as directly made as they are resolved, and the truth and the reality consist pre cisely in this self -closed circular process. This movement within itself expresses the absolute Being qua Spirit. Absolute Be ing, when not grasped as Spirit, is merely the abstract void, just as spirit whi ch is not grasped as this process is merely an empty word. Since its moments are grasped purely as moments, they are notions in restless activity, which are mer ely in being inherently their own opposite, and in finding their rest in the who le. But the pictorial thought of the religious communion is not this notional th inking; it has the content without its necessity; and instead of the form of the notion it brings into the realm of pure consciousness the natural relations of Father and Son. Since it thus, even when thinking, proceeds by way of figurative ideas, absolute Being is indeed revealed to it, but the moments of this Being, owing to this [externally] synthetic pictorial thinking, partly fall of themselv es apart from one another, so that they are not related to each other through th eir own very notion, while, partly again, this figurative thinking retreats from the pure object it deals with, and takes up a merely external relation towards it. The object is externally revealed to it from an alien source, and in this th ought of Spirit it does not recognize its own self, does not recognize the natur e of pure self-consciousness. In so far as the form of figurative thinking and t hat way of thinking by means of relationships derived from nature have to be tra nscended, and especially the method of taking the moments of the process, which Spirit is, as isolated immovable substances or subjects, instead of transient mo ments--this transcendence is to be looked at as a compulsion on the part of the notion, in the way we formerly pointed out when dealing with another aspect.(11) But since it is only an instinct, it mistakes its own real character, rejects t he content along with the form, and, what comes to the same thing, degrades the content into a historical imaginative idea and an heirloom handed down by tradit ion. In this way there is retained and preserved only what is purely external in belief, and the retention of it as something dead and devoid of knowledge; whil e the inner element in belief has passed away, because this would be the notion knowing itself as notion. The Absolute Spirit, as pictured in the element of pure essential Being, is not indeed the abstract pure essential Being; rather, just by the fact that this is merely a moment in the life of Spirit, abstract essential Being has sunk to the level of a mere element (in which Spirit lives). The representation of Spirit in this element, however, has inherently the same defect, as regards form, which e ssential Being as such has. Essential Being is abstraction, and, therefore, the negative of its simplicity, is an other: in the same way, Spirit in the element of essential Being is the form of simple unity, which, on that account, is just as essentially a process of becoming something else. Or, what is the same thing, the relation of the eternal Being to its self-existence, (its objective existen ce for Itself), is that of pure thought, an immediately simple relation. In this simple beholding of itself in the Other, otherness therefore is not as such set up independently; it is distinction in the way of distinction, in pure thought,

in the character of e xisting for another. is passive. t hus. or to express the fact that the simple whi ch has been expressed as absolute. which is individual self. and from nature offering its bounties without man's toil. Man is pictorially represented b y the religious mind in this way: it happened once as an event. to state the same in yet another way. because it is an abstract element. it may be called "innocent". with no necessit y about it. because that thought has come from immediacy or is conditioned th ought. is not merely Spirit thus thrown out and dispersed into the plenitude of existence and the external order imposed on it. This existence for another is at the same time a world. in the first instance. or merely sense-consciousness turns round into consciousness of thought. Immediate existence turns into th ought. Since this self-concentration on the part of the existent consciousness has stra ightway the character of becoming discordant with itself. or be cause. as world. the dissolution of their sim ple universality. this consciousness is essentially and merely evil. lies in the very noti on of Spirit. however. moreover. and their dispersion into their own particularity. In the way this indivi dual self is thus immediately established at first it is not yet conscious of be ing Spirit. but n ot strictly "good". but qua immediacy or existence. then. Evil appears as the fi rst actual expression of the self-concentrated consciousness. or pure thought. for since Spirit is essentially the simple Self. is really the negative. and was driven from the state of innocence. and hence opposed to itself. which is expres sed in the element of pure thought. lacking thus inwardness. or exists for another. the other of itself. and this opposition is not yet brok en down. from Paradise. just because it is abstract. and. owing to just this very opposition. and again their relation to each other. In order that in fact it may be self and Spirit. or dispersed i nto the diverse multiplicity of its conscious life. Spirit.e. but thought which contains otherness. cancellin g and superseding its own pure thought-constituted notion. becomes an other to itself: it enters existence. from itself. bare existence. Merely eternal. and. that he lost the form of harmonious unity with himself by plucking t he fruits of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. and. what is put forward as essential Be ing is simple immediacy. it has firs t to become objectively an other to itself. The world. At the same time. and is. enters immediate existence. for otherness itself. Spirit. where lover and beloved ar e by their very nature not opposed to each other at all. b eing reflected into themselves. therefore. or abstract Spirit. but to be concrete. it thus does not exist as Spirit. This "Creation" is the word which pictorial thought uses to convey the no tion itself in its absolute movement. I n so far as immediate existence turns round into thought. is the undisturbed separate subsistence of those moments fo rmerly enclosed within pure thought. and hence passes over into the proper element of imagination--the element where the moments of the pure notion at once acquire a substantial existence in opposition to each other and are subjects as well. but. from the garden with all its creatures. is with out Self. is itself rather the other of its own simplicity. w hich do not exist in indifference towards each other.is immediately no distinction-a recognition of Love. is essentially just this: not to be merely i n that element. merely for a third. it is not pure knowledge. ho wever. It creates a World. in the same way that the Eternal Bei ng manifests itself as the process of being self-identical in its otherness. its becoming "other" means t hat knowledge concentrates itself upon itself. The world i s objectively existent spirit. The element of pure thought. is. the self-opposed thought of good and evil. And because the th oughts of good and evil are utterly opposed. there is present also the good consci ousness opposing the one that is evil. this self is likewise present therein. i. break away from one another and stand confrontin g each other. Sin ce this spirit is determined as yet only as immediately existing. that has consciousness and distinguishes itself as other. and self-concentration . actual.

here.centration. through it. But these universal powers of goo d and evil belong all the same to the self. viz. what is distinguished is itself just as truly one and single . For another thing it is useless to count. is taken by imagination as an event ex traneous and alien to the Divine Being: to grasp evil in the Divine Being itself as the wrath of God-that is the supreme effort. From this point of view it thus comes about that. in contrast to the absolut e determinateness of the abstract unit-the principle of number-as indeterminaten ess in relation to number as such. Such a form of expression as "fallen". for the reason that. In so far as this condition of otherness falls into two parts. for one thing. Good and Evil were the specific distinctions of thought which we found.e. remains a fruitless struggle. just like the term "Son". the bare difference of magnitude and multitude says nothing at all and falls outside conceptual thought. i n other connexions. when Spirit is interpreted in terms of pure thought. This coordination must. Since th eir opposition is not yet broken down. just as. and merely lives to praise that Being. conversely. or the self is their actuality. man is the self with no e ssential reality of his own and the mere ground which couples them together. comes nearer its realization: the realization is taken to consist in the Divine Being "humbling" Itself. but that in his place another was at once created. that of evil. good enters in to actual reality and appears as an (objectively) existing self-consciousness. can be regarded as altogether useless. is capable. i. In the same way.as the thought is this el ement distinguished. so that in this connexion we can speak only o f numbers in general. the other which has become evil). in g eneral. and on which they exist and war with one another.viz. it is matter of indifference to coordinate a multiplicity of ot her shapes and forms(12) with the simple thought of otherness in the Being of th e Eternal. not of a specific number of distinctions.--the fact of becoming evil can be removed further backwards away out of the actually exis ting world and transferred to the very earliest realm of thought. win approval. while the other part is the abandonment. the thought of distinction which is only one thought . but as determinate diversity. the severest strain. of which f igurative thought. and not to the notion. Spirit migh t. of self-existence. t hat which is simple and knows itself to be essential Being. for figura tive thinking. and that "self-centredness" characteristic of evil. or (because the multiplicity breaks up itself again into two pa rts. it is here quite superfluous to think of number and counting. wrestling with its own limitations. because the thought which grasps the many in one has to be dis solved out of its universality and must be distinguished into more than three or four distinct components. Counting the moments. by becoming se lf-concentrated. as evil is nothing else than the s elf-concentration of the natural existence of spirit. be more exactly expressed numerically as a Quaternity . one part which has remained good. mi ght even be expressed as a Quinity. as it should do: not indeed as pl urality in general. The other aspect. . the emptying. a four in one. an effort whi ch. or transfers pictures 'into the realm of thought. is thereby more precisely determined. so that one part is the Son. as regards its moments. Hence. since it is devoid of the notion. To this part may then also be assigned the resumption once again of the self-existence relinquished. the second over against the first. This universality appears. however. belonging merely to figurative thought. each of them independent by itself. and renouncing its abstract nature and u nreality. It may thus be said that it was the very first-born Son of Light [Lucifer] who. th is moment of otherness does express diversity. and they are represented as essential rea lities of thought. fell. and transfer to them that condition of self-con. since. while partly again the transition to otherness on the part of the inner self (Wesen). T hat which.is partly itself thought. is in general me rely hinted at as the Divine Being's transition into otherness. either (we may say) transmutes and low ers the moments of the notion to the level of imaginative thought. all the same.

now returns into itself as the Self: and Spirit thus passes from the second element constitu ting it. therefore. as it is essentially--their movement starts only in that one of the two which has the character of being inherently essentia l as contrasted with the other. that its objective existence becomes co ncentrated in Itself and becomes evil. not independent self-existence. it is self-existence which passes for what is essential and the simply Divine for unessential. twofold in character. being determinate notions. their movement is thus free. gives itself unto death. For in this process it manifests itself as spirit: the ab stract Being is estranged from itself. if there were a "fall"' from it. The struggle only takes place where both cease to be this mixture of thought and independent existence. the bare community of their two moments. and gets this specific character merely through opposition. then. and its simple thought. If we further consider the kind of procedure that pictorial thinking adopts as i t goes along. and two connexions arise. the immediate existence of actual reality has ceased to b e something alien or external to the Divine. which are pictured as separate and independent Beings. and in the one having an unequal value as against the other. is taken back again by the second process of becoming "other". In the one. universal: this death (of immediacy) is therefore its rising anew as spirit. Their media ting. it has natural existence and the reality of an actual self. it is not asserted but implied that per s e this evil existence is not something alien to the Divine nature. That this self-centredness. Here it is eo ipso asserted that implicitly and inherentl y the two are not separate: just as in the statement. it is as universal self -consciousness. This is pictured as a spontaneous action. Thereby the Divine Being has come to itself in the sphere of the sensuous present. and confront each other mere ly as thoughts. they essentially exist mer ely in the relation of opposition.--ap pears to pictorial thinking as an inconceivable happening. are the two moments whose absolute unit y is Spirit itself. Its alienation with itself consists in the two falling apart from each other. by being sublated. If. as universal. For there. qua independent. on the contrary. that the Divine Being from the beginning empties Itself of Itself. belongs to the D ivine Being--while this is for us a notion. and so as far as it is a notion. or its being sensuously present. and is affirmed as supers eded.The alienation of the Divine Nature is thus set up in its double-sided form: the self of Spirit. Therefore that element which ha s for its essence. but simple being. we consider the movement o f both as it is in themselves--i. When the self-consc ious Being cancels and transcends its immediate present. the Divine Being stand s for what is essential. The aspect of self-concentration re ally constitutes the essential moment of the self of Spirit. Ju st in virtue of their independence each must inherently. The dissolution of this opposition does not take effect through the struggle bet ween the two elements. and peculiar to themselves. Absolute Bein g would be merely an empty name if in very truth there were any other being exte rnal to it. we find in the first place the expression that the Divine Being "t akes on" human nature. through its own notion. they have their essential nature outside their opposition. though still empty.--figurative thought--and goes over to the third-self-consciousness as s uch. but th e necessity for its self-abandonment lies in the notion that what is inherently essential.e. s elf-determined. ground is existence in general. and so reconciles Absolute Be ing with its own self. whence primarily comes its reality. while natural existence and the self are unessential an d are to be cancelled. dissolve itself in itself. immediately expresses therefore the establishment of a communion which. on the other hand. In the other. T his disparateness is. is what emp ties and abandons itself. This notion of the transcended individual self which is Absolute Being. has just on that account no real independent subsistence. The inherent and esse ntial nature assumes for figurative thought the form of an indifferent objective . which have in common the moments just given. while hitherto having its abode in the sphere of pictorial thought. This its otherness.

It is this spiritual unity. which in this manner is still im mediate and hence not spiritual. is distinguished from itself and so is self-identity. Since both are equally right. or again that t he Divine Being is the same as nature in its entire extent. the process in which simple sameness is abstraction and thus absolute distinction. Spirit thus takes up its position in the third element. self-centred self-ex istence. with the thought of this other-evil--is thus presented here. it must be met and opposed by insisting on the other with immov able obstinacy. specifica lly. and. When ev il is the same as goodness. the copula o f the judgment. just as nature separ ated from God is simply nothingness. It is only thes e two propositions that make the whole complete. and returns to His essential Being. being distinction per se. is implicitly universal self-consciousness. then evil is just not evil nor goodness good. who has assumed shape and for m. and when the first is asserted and asseverated. viz. theref ore pure thought or self-centredness. however. in a figurativ e way. are the same. The thought. the unity of the two is at once apparent. and t heir wrong consists in taking such abstract forms as "the same" and "not the sam e". for s elf-centred self-existence is simple knowledge.e. and what is self-less simplicity is similarly pure self-existence centred within itself. he has to become explicitly so for this self-consciousness. fixed. the Process has turned back into it. or Human God. i. or as transcended--which became known to pictoria l thinking in that atoning reconciliation spoken of above.e. where the moments as much are as they are not. while this again. The difficulty people find in these conc eptions is due solely to sticking to the term "is" and forgetting the character of thought.fact. real. If this reconciliation is expressed conceptually. as cancelled and preserved at once: and this way of affirming th em cannot be expressed by the judgment. Hence. The essential Being is then Spirit only when it is reflected into itself. are equally pure negativity or per se absolute distinction. Precisely this is what we have in sameness of th e Divine Being and Nature in general and human nature in particular: the former is Nature so far as it is not essential Being. The reconciliation of the Divine Being with its other as a whole. both are really done away with--evil in general. and in res ting on them. or again pure knowle dge. and with its moment of opposition to spiri tual unity it is the principle of Evil. The movement of this community being that of self-consciousness. "identity" and "non-identity". but this nothing itself is all the same. in the form that the Divine Being empties Itself of Itself and is made flesh. And since this unity is the universality of self-consciousness. cons ists in explicitly bringing out what has implicitly become established. comes also before thi s figurative way of thinking (since it does possess the real content). but that thought appears afterwards. so far as they are not good and evil. This figurative idea. But it is in Spirit that we find both abstract aspects affirmed as they truly are. it knows the human form assumed by the Div ine as merely a particular form. if it must be sa id that good and evil in this their conception. in universal self-consci ousness: Spirit is its own community. to be something true. self-consciousness has ceased to be f igurative or pictorial in its thinking. their truth is just their movement. just as certainly it must be said that they are not the same. by the soulless word "is" . that those apparently mutually repugnant moments. on the contrary. by saying it consists i n the fact that evil is inherently the same as what goodness is. and goodness. they are both equally wrong. for simple self-existence.--then this must be looked at as an unspirit ual mode of expression which is bound to give rise to misunderstandings. since this self-conscious . Neither the one nor the other has truth. Since in this way they are both exp ressed in terms of their notion. are not inseparable. Nature is Divine in its essential Being. In the same way Nature is nothing outside its essential Being [G od]. a bsolute Being and self-existent Self. which distinguishes itself from its figurative idea.--unity where the distinctions are merely in the form of moments. i. it is absolute abstraction. self-less simplicity.--are only the process which is Spirit. not yet as a universal form--becomes spiritual for this consciousness in the process whereby God. surrenders again His immediate existence. The dead Divine Man. but absolutely different. Or.

and the content is then and thereby a spiritual content. Since the speci fic determinateness of each is just as much its opposite. But this aspect is already pe r se evil: entering into itself consists therefore. natural spirit: se lf has to withdraw from this natural existence and enter into itself. it is a forsaking of that immediacy. Conceptual comprehension (Begreifen).e. i. what we find is that each part of figurative thought receives here the opposite significance to that which it had before. "identity" and "non-identity" cancelled one another and were transcended.ness constitutes one side of the opposition involved in figurative thought. Beside this immediacy. and hence knowledge--a knowledge which is a pure act of consci ousness within itself. By picture-thinking the world is supposed actua lly to become evil and be evil as an actual fact. in the form of a n objective existence. but merely of the thought of evil. or in themselves. from the point of view of figurative thought. being a ret urn into self out of the immediacy of nature. It is not na tural existence as such that consciousness forsakes. This implicit state is apprehended b y the self-consciousness. The movement. and the atoning reconcilement of the Absolute Being is viewed as an actual existent phenomenon. By self-consci ousness as such. has therefore still to come on the scene in its own more peculiar fo rm. which takes natural existence and individual self-existence t o be the essential reality--this aspect. that does not comprehend (begreifen). to raise itself in and for itself to the level of spirit. which is pictured as independent. The immediate process of becoming self-cen tred. is considere d to be merely a moment that is already superseded and transcended.--the event of God's emptying Himself of His D . This first movement is just on that account itself merely immediate. that process of becoming fixed in itself is in the sphere of self consciousness. and this universality of self which has arisen within the life of the self--these constitute implicitl y the reconciliation of spirit with itself. the mediation of figurative thought is necessary. For. does not mean for it a grasping (Ergreife n) of this conception (Begriff) which knows natural existence when cancelled and transcended to be universal and thus reconciled with itself. the becoming self-centre d on the part of the natural self-consciousness was actually existing evil. it has to become evil. is its simple notion. and a dying to sin. then. If. the essential Being is inherently and from the start recon. and as something presented to it figuratively. because it is the sa me as what its ground or reason is. Because of evil man must be self-centred (in sich gehen). therefore. This moment of the negative must in like manner find expr ession in the content. that would mean. unity in otherness--sp iritual reality--is achieved: just as formerly we saw the opposite meanings comb ined objectively (fer uns). has. is just as much a mediate process: it presupposes itself. and n ot yet as a moment. that is to say. become sel f-centred. This particular self-consciousness is Spirit in natural form. which is specifically characterize d as evil. as regards its form. Since. and is therefore recognized as the first moment of reconciliation. but evil is itself the state of self-concentration. in which w hat are parts for figurative thought are sublated. By this means each meaning finds its completion in the other. are moments. for the self is the negative. it has to reveal the process of Spirit in its self. this pictured truth. and even the abstract forms of "th e same" and "not-the-same". the side of evil. or the process of passing into otherness. but rather a grasp ing of the imaginative idea (Vorstellung) that the Divine Being is reconciled wi th its existence through an event. then. the knowledge of evil as something that per se belongs to existence. viz. in persuading itself that na tural existence is what is evil. This knowledge is certainly a process of becoming evil. is its own ground and reason: the reason for self-concentrating is because nature has per s e already done so. but natural existence that is at the same time known to be evil. however.cited with itself and is a spiritual unity. T he knowledge of nature as the untrue existence of spirit. on account of its independence.

this means the sublation of his factuality. is abstract negativity. This feeling thus means . in other words. is eo ipso dead. simple. returned into the self. which takes as essential Being the simple abstrac t element of thought. which is essential Being reconciling itself with itself. exists. a dark ness distinguishing and knowing nothing more outside it. die s there daily. by which its abstraction and lifelessness have expir ed. in other words. the content expresses just Spirit itself. pure thought and the spirit eternal therein. which it lacked when it was object or imme diacy. and daily rises again. which is for it object.--is thus here transferred to self-consciousness itself. qua death. On the other side. rath er the return of the whole into itself consists just in containing all moments w ithin itself. whereby Substance becomes Subject. This self-consciousness does not th erefore really die. when it feels that God Himself is dead. It is this by the fact of i ts passing through the three elements of its nature: this movement through its w hole self constitutes its actual reality. has .. into its notion. This harsh utterance is the expression of inmost self-knowl edge which has simply self for its content. For the mediator. becomes the religious communion. the universal. as long as his death has not yet accomplished the reconcili ation. the loss of the Substance and of its objective existence ove r against consciousness. in its knowled ge. that. the pure certainty of itself. What was in the forme r merely an (objective) existent has come to assume the form of Subject. What moves itself. of his particular selfexistence: what dies is not merely the outer encasement. 'That death is the bitterness of feeling of the "unhappy consciousness". the immediate result of the process which terminates only in the universality belonging to nature. of his particular independent existence: this p articular self-existence has become universal self-consciousness. which is not yet affirmed as a self. and not merely obje ct for self-consciousness. is something one-sided. as the particular person(14) is pictorially imagined to have really died. just because of this. that Absolute Spiri t presents the nature of spirit in its existence. Death then ceases to signify w hat it means directly--the non-existence of this individual--and becomes transfi gured into the universality of the spirit. the self first gets this as S pirit. but also the abstraction of the Divine Bein g. being stripped. to the knowle dge which maintains itself in its otherness. a re no longer away beyond the mind thinking pictorially nor beyond the self. a nd the pure or non-actual Spirit of bare thought has become actual. When the death of the mediator is grasped by the self. that is Spirit. i. which lives in its own communion. its figurative idea is the true absolute content. As we saw. In spiri tual self-consciousness death loses this natural significance. which.e. is self-consciousness. it passes into it s true conception. it . in point of fact. That which belongs to the sphere of pictorial thought--viz. This one-sided extreme of self has n ot yet equal worth and value with essential Being. of essential Being. not concrete reality. it is the return of consciousness in to the depth of darkness where Ego is nothing but bare identity with Ego. or. qua individual or rather qua p articular. The death of the mediator is death not merely of his natural aspect. The grasping of this idea now expresses more specifically what was formerly called in figurative thin king spiritual resurrection. That immediately pr eceding element of figurative thinking is thus here affirmed as transcended. then. or pure essential Being. The death of this pictorial idea implies at the same time the death of th e abstraction of Divine Being. its particularity expires in its universality. This knowledge is thus spiritualization. But at the same time it is the pure subjectivity of Sub stance. and universal self-consciou sness. It knows itself. The death o f the Divine Man. By that very fact the first element too. It i s at the same time not merely content of self-consciousness.ivine Being through His factual Incarnation and His Death. the conception just mentioned. and Substance therefore has become real. Spirit is Spirit knowing its own self. or the process by which God's individual self-consc iousness(13) becomes the universal. it is also actual Spirit. In this way.

but as the act of satisfaction obtained from an (alien) other. that Substance has here at tained to being absolute self-consciousness--this is. whi ch the other self achieved. It grasps this aspect-that the knowledge which become s purely inward is inherently absolute simplicity. or does not find it in its own action as such. The world is no doubt implicitly rec onciled with the essential Being. or pure inwardness of knowledge is just as muc h the self-identical essential Being: put other-wise. and in so doing puts aside its own simplic ity and rigid unchangeableness: it was. to which the Absolute Being is reve aled. We saw how the notion of spirit arose when we entered the sphere of religion: it was the process of spirit cert ain of its self. is in its heart. and as it is Subject. in w hich what is absolutely in opposition recognizes itself as the same as its oppos ite. What falls within its consciousness as the immanent essential element. and does away with the distinction of its self from w hat it beholds. as the aspect of immediacy and of existence. in general. which is not object to itself as this self-consciousness.is the subject of the movement. the object as alienated from itself. the aspect of pure mediation. This religious communion. something far away in the future. that this negativity. and it is likewise the moving process itself. it is not really aw are as a fact that this depth of pure self is the power by which the abstract es sential Being is drawn down from its abstractness and raised to the level of sel f by the force of this pure devotion. b ut still with its conscious life sundered in twain and its actual reality shatte red. is the wo rld which has yet to await transfiguration. just as the ele ment of pure thought itself was also hampered with that opposition. therefore. consciousness has this idea also of its reconciliation. in like manner the universal divine man. We see it relin quish its natural existence. has as its father its own proper action and knowledge. and this knowledge breaks out into the "yea. Its own peculiar reconciliation therefore enters its consciousness as som ething remote. of its self-centredness. which forgives evil. beholds this notion. appears as away in the distance of the past. because the relinquishment of itself on the pa rt of substance is for the self something per se. is the reconciliation that lies beyond: while what app ears as actually present. Its content. or does not develop into clear consciousness of itself. It obtains satisfaction by attaching. to state it otherwise. in an external way. an sich) father and on ly an actual mother. so far as it is conscio usness. the self does not at once gras p and comprehend it. yea". to its pure negativity the positive significance of the unity of itself with essential Being. But the positive signifi cance--viz. The religious consciousness. is not yet fulfilled in this its self-conscio usness. but in the form of an im aginative idea. but as one with itself in its Lo ve.(15) This spi ritual communion is not also consciously aware what it is. the spiritual comm union. Its satisfaction thus itself remains hampered with the opposition of a b eyond. We see self-consciousness at its last turning point become inward to itself and attain to knowledge of its inner being. an external other. but does not behold in its consciousness as an actual immediate object. Its reconciliation. and that Being no doubt knows that it no longe r regards. is put before it in the form of a pictorial ide a. Just as the individual divine man(16) has an implied (essential. just as the reconciliation. it is spiritual selfconsciousness. In other words. Rather. which it merely feels. for the devotional conscio usness. so it is also Substance. so that this disruption still attaches even to the actual spiritual character of the communion--to its return out of its figurative thinking. however. and reach pure negativity. the process. and is thus itsel f Spirit just because and in so far as it is this process. it has before it those picture-thoughts which were considered. or the substance through which the subject passes. with which one extreme m eets the other. But for self-consciousness this immediate presence has not yet the form and . or Substance--as the pictoria l idea of something which is not thus by its very conception. Since this unity of Essential Being and Self has been inherently brought about. The action of the self hence retains towar ds it this negative significance. while its mother i s eternal Love.

This knowledge of which we are spearing is. (or existence-for-another and existence-for-self). and that this externalization of self-c onsciousness has not merely negative. and has resumed them into itself. its actual self-consciou sness is not at this stage the object it is aware of. for in d oing so it establishes itself as object. that self-consciousness ha s just as really cancelled and superseded this self-relinquishment and objectifi cation. partly essential being or in the form of a universal-correspon ding to understanding. when the latter apprehends every individual one of them as self. The object as a whole is the mediated result [the syllogi sm] or the passing of universality into individuality through specification. This is the movement of consciousness. VIII. howeve r. and is thus at home with itself in its otherness as such. then. then. not knowledge in the sense of pure conceptual comprehension of the object. or. its relatedness. for self-consciousness. a significance not merely for us or per se. Thus the spirit of the communion is. This totality of its determinate characteristics makes the obje ct per se or inherently a spiritual reality. its true m eaning must have already come out in the shapes or modes consciousness has assum ed. sets up the object as its self. and. when it takes up towards them the spiritual relationship just spoken of. or. or better. The content of this figurative thought is Absolut e Spirit. but positive significance. furthermore.e. what is the same thing. separated from its religious consciousness. partly an alteration of itself. by reason of the indivisible unity characterizing its self-existence. determinatenesss--correspondi ng to perception. Spirit as a whole and the moments distinguished in it fall within the sphere of figurative thinking.shape of spiritual reality. and have grasped its meaning from the point of view of each of them. there is also this other moment in the process. in its immediat e consciousness. The negative of the object. and it becomes so in truth for cons ciousness. must have taken up a relation to the object in all its aspects and phases. self-consciousness knows this nothingness of the object because on the one hand self-consciousness itself externalizes itself. because the form appertains to consciousness as such. which declares inde ed that these two modes of consciousness inherently are not separated. or. at the same time. that the emptying of self-con sciousness itself establishes thinghood. Consciousness. These three specific aspects. ABSOLUTE KNOWLEDGE(1) THE Spirit manifested in revealed religion has not as yet surmounted its attitud e of consciousness as such. has to be taken in its various moments and set forth in the manner appropriate to consciousness as suc . partly immediate existence. he re this knowledge is to be taken only in its development. and in this process c onsciousness is the totality of its moments. as also the reverse process from individual to universal through cancelled individu ality or specific determination. On the other hand. but this is an implicitness which is not realized. a po sitive significance. a thing in general--correspondi ng to immediate consciousness. The surmounting of the object of consciousness in this way is not to be taken on e-sidedly as meaning that the object showed itself returning into the self. i. It h as a more definite meaning: it means that the object as such presented itself to the self as a vanishing factor. and w ithin the form of objectivity. The object is. but for self-consciousness itself. gets. or has not yet become an equally absol ute explicit self-existence. its cancelling its own existence. determine the ways in which consciousness mu st know the object as itself. All that remains to be done now is to cancel and transcend this bare f orm.

it is i ndeed represented also as a thing. into a being at the mercy of an "othe r". of pure knowledge.e. lets existence drop out of the self. and this. finally. to what here alone constitutes the nature of the object--the thing stands for something that is self-existent. we saw Reason. which has traversed the region of spirit in self-al ienation. therefore. t aken at first glance. produced the thing as its self.sciousness as such.e. In so far as the moral con sciousness. which is not yet made e vident. it knows that its exist ence as such is this pure certainty of its own self. . and passes into its opposite. thing is transcended in this infinite judgme nt. only t hrough the ego and its reference to the ego. Things are simply and solely useful. but only its empty husk. then.h. For that reason the object does not yet. When ego is called a soul. the ego is an immediate thing of sense. partly a multitude of such modes which we [who analyze the process] gather together. in other words knows that the thing has essentially and solely a relative exi stence.. so far as it is immediate. but also in the sense of essence or inner reality. but a thing in the sense of something invisib le. has. an indifferent objective entity. is just the absence o f spirituality. and o nly to be considered from the point of view of their utility. in fact not as an immediate entity and not as that wh ich is generally understood by a thing. But knowledge of the thing is not vet finished at this point. by giving up itself. it is in fact the most luminous and illuminating judgment. however. the objective element. In its conception. is nothing else than pure knowledge of i tself by itself. etc. its inner significance. it ju st as truly takes this existence back again into its self. impalpable. The attitude consciousness adopts in regard to the object is not that of considering it either in this totality as such or in the pure conceptual form. but this self-existence is itself declared to be a moment which merely disappears. As regards the object. That judgment. i. and the moments of the notion proper. Or again--to give complete expression to the relationship. It is nothing but merely this will and th is knowledge. "ego is a thing". where apprehension is a shape or mode of consciousness.e. being that ha s no inherent nature per se. This is found in the case of Moral Self-consciousness. In the form of consci ence.e. too. Any other possesses merely non-essential being. i. assume the form of s hapes or modes of consciousness. in its view of the world. and knows the thing to have no independenc e. when p resent in con. This mode of experience k nows its knowledge as the absolute essential element. And. its specific character take expression at its hig hest stage in the infinite judgment: "the being of the ego is a thing". we saw it conscious that its activity is there of an external sort. it is partly that of a mode or shape of consciousness in general. fur ther. then. and at the same time conscious of the object merely as an immediate object. it only has significance in relation. and in which the totality of the moments of the object and of t he process of consciousness can be shown merely resolved into their moments. We saw. into which qua acting it puts forth itself. has no spiritual content. In point of fact. still in the thing. The thing is nothing in itself. i. This moment came before consciousne ss in pure insight and enlightenment. or rather. appear as the inner essence of Spirit in the way this has just been expressed. The trained and cu ltivated self-consciousness. at the stage of "Observation". is what the two other moments to be considered express. To understand this method of grasping the object. it retains i tself. we have here only to recall the previous shapes of con sciousness which came before us earlier in the argument. The thing must bec ome known as self not merely in regard to the immediateness of its being and as regards its determinateness. seeking and finding itsel f in this indifferent thing--i. sense-certainty (sense-experience) is announced as absolu te truth. knows no other objective b eing than pure will or pure knowledge. it is no longer this incessant alternation between the placing" a nd the "displacing" [dissembling] of existence and self. The thing is ego.

however. Herein it is established. the "beautiful so ul" is its own knowledge of itself in its pure transparent unity--self-conscious ness. that the th ird moment. no other significance for self-consciousness than that of be ing pure knowledge. qua i mmediate existence. they at the beginning fall apart. This unification has. but not according to the proper form. at the same time. what is self-opposed is a knowledge partly of this purely individual self. universality. The las t of these moments is. it. which by contrast is the aspect of reflexion into self. it is this that winds up this series of embodiments of spirit. consciousness has reached the individual moments of that order. and also their unification. The content. form a rigid reality confronting action. The unification of both aspects is not yet brought to light. for in it spirit gets to the point where it knows itself not only as it is inherently in itself. and makes good its conduct. which knows this pure knowledge of pure inwardness to be spirit. means for each of the two opposite fac tors merely knowledge.These are the moments which compose the reconciliation of spirit with its own co nsciousness proper. nor only as it is (objectively) for itself in terms of its bare form devoid of content. It is that part of the embodiment of self-assured spirit which keeps within its essential principle and was called the "beautiful soul". in the one case. necessarily this unity itself. in consciousness itself as such. is that side theref ore which contains its self and its opposite. In pardon. already taken place by implication. as it is in its elf and for itself. This first movement turns round into the second. They axe distinguished inter se by the fact that the one is this reconciliation in the form of implicit immanen ce. This notion is also already given with the aspect of self-conscio usness. similarly. By themselves they are single and isolated. we saw h ow this rigid fixity gives way and renounces its claims. for the religious aspect is the aspect of the essentially independent (Ansich) and stands in contrast to the pr ocess of self-consciousness. or the essence. however. as we see. or in ter ms of self-consciousness. in the religious mind. Finally they also cancel the empty opposition that still remains. qua determinate existence. but as it previously came before us above. This reconciliation of consciousness with self-consciousness thus proves to be b rought about in a double. partly of knowledge qua universal. and it is their spiritual unity alone which furnishes the power for this reconciliation. (an sich) or in a general way. in this way. and has done so in religion in the return of the figurative idea (Vorstellung) into self-cons ciousness. Action is the first inherent division of the simple unity of the notion. or qua relation. in the other case. s ince the element of recognition puts itself forward as simple knowledge of duty in contrast to the distinction and diremption that lie in action as such and. and. but as it is in its self-completeness. as well as the other aspect of self-conscio us spirit. however. and are the knowledge of ego as identical with ego:-this individual sel f which is immediately pure knowledge or universal. Reality has here. is not me . The declaration that what it does it does in accordance with the convicti on of duty-this statement is the warrant for its own action.sided way. have been brought to light and are here in their completeness: the unification still a-wanting is the simple unity of the notion. but explicitly (fer sich) or expressly devel oped and distinguished. Spirit certain of itself in its objective exi stence takes as the element of its existence nothing else than this knowledge of self. That is to say. The unification therefore belongs to this other asp ect. and contains them not only implici tly. the other in the form of explicit self-existence. In the order in which the modes or shapes of consciousness came before us. like all the other moment s. As we have considered them . so far as it is the other aspect. has the form of being a particular mode or shape of consciousness. or in terms of its absolute content. and the return out of this division. b inds them all in fact into itself. long before ever religion gave its ob ject the shape of actual self-consciousness.

because it is negativity. the latter positive thought. finally. and is thus the appearance on the scene of pure knowledge of the essence. it is the principle of evil: so far as it is the inherently essential. It is knowledge of pure knowledge. but in the sense of an essent ial being which is this knowledge. Since this notion keeps itself fixedly opposed to its realization. but it is now its own act of renunciation. it is the principle which remain s good. and the latter through universality. this individual pure -self-consciousness whic h is therefore at the same time a genuine object. it is the one -sided shape which we saw before disappear into thin air. the notion that has attained its realization--the notion in its truth. it now establishes itself as it is in its truth. self-transcending. not in the sense of an abstract essence such as duty is. the determinateness of t he notion in contrast with its fulfilment is canceled and done away with. In the latter it won the absolute content qua content or in the form of a figurative idea or of otherness for cons ciousness. But to make its appearance in this opposition is to participate in it. is just as much that sta te of reflexion into self which comes out of pure knowledge--both qua existence and qua duty--and this is the state of evil. makes confession. The one of the two parts of the opposition is the disparity between existence within itself. a knowledge which does not act and is n ot real. in the first the form is just the self. So far as this proces s of diremption is the process of becoming self-centred. and is duplicated as well--is both for consciousness and is its self-existen ce or its own proper action. just as the notio n renounced is its own notion. This process of "going into self" c onstitutes the opposition lying in the notion. and the negative element exists as a determinate quality which eac h has for the other. partly in religion. for it is the diremption of negativity which constitutes the notion. i . for that m ode contains the active spirit sure of itself. and thereby dies to its lifeless self and its inert univ ersality. the former negative thought . By this process of action spirit has come to light in the form of pure universality of k nowledge. and what remains is its true notion. for this purity is absolute abstraction of negativ ity. thus repeats itself now as knowledge thereof on the part of consciousness an d as conscious action. This notion gave itself its fulfilment partly in the acts performed by the spiri t that is sure of itself. the latter renounces the rigidity of its abstract universality. but the self intuition of God Himself. or the objective b eing it contains. Now what in the first instance takes place implicitly is at once for consciousne ss. in unity with its externalization. pure knowledge of essence has inherently relinquished its simplicity. for this notion is the self-ex isting self. Its se lf-consciousness attains the form of universality. this objec tless self-consciousness ceases to hold fast by itself. which is being and existence as well as essence. in its individuality. and relinquishes itself.rely intuition of the divine. takes upon itself objective existence . That implicit nature of the beginning is in truth as much mediated. which is simple uni . or acts. as we see. This existence. but also positively re linquish itself and advance further. The power of diremption or of coming forth out of its inwardness lies in the purity of the notion. is that simple notion. Through this act of realization. which how ever gives up its eternal essential Being. the self accomplishes the life of Absolute Spirit.e. In the same way the notion finds its element of reality. the other. This waiving of independence i s the same renunciation of the one-sidedness of the notion as constituted implic itly the beginning. Each lays aside for the other the independence of charact er with which each appears confronting the other. and universality. and is essentially self-cancelling. so that the former is completed through the moment of universality. which is self-consciousness as self-consciousness. On the other hand. The same thing that is already inherently establish ed. This shape (mode). disparity between it s abstract universality and the self. wh ich is the essence. which is self. in pure knowledge itself. The former dies to its self-existence. for this knowledge is simple immedia cy.

or. Tr uth is here not merely in itself absolutely identical with certainty. exist before. for it is pure negativity. and at the same time. What is there. or the same pure negativity which constitutes ego. the notion. it has als o the shape.e. The nature. Thus. is secured when the content has received the shape of self. only then is the content comprehended (begriffen) when ego in its otherness is still at home with itself. and thereby realizes its notion. For the substance is the undeveloped i nherent nature. the knowledge of this Subject as Substance a nd of the Substance as this knowledge of its action. the knowledge that the action of the self within itself is all t hat is essential and all existence. and in doing so rema ins within its own notion--this is Absolute Knowledge. comes to have the natu re of existence. It is spirit knowing itse lf in the shape of spirit. It has a content. This identification . or sublated. which is this ego and no other.e. It is through action that spirit is spirit so as definitely to exist. or is not in itself abso lute knowledge. is there earlier than its fo rm.ty of knowledge. appearing before consciousness in this element of existence. this content is nothing else than the very process just spoken of. earlier than the shape of the notion. comprehension (Begreifen) in ge neral. universal ego. or self-diremption. is simply to gather together the particular moments. what does ex . self-existent knowledge. each of which in principle exhibits the life of spirit in its entirety. qua distinguished. Qua spirit which knows what it is. Ego is in it. reflected into itself. What we have done here. immediately is mediated. whose content was disclosed in these moments. it is knowledge which comprehends through notions. for it is the process of supe rseding itself. a nd does this for itself qua spirit. it is consciousness. This last embodiment of spirit--spirit which at once gives its complete and true content the form of self. Spirit in and for itself is. As to the actual existence of this notion. science does not appear in time and i n reality till spirit has arrived at this stage of being conscious regarding its elf. which in religion is not as yet at one with its certainty. and again to secure the n otion in the form of the notion. moments. as we see. when distinguished int o its separate moments. For this notion is. It is ego. and is not to be found at all till after the completion of the task of mastering and constrai ning its imperfect embodiment--the task of procuring for its consciousness the s hape of its inmost essence. a nd which had already presented itself in the form of a mode or shape of consciou sness. for s pirit knowing it--it is in the form of knowledge of itself. it raises its existence into the sphere of thought and hence into absolut e opposition. By this m eans. by the fact that it possesses the shape of t he notion in its objectivity. in addition. it does not. or in its existence--i. produced by it in this element. the ground and notion in its inert simplicity. what is h ere the same thing. f or the content is the spirit which traverses the whole range of its own being. what was in religion content. More precis ely stated. the character of certainty of self. the state of inwa rdness or the self of spirit which is not yet there. is here the action proper of the self. or a way of imagining (Vorstellen) an other. Truth is the content . assumes the form of what is objective to consciousness. what constitutes the very essence. which it distinguishes f rom itself. Now in actual reality the knowing substance exists. This content in its distinction is itself the ego. and in this manner bringing its self-consciousness l evel with its consciousness. Sp irit. The notion is the connecting princ iple securing that the content is the action proper of the self. is systematic Science. then. viz. and returns out of it through and within this very opposition. and process of this knowledge have then shown themselves to be such that this knowledge is pure self-existence of self-consciousness. however. which as such has not yet reached the substance. i.

so long as it do es not annul time. Substance. where s pirit is not yet complete within itself. or the object of imagining (Vorstellen) consciousness in general. or whatever other expressions we care to employ. it supersedes its time cha racter.e . as a sacred object of belief. it appears as a single whole. of the object of consciousness into the object of self-consciousness. and absorbed into itself the entire structure of the s ubstance with all its constituent elements. to realize and make manifest what is inherent. to set forth in itself what it inherently is. For experience just consists i n this. is in the shape of still unexpressed simplicity. (conceptually) comprehends intuition. it is distinguished into the intuitiv ely apprehended pure notion. Consequ ently. the movement of these moments is the process by which the whole comes into b eing. in contrast to which the substance and the consciousness of this substance are richer in content. To begin with. for the substance is here still self-less existence and nothing but certainty of self is revealed. it goes on till it has produced these elements out of itself and thereby reinstated them on ce more as objects of consciousness. Since this negative attitude towards objectivity is positive as well. which is spirit. intuitively apprehended. Because knowl edge (Erkennen) is a spiritual state of consciousness. the undeveloped immediate. qua subject. therefore. in fact.e. But since these moments are pure activities and must move forward by their very nature.e. implicit. an d only as this process of reflecting itself into itself is it essentially and in truth spirit. the inherent. Time is the pure self in external form. When this notion grasps itself. the whole--but not as comprehended co nceptually--is prior to the moments. natu re. Time. regarded as inward and immanent. it is the notion apprehended on ly through intuition. Hence spirit necessarily appears in time. it is the necessity compelling spirit t o enrich the share self-consciousness has in consciousness. is the development of itself explicitly to what it is inherently and implicitly. It is inherently the movement which is the process of knowledge-the transforming of that inherent nature into explicitness. involves the necessity. But this substance. So far as spirit. to show itself to be spirit. Time therefore appears as spirit's destiny and necessity. a cycle t hat presupposes its beginning. completes itself as . knowing itself as notion. concealment. For this reason it must be said that nothing is known which does not fall within experience. of Substance into Su bject. i. and reaches its beginning only at the end. the development of it into the self. and the Content. into the notion.ist. And since that whole is what is distinguished. th e moments thus make their appearance prior to the whole in its complete fulfilme nt. This transforming process is a cycle that returns into itself. that the content-and the content is spirit--in its inherent nature is su bstance and so object of consciousness. which admits as real what essentially is only so far as this is a being for the self and a being of the s elf or a notion--knowledge has on this account merely a barren object to begin w ith. establishes and fixes the content. then. The revelation which substance has in such a consciousnes s is. over against its simple self-consciousness. conversely. to make manifest that which is at fi rst within--i. it is o nly the abstract moments that belong to self-consciousness concerning the substa nce. or. to vindicate it for spirit's certainty of self. at first an inner necessity. apprehended in intuit ion. i. or (as it is also expressed) which is not felt to be true. The completed expression in objective form is--and is only when completed--at the sa me time the reflexion of substance. and presented to consciousness in t he form of empty intuition. Time is just the notion definitely existent. until and unless spirit inherently completes itself. which is not given as an inwardly revealed eternal verity. and is intuition comprehended and comprehending. to put into motion t he immediacy of the inherent nature (which is the form in which the substance is present in consciousness). and it app ears in time so long as it does not grasp its pure notion. In consciousness. into an object that is at the same time transcended--in other words. In the notion. is of necessity this self-distinction. and not grasped and understood by the self. self-consciousness enriches itself till it has torn from consciousn ess the entire substance. on the other hand.

is complete and immediate unity with self. really collapses upon itself. but this science alone is the perfect form in which spirit t ruly knows itself. by what is distinct from knowledge itself. and to have got at the distinctions between the endless variety of things.reflecting process. it has thus itsel f expressed in an abstract way the immediate unity of thought and existence. the content of its consciousness alien to itself. it would here be interpreted as unity of thought and time. in so far as it is at the outset the substance of Absolute Spirit.(6)-after these stage s. It thus discovers this world in the living present to be i ts own property. which--being pur e distinction and at the same time objective to the self that knows itself--has to be expressed as Time.(7) This "Ego identical with Ego" is.(2) When.(3) thereupon spirit at once recoils in horror from this abstract unity. in the actual pres ent. h as thereby made it an objective existence and established it throughout the whol e of existence.a world-spirit. which has an existence all the harsher and more barbaric the deeper is its inner spirit.(4) B ut after Spirit has externalized this principle in the process of its culture. however. just as formerly Essential Reality was exp ressed as unity of thought and extension. the self-ident ity of the Ego stands in contrast to this absolute distinction. unhalting time. spirit then brings to light the thought that lies in its inmost depths. from this self-less substantiality. and its inarticulate self has all the harder task in dealing with its essence. neverthe less. would not be conceived a s Spirit. i. conversely. is the crude form of consc iousness. unresting. Ego is not merely self. have to fa ll outside the Substance and be due to reflexion. expresses earlier in time than (philosophical) scie nce what spirit is. as unity of extension and existence-for "ex istence" is an ultimate simple term more adequate to thought than "light"-and in this way has revived again in thought the Substance of the Orient. it cannot reach its completion as self-conscious spirit. This identity . as reflecting about self and reflecting itself into self. a content were to be spoken of. But distinction left to itself. it is the objective quiescence of extension. or rather to quicken the abstract element of the intelligible wor ld with concrete self-hood. for sin ce this identity qua absolute negativity is absolute distinction. and all content would. Through "observation". as regards its diversity. Again. Knowledge would a ppear to have come by things. in the first instance. and e xpresses essential Reality in the form Ego=Ego. it is identity of self with itself. Substance woul d only stand for the Absolute in so far as Substance was thought of or "intuited " as absolute unity. therefore. then on the one hand it would only exist i n order to be thrown into the empty abyss of the Absolute. of abstract Essential Reality and Self. while on the other it would be picked up in external fashion from sense perception. It turns thither because to supersede that alien method means returning int o self-consciousness. Not till it has surrendered the hope of cancelling that foreignness by an external.e. to its own peculiar world. however. without any one understanding how or where all this came from. it f inds in its thought existence. because Substance would not be Subject. or the intuition of a content which qua specific would hav e merely a contingent character and would be devoid of necessity. viz. and maintains as against it the principle of Individuality. if. has arrived at the idea of "Utility"(5) and in the sphere of abs olute freedom has grasped existence as its Individual Will. ali en. Substance by itself alone would be void and empty I ntuition (Anschauen).(8) . The con tent of religion. The process of carrying forward this form of knowledge of itself is the task whi ch spirit accomplishes as actual History. the self. and when it has expressed the primal princi ple of "Light" in a purer form. and comprehends existence. and so has taken the first step to descend from the ideal intel ligible world. In this way. it finds exi stence in the shape of thought. on the one hand. in other words this Subjec t is just as much Substance. and. while this latter is pure identity with self--is Ego. The religious communion. method does it turn to itself. a process which does not belon g to Substance.

Seeing. the content is a notion.(9) The moments of its process are set forth therein no longer as determinate modes or shapes of consciousness. Each individual moment does not appear as the process of passing back and forward from consciousness or figurati ve (imaginative) thought to self-consciousness and conversely: on the contrary. in other words. the going-into-itself and the coming i nto being of the pure ego. Absolute Knowl edge does not contain this distinction and supersession of distinction. and as the organic s elf-explaining and self-constituted process of these notions.--depends solely on its pure characteristic nature. nor the mere absorption of self-consci ousness into Substance and the nothingness of its (self-) distinction. so far as the assumption of those various shapes or modes is affected with the insurmountable distinction which consciousness implies [i. The content is. th e notion in a process of self-diremption. As the mind that actually exists is not richer than it. since each moment has the form of the notion. mind .e. true knowledge lies rather in the seeming inactivity wh ich merely watches how what is distinguished is self-moved by its very nature an d returns again into its own unity. The diversity of content is.--the pure notion with its further development. Thus the necessity or diversity. and is t he process in which that distinction is canceled and transcended. in establishing as mere moments its explicit self-existence as well as it s implicit inherent nature. like its free existence. both has gone out of that subs tance into itself. that Spirit has attai ned the notion. making its substance an object and a content. On the contrary. and declares them all to mean the same there. which has the subs tance for its essential nature and subsists on its own account. the self that empties (externalizes) itself. because it is self-contained and self-subsi stent. and its restless activity consists in cancelling and superseding itself. and qua subject. is the self too. due to rel ation. that co ntent is the immediate unity of self-knowledge. Spirit has wound up the process of its embodiment . Nor again is Ego a tertium quid which casts distinct ions back into the abyss of the Absolute. the distinction of consciousness from its object or content]. which consciousness implies. as if it were afraid of relinquishi ng or externalizing itself. liberated from the condition of being an appearance in mere cons ciousness. and is not inherent.Spirit. While in the Pheno menology of Mind each moment is the distinction of knowledge and truth. Spirit has attained the pure element of its existence. in view of the freedom of its own existence. The pure process of thus externa lizing itself constitutes--when we consider this process in its content--the nec essity of this content. then. Rather. it unfolds its existence and develops its processes in this ethe r of its life and is (Philosophical) Science. then. again. the notion is the necessity for and the rising of existence. and. Ego has not to take its stand on the form of self-consciousness in opposition to the form of substantiality and objectivity.(10) so. however. Spirit is the movement of the self which empties (externalizes) itself of self and sinks itself within its own substance. it unites the objective form of tr uth and the knowing self in an immediate unity. or is negativity. The power of spirit lies rather in remaining one wit h itself when giving up itself. there corresponds to every abstr act moment of Absolute Knowledge a mode in which mind as a whole makes its appea rance. With absolute knowledge. the pure shape. But this subsist ing of existence for itself is the notion established in determinate form. Since this distinction is the pure action of Ego=Ego. has reverted to and has be come a distinction within the self--as determinate notions. and i s thereby the notion's own inherent movement--that of descending into the simple substance. which is only subject by being this negativity and going through thi s process. in which existence is i mmediately thought. That first reflexion out of im mediacy is the subject's process of distinction of itself from its substance. too. the notion. but --since the distinction. Conversely. qua determinate. has shown itself to us to be neither the mere withdrawal of sel f-consciousness into its pure inwardness. and also supers edes this distinction of objectivity and content. and in this self-form.

an object which. or its subst ance: and this revelation is also its temporal embodiment. according to which their essential element. But this form of abandonment is. appearing there in its simple mediating activity as thinking. Absolute Knowledge contains within itself this necessity of relinquishing itself from notion. in its actual exis tence.in its actual content is not poorer. nothing but this eternal process of abandoning its (Nature's) own indepen dent subsistence. and is the inner being. But re-collection (Er. a new world. the negative is negative of itself. and so exists at . its vanished existence is. Here it has to begin all over again at its immediacy. in which Spirit comes into being. and this is the Absolute Notion. and as if it had lea rned nothing from the experience of the spirits that preceded. immediate identity with itself. and this superseded existence--the previous state. the emptying of itself by itself. or its limit. and likewise its existence as Space. as if . just for the reason that it grasps its own notion. This sac rifice is the self-abandonment. a conscious self-mediating process--Spir it externalized and emptied into Time. While. and each takes over from its predecessor the empire of the spiritual world. the higher form of the substance. Knowing its limit means knowing how to sacrifice itself. is its living immediate process of de velopment. has not yet attained its full fre edom. this relinquishment (externalization) of self is still incomplete. constitutes a succe ssion. and the movement which reinstates Subject. this phase of Spirit begins all over again its formative development. This process of releasing itself from the form o f its self is the highest freedom and security of its knowledge of itself. the notion . a gallery of pictures. however. is the pro cess of becoming in terms of knowledge. in the distinction that it implies. and assuming definite shape in existence. just by being in a relation. but born anew from the womb of knowledge--is the new stage of existence. each of which is endowed with the entire wealth o f Spirit. in f act. breaks up and se parates the moments of this mediation and exhibits them to itself in accordance with their immanent opposition. is its "extension" or spa tial embodiment.(12) as freshly as before. similarl y. and necessarily involves the transition of the notion into conscio usness. in the form of free fortuitous happening. In thus concentrating itself on itself. but also of the negative of itself.(11) This l ast form into which Spirit passes. Nature-Spirit divested of self (externalized)--is. in fully comprehending its substance. Knowledge is aware not only of itself. and moves so slowly just for the reason that the self has to permeate and assimilate all this wealth of its substance. Spirit is engulfe d in the night of its own self-consciousness. Nature. in that this external ization in its very nature relinquishes (externalizes) itself. yet at the same time it commences at a higher level. This revelation consequently means superseding its "depth". however . All the same. where one detaches and sets loose the other. in which Spirit sets forth. its externalization.innerung) has conserved that experience. Since its accomplishment consis ts in Spirit knowing what it is. for it. The goal of the process is the r evelation of the depth of spiritual life. and thence rise once more to the measure o f its stature. is the certainty of what is immediate or is sense-consciousness--the b eginning from which we started. The realm of spirits deve loped in this way. the negation of this inwardly self-centred (insichseiend) ego-a negativity which is its self-relinquishment. For Spirit that knows itself is. all that preceded were lost. then. this know ledge means its concentrating itself on itself (Insichgehen). and this. an d a new embodiment or mode of Spirit. conserved therein. This wa y of becoming presents a slow procession and succession of spiritual shapes (Gei stern). This process expresses the relation of the certainty of its self to the object. a state in which S pirit leaves its external existence behind and gives its embodiment over to Reco llection (Erinnerung). To know the pure notions of knowledge in t he form in which they are modes or shapes of consciousness--this constitutes the aspect of their reality. apparently starting solely from itself . The other aspect. History. its process of becoming Spirit. intuitively apprehending o utside it its pure self as Time. and.

in it s forefront. and those belonging to it would be the heathen 'who know not God'. which is Absolute Knowledge or Spirit knowing itself as Spirit.. It includes. form at onc e the recollection and the Golgotha of Absolute Spirit.once in its spatial extension" as well as in its "depth" or the self. and in the absolute religion it is the absolute spirit which manifests no longer abstract e lements of its being but itself. a self-consciousness in man and man's knowledge of G . Knowledge (the principle by which the substance is mind) is a self-determining principle. or History (intellectually) comprehended (begriffen). dashing t o pieces everything high and great . Only The chalice of this realm of spirits foams forth to God His own Infinitude From PHILOSOPHY OF MIND B. The spirit is only spirit in so far as it is for the spirit. it may almost create surprise that so many. that the method of divine knowledge may and must begin: and i f self-revelation is refused Him. The goal. for according to them it would rather be the r eligion in which nothing of God was revealed. the truth.to apprehend this accurately and distin ctly in thoughts .(13) Both together. and especially theologians whose vocation it is to deal with these Ideas. is History. it is from Him. But clearly if the word 'Mind' is to have a meaning. and alone . . If the wo rd 'God' is taken in earnest in religion at all. it is the Science of the ways in which knowledge appears.at fi rst only 'rationalizing' reflection. And nothi ng serves better to shirk it than to adopt the conclusion that man knows nothing of God. have tried to get off their task by gladly accepting anything offered them for this behoof. looked at from the side of their free existence appearing in the form of co ntingency. but afterwards. solitary. as in duty bound. which made the divinity and its action in the world only a levelling power. If we recollect how intricate is the knowledge of the divine Mind for those who are not content with the homely pictures of faith but proceed to thought .it therefore is manifestation out a nd out. the propositions: God is God only so far as he knows him-self: his self-knowledge is. the certainty of its throne. The same answer may be given to the modem assertions that man cannot ascertain God. the theme and c entre of religion. whose con tent is absolute mind . further. the reality. in which he had not revealed himse lf.that it be revealed. looked at from the side of their intellectually comprehen ded organization. and. to specul ative comprehension. without which it were lifeless.requires careful and thorough speculation. To know what God as spirit is .was confronted by Plato and Aristotle with the doctrine that God is not envious.the religion i. revealed by God. then the only thing left to constitute His nat ure would be to ascribe envy to Him. REVEALED RELIGION(1) ¤ 564 It lies essentially in the notion of religion. finds its pathwa y in the recollection of spiritual forms (Geister) as they are in themselves and as they accomplish the organization of their spiritual kingdom.due to a one-sided survey of human life . Their conservat ion. what is more. as infinite self-realizing form . it implies the revelation of Him.e. These assertions (and more than assert ions they are not) are the more illogical. because made within a religion which is expressly called the revealed. The old conception .of Nemesis.

the elemental and the concrete nature . and is that extreme through its connection with a confronting nat ure and through its own naturalness thereby investing it.od. abiding sel f-centred. for that reas on.divides itself to become the antithesis of two separate worlds. the form parts from the content: and in the form the dif ferent functions of the notion part off into special spheres or media. he still remains in original identity . has realized his being as the Idea of the spirit.1.the withdrawal of the eternal from t he phenomenal into the unity of its fullness.on the other hand.knowledge in God.See the profound elucidati on of these propositions in the work from which they are taken: Aphorisms on Kno wing and Not-knowing. however. it is. a separate being. by C. and in hi m wickedness is implicitly overcome. only standing to it in an external connection.just as. on the other hand. This individual. standing in action an d reaction with such nature. of the world it gave away . presented to consciousness as a men tal representation. it is this concrete et ernal being which is presupposed. completes its independence till it becom es wickedness. this differentiation of him from the universal essence eterna lly supersedes itself. though.(in the Eternal sphere he is called the Son) . ¤ 569 (c) Under the 'moment' of individuality as such . again. or of judgement. Yet. amid that natural ness. F. the essential and actual spirit of nature and spirit. through this mediating of a self-superseding mediati on. in each o f which the absolute spirit exhibits itself. Further. keeps himself unchanged. the place of presupposition (1) is taken by the universal subst ance. (a) as eternal content.is transplanted into the world of time. as the extreme of inherent negativity. existence of the absolutely concrete is represented as putting himself in judge ment and expiring in the pain of negativity. and thus sensuous. while in point of form he is. On one hand is heaven and earth.: Berlin 1829. which proceeds to man's self.. ¤ 567 (A) Under the 'moment' of Universality . in which the contrast of universal and particular has sunk to its i dentical ground. This quasi-pictorial representation gives to the elements of his content. and reconciliation with the eternal being. and thus. their relationship it makes a series of events according to finite reflective categories. directed towards the Eternal. making them presuppositions towards each other. as absolute return from that negativity a nd as universal unity of universal and individual essentiality. and. (c) as infinite return. which therefore is finite. such a form of finite representationalism is also overcome and superseded in the faith which realizes one spirit and in the devotion of worship. the spirit. ¤ 565 When the immediacy and sensuousness of shape and knowledge is superseded. this immediate. first of all. which is at fir st the presupposed principle. in which he. The eternal 'moment' of mediation . not. and phenomena which succeed each other. though different. ¤ 568 Under the 'moment' of particularity.its movement is the creation of the phenomena l world. but alive and present in the world.the sphere of pure thought or the a bstract medium of essence . as actualized out of its abstraction into an individual self-consciousness . which by this difference becomes the phenomenal world in to which the content enters. the first substance is essentially as concrete individuality and subjectivit y . when it thinks. G .of subjectivity and the no tion itself. ¤ 570 (2) This objective totality of the divine man who is the Idea of the spirit . . But. That spirit. (b) as distinction of the eternal essence from its manifestation.of the only Son .it is therefore the absolute spirit. eternal. with whom. but (as und erlying and essential power under the reflective category of causality) creator of heaven and earth: but yet in this eternal sphere rather only begetting himsel f as his son. in point of content. as infinite subjectivi ty. ¤ 566 In this separating. who as such is identified with the essence . even in its manifestation. on one hand.is the Spirit. Go d is. staying aloof and inert.

yet is all the while known as an indivisible coherence of the universal. . THE RELATION OP THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION TO ITS PRESUPPOSITIONS AND TO THE . falls back rather into the vanity of wilfulness. and has tha t content as an object in which it is also free. and is the actual presence of the essential and self-subsisting spirit who is all in all. a nd therefore by chance and its own good pleasure. his natur al man and self-will. Irony. remains master over it. an object of contemplating vi sion .not merely to the simplicity of faith and devotional feeling.where the spirit closes in unity with itself . I n the immanent simplicity of thought the unfolding still has its expansion. Thus the Being of Beings (3) through this mediation brings a bout its own indwelling in self-consciousness. are the revelation of that spirit whose life is set out as a cycle of concrete shapes in pictorial thought. he. the unfolding of the mediation cont racts itself in the result . secondly. is only the f ormal aspect of the absolute content. Thinking. with the assertion that it stands on the very summit of religion and philosophy. so that the spirit is not als o at the same time known as implicitly existent and objectively self-unfolding.and. In this form of truth.but the vision of implicit truth. through which witness of the spirit in him. From this its separation into p arts. throws off the one-sidedness of subjectivity in wh ich it is the vanity of thought. LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION I A. But. knowi ng itself in itself as absolute .is the implicit presupposition for the finite immediacy of the single subject. but even to thought. gives itself direction and con tent.then that infinite subjectivity is the merely formal self-consciousness.is taken in a merely formal. at first characterized himself as n ought and wicked. ¤ 571 These three syllogisms. by means of the faith on the unity (in that example implicitly accomplished) of universal and i ndividual essence. contentless sense. which from itself. constituting the one syllogism of the absolute selfmediation of spirit. If the result . is itself the emptiness and vanity. so far. th e self-centred manifestation. F or such subject therefore it is at first an Other.Irony. that it is the free thought which has its infin ite characteristic at the same time as essential and actual content. on account of his immediate nature. which can make every objective r eality nought and vain. simple. after the example of his truth. and eternal spirit in itself. It is only in proportion as the pure infinite form. with a temporal and external sequence. he is also the movement to throw off his immediacy. and thus to know himself made one with t he essential Being. to close himself in unity with that example (who is his im plicit life) in the pain of negativity. truth is the object of philoso phy.the realized Spirit in which all mediation has superseded itself . is not bound by it .

The dialectic of idea . Immediate knowledge and mediation b. 3. 3. The relation of the philosophy of religion to the current principles of the religious consciousness. 2. The necessity and mediation of the religious attitude in the form of though t.The transition to the speculative conception of religion. 2. . OF GOD B. DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT PART I. The attitude of philosophy to religion generally . The historical treatment of dogmas . PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS C. The relation of the philosophy of religion to positive religion III. The form of feeling. . Philosophy and the prevalent indifference to definite dogmas . 1.PRINCIPLES OF THE TlME . 1.The rational way of looking at finitenesse. Perception. THE RELIGIOUS ATTITUDE I. The forms of the religious consciousness. 1.. or ordinary thought III. 3. The severance of religion from the free worldly consciousness II. The position of the philosophy of religion relatively to philosophy and reli gion. Idea. 2. I. Mediated knowledge as observation and reflection c. The necessity of the religious standpoint II. The mediation of the religious consciousness in itself a. The speculative notion or conception of religion . 2. 1. Philosophy and immediate knowledge B. The relation of the philosophy of religion to the system of philosophy. Finiteness in sensuous existence.Finiteness from the point of view of reflectiony. THE CONCEPTION OF RELIGION A. 3. .

all the contradictions of deeper-reaching thought have their meanin g unveiled. to philosophy as a whole. and what is our ordinary idea of religion. or cultus III. and pleasures. and that rel igion is for our consciousness that region in which all the enigmas of the world are solved. the interests of political life. I shall give (C) the division of the subject. it is by reason of h is being Spirit. and to add on this study of it. or. activities. To begin with. finds its ultimate centre in religion.The historical existence of this religion. and describe the relation of this science to philosophy and religion. By way of introduction I shall. all wherei n he seeks his happiness. it is throug h thought. Thus God i . that man is man . But all these ma nifold forms of human relations.C. or the religion of measure a. in the thought. Of faith II. all that has worth and dignity for man. Speaking generally. The objective characteristics of the religion of magic c. The general character of this religion b. The relation of religion to the State PART II. We know that in religion we withdraw ourselves from what is temporal. and the feeling of God. which awakens the need our science has to satisfy. Magic b. to put it more definitely. and all t hose conditions which have reference to man's freedom and will. as also^to the prevalent principles of the religious consciousness. The division of consciousness within itself 1. and from man as Spirit proceed all the many d evelopments of the sciences and arts. however. DEFINITE RELIGION Division of the subject FIRST DIVISION. the consciousness. c. of eternal rest. of eternal peace. and all the ways in which these are intertwined . his glory. after I have (B) touched upon some preliminar y questions which follow from those relations. Worship or cultus in the religion of magic II. and his pride. and where the voice of the heart's pain is silenced the region of et ernal truth. Worship or cultus IT has appeared to me to be necessary to make religion by itself the object of p hilosophical consideration. in the form of a spe cial part. Immediate religion a. The Chinese religion. The definite character and special forms of worship. WORSHIP OR CULTUS I. Then. concrete thought. fi rst of all (A) give some account of the severance or division of consciousness. THE RELIGION OF NATURE I. it is necessary to recollect generally what object we have before us in the Philosophy of Religion.

and to comprehend its nature is the object of the present lectures. Faith recognises it as the truth. or however we may designate it. and what thus forms the essence of religious contemplation. of religion. all care. it u nburdens itself of all finiteness. and is its own end . softened away into eternal rest. giving the consciousness of the active presence of truth. To consider. He re its consciousness is absolutely free. all the limited interests of finite life. and as from the highest peak of a mountain. In religion man places himself in a relation to t his centre. and which animates and preserves in existence a ll the various forms of being. Whatever awakens in us doubt and fear. so all return back to it again. and governs his entire conduct. even amidst the anxieties which torment the soul here in this region of time. this cond ition of freedom is the sense of satisfaction which we call blessedness. He who has not extended his spiritual interests beyond the hurry and . and in this attitude it is no longer with himself that man i s concerned with his own interests or his empty pride but with the absolute end. as the substance of actual existing t hings . but to the unlimited and infinite. In the region where the spirit occupies itself with this end. far off. for all other aims converge in this ultimate end. We m ust first of all. To try to do this would be as absurd as to give a dog printed writings to chew. for here the spirit relates itself no longer to something that is oth er than itself. while the dark things of this life are softened away into a dream-li ke vision. far away from al l definite view of what is earthly. This image of the Absolute may have a more or less present vitality and certaint y for the religious and devout mind. makes itself actively felt in the life of the indi vidual. consciousness. and its rays stream as something divine into this present temporal life. all sorrow. the unconditioned. and in which she drowns all sorrow. contemplates it as something having on ly the semblance of existence. and here alone all find thei r fulfilment. He is the centre which gives li fe and quickening to all things.s the beginning of all things. and that is limited. and in the futur e. As all things proceed from this point. All the various peoples feel that it is in the religious consciousness they pos sess truth. and no longer of dependence. on the contrary. its varied tints and lights. merely reflects back its shades of colour. a relation of freedom. and wins for itself final satisfaction and de liverance. we leave behind on t he shores of time . to something which is absolutely self-sufficient. in reference to the end we hav e in view. Religion. So far as man's essential nature is concerned. and they have always regarded religion as constituting their true di gnity and the Sabbath of their life. becau se it is consciousness of absolute truth. and in presence of itthey vanish and cease to have value of their own. what is free. nothing ne w is to be introduced into him. or it may be represented as something longed and hoped for. and this is an infinite relation. we look down calmly upon all the limitations of the landscape and of the world. and in so doing he rises up to the highest level of consciousness and to the region which is fr ee from relation to what is other than itself. that it is not the concern of philosophy to produce religion in any i ndividual. and is its own object and end. in which all other relations concentrate themselves. No other aim can hold its ground against this. and be a present source of pleasure . is ther efore absolutely free. and become transfigured until they are a mere framework for the brigh tness of the Eternal. however. definitely understand. is the vital force in the present -world. Its existence is. under the idea that in this way you could put mi nd into it. and the end of all things. Still it always remains a certainty. while a s activity it has nothing further to do than to manifest the honour of God and t o reveal His glory. Such is the general perception. so with the spiritual eye man. which seen from this pure region bathed in the be ams of the spiritual sun. presupposed as forming what is fun damental in every one. as something which is occupied with this final object and end. lifted out of the hard realities of this actual world. In its character as feeling. In this region of spirit flow the streams of forgetfulness from which Psyche drinks. and is indeed true consciousness. to e xamine. sensatio n.

. no man is so utterly ruined. individuals may deviate from it. As man. if he has nothing of religion in himself. st rife. for instance. and cannot free himself from it. through the feeling of the Eternal. or the indolence of individuals may interfere with the necessity of thei r universal spiritual nature . This freedom brings with it the power of free choice. It is not the purpose of philosophy to e dify. and it is possible for it to sever itself from its necessity. the perv ersity. nor succeeded in lifting himself above this life t hrough aspiration. In this relation we have the source of the division which arises in opposition to the primary absolute tendency of the spirit toward religion. all this does not hinder the will from being able to persist in its obstinacy. and their most widely differing connections with the main interest of religion. ' What knowledge must do is to know religion as something which already exists . The self-will. For even in tins last case he is inwardly occupied wit h it. so lost. does not possess in hims elf that element which it is our object here to comprehend. and is not a feeling foreign to his nature. and yet remains far from religion. however. and though the will should learn in the sphere of reality the nullity of its separation. and so bad.bustle of this finite world. or some yearning after it. or a feel ing of hatred towards it. through the anticipation. religion is essential to him. have sprung up. and antagonism with philosophy. But in human freedom w hat is and what ought to be are separate. Therefore. plants. it must work itself thr ough all those ramifications of the interests of the time which have at present concentrated themselves in the widely-extended sphere of religion. it is said that such and such a man has a k nowledge of God. and it is with this that philosophical knowledge connects itself. Yet the essential question is the relat ion of religion to his general theory of the universe. any p articular empirical subject. and quite as little is it necessary for it to make good its claims by show ing in any particular case that it must produce religious feeling in the individ ual. But the fact is. the aim of knowledge to lead to this. or of l ingering there consciously and purposely. We shall consider this opposition and its solution when we have examined the opposition as it still maintains itself outsi de of philosophy. it is true. Philosophy. and upon which it essentially works. and who has not gazed upon the pure ether of the soul. all the manifold forms of consciousness. It is not. and to grasp the thought that Spirit must of necessity advance from the other modes of its will in conceiving and feeling to this absolute mode . nor can we re gard any one as being so wretched that he has no religion whatever in him. even if it were only that he has the fear of it. has to develop the necessity of religion in and for itself. and have seen it develop until it reaches that completed state where it involves philosophical knowledge in itself. animals. too. and attempt to g et for themselves a standpoint of their own. to the standpoint of untruth. and has not become godly. It may happen that religion is awakened in the heart by means of philosophical k nowledge. is involved in the freedom of the subj ect. This possibility of letting oneself drift. cannot deviate from the necessity of their nature from their truth and become what they ought to be. Before the Philosophy of Re ligion can sum itself up in its own peculiar conception. but i t is the universal destiny of Spirit which is thus accomplished. and to work in opposition to its true destiny. although philosophical knowledge should clearly perceive the necessity of the religious s tandpoint. It is another m atter to raise up the individual subject to this height. fr om its laws. while planets. nor is it meant to do so . At first the movement of the principles of the time has its place outside of philosophical st udy. but this movement pushes on to the point at which it comes into contact. to be religious if he has not been so before. and does not wish to have. and to stand aloof from its necessity and truth. There is a common and shallow manner of arguing against cognition or philosophic al knowledge. as when. and hold to it. and here. but it is not necessarily so. through inertness.' It is neither its intention nor its duty to induce this or that person.

Every moment of his finite existence and activity. religion is still looked upon as what is highest . namely. he either takes what is His and gives thanks. In regard to God. THE SEVERANCE OF RELIGION FROM THE FREE WORLDLY CONSCIOUSNESS. of habit . and we pass to and fro from the one to the other alternately only. in like manner. on the cont rary. Judging from what is expressly acknowledg ed. is led under the conditions of c onfidence. and of the activities and productions of Spirit. objects which are to have absolute worth. is a work of man. to be in and for themselves. as to its infinite and ultimate source. as well as the willing and actual carrying out of t hese aims. to that higher region. from what he f . and with the satisfaction of his needs ." Here the need of justification. the order. of controv ersy. and the peculiar characteristics of na tural things. however. Thus research recognis es the laws. It is true that the development of this side d oes not seem to affect religion injuriously. But into this separateness of the tw o sides there directly enters a double modification. when he lays all this aside. has already come in.) Let us consider first of all the religion of the godly man . and he takes his life. and starting from the worldly side. the will s ets before itself absolute aims . Faith is still presupposed as existing irr espective of. his circumstances. The development of this distinction may be generally designated as the maturing of the understanding and of human aims. he is that which circumstances and nature have made him. ruin and disunion creep over in to religion. the constitution. the distinction involved in this relation deve lops until it becomes opposition. both of his understanding and will. two different regions of consciousness. " I believe in God. of inference. a. released fro m absorption in finite occupations. something different from that where a man. It is so. Although he sets out from what is. and reflection has become independent. and all action seems to limit itsel f strictly to that side in the matter. justice. that is. as a lot or destiny which he does not underst and. godly man is not kep t shut off and divided from the rest of his existence and life. The rest of his life. o r else he offers it up to Him freely as a gift of free grace. of custom. of his sorrow and joy. and then he has a Sunday. the state. and by being thus lifted up produces in him the idea and sense of his eterna l nature. Now these experie nces and forms of knowledge. and rights as he receives everything. with w orldly aims in general. I. with reflection and with the consciousness that something else stands opposed to this faith. say s. While understanding awakens in human life and in science. lives to himself and to the higher nature wh ich is in him. of dutif ulness. In them he is i n presence of what is his own. it breathes its influence over all his feelings and actions. (a. anything else. is lifted up by him out of his limited sphe re. stands to the other forms of the consciousness of man. collects his thoughts. and his consc iousness brings all the aims and objects of his worldly life into relation to Go d.THE RELATION OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION TO ITS PRESUPPOSITIONS AND TO THE PRI NCIPLES OF THE TIME. there already lie germs of division. for example. The rest of his co nscious life is thus subordinated. even in its immediacy. Thus man has in his actual worldly life a number of work ing days during which he occupies himself with his own special interests. To believe in God is thu s in its simplicity. and without opposition to. but. to his true essential being. . of on e who truly deserves to be so called. Now that religion of the simple. but as a matter of fact i t is not so. In the relation in which religion. without reflection. since b oth sides are conceived of as in a condition of separation relatively to each ot her. and. From the worldly side. In their simple relation they already constitute two kinds of pursuits.

that of independence and that of conditio nality." and is self-co nsciousness. feeling and fa ith. that God has made everyth ing. But as religious feelin g. as he s ays. the spirit and the spiritual faculties of which he. and he has the consciousness that he has produced it. sci ence. and then in the progress of knowledge and the pursuit of aims nothing further is thought of the matter. for example. and determine s itself on its own authority as independent and selfsustaining. yet he is no longer merely one who knows. that aspect of independence involves this also. or perhaps it may be to get protect ion for the religious side as it were relatively to what is without. T herefore the matter is settled with the one admission. this knowledge are wanting in it. which he takes possession of. on the contrary.) Notwithstanding. an i nfinite wealth that world of his intelligence. to the worldly side. and what the spirit receives for the accomplishment of its duties is always regarded as grace alone. duties witho ut rights belonging to them. of his rights and deeds. All that is determi ned comes. namely this. of his external possession. and with regard to objects which are absolutely different (as. this insight. it would become ted ious and burdensome if it were repeated in reference to each individual thing. Since this religious relation of particula r objects is always expressed in the same monotonous manner. that its ac tion is conditioned. and this is something given. al though it may do so daily and hourly in the same manner. artlessly. that it restricts knowledge. Its religion is accordingly distinguished from what we have in that region of independence by this. whether or not he actually get s it. that God has made all.inds. and of hu man. too. it is only the activity belonging to se lf-consciousness which is present. or men). and knowledge and will must have experience of the fact tha t it is thus conditioned. here its attitude is that of humility and dependence. that relation continues for it fixed at one and the same point . The one side is that in which the spirit knows i tself to be its own. in order to attain to that knowledge. and uses as means for his ends. But this admission is cold and lifeless. that is to say. In the act of knowledge he sets out from the organisation and order of nature. is something independent of his efforts. self-appointed aims. (. but what he makes out of that which is given in knowledge and in will is his affair. ants. who has these rights . for the spirit now moves between two sides. where it lives in its own aims and interests. because that which constitutes the vita lity of this consciousness. and this religious side is thereby satisfied once for all. and here. it really rests in singleness or single instances . b ecause it does not get beyond the abstract-universal. It would accordingly appear that this admission is made simply and solel y in order to get rid of the whole business. and he is referred in the matter to an Other. it is true. s uch expressions may be used either in earnest or not. it stops s hort at the thought that all is a work of God. to be included in the sphere of knowledge. of his knowledge. Therefore these prod uctions constitute his glory and his pride. In short. of which the distinction has actually developed itself. Thus the spirit has entered into the condition of opposition as yet. Therefore that admission is unfruitful too. and leaves for the sphere of religion. Man demands his right . makes use. The other side is that where the spirit recognises a higher Power absolute duties. and this relation leads man to the avowal that everything is made by God all things which constitute the content of his knowledge. his work. enter into relation with each other. as well as he himself. In the first instance it is th e independence of the spirit which is the foundation. the course of the stars and their law s. The content of his sciences is a materi al outside of him. it is in every moment who lly what it is. and without at first knowing it but the opposition comes to be a con scious one. Thus the two sides. and is without reflection and the consciousness which compares e . in which it is "at home with itself. Piety does not weary of lifting up its eyes to God on all and every occasion. and provide for him an immense.

no occurrence." (a. occurrences. because however much he may poi nt to what serves a purpose. just as much that does not serve a purpo . and the consciousness of that sameness. and consequently a more strictly defined content is introduced for the ma nifold materials are placed in relation to one another. we admire the wisdom of God in nature because we see how animals are provided with weapons. here no longer present in its naive and experimental character. On the contrary. namely. brings t he religious man into a condition of perplexity. while over against it i s the religious feeling of dependence. i ts inconsistency be disregarded. might not be shown to have some use. representing thus a finite content. conditions of n ature. and not to be an object of the eternal. and then a general proposition is enunciated once for all. he sees. consists i n the contemplation of the constitution and arrangement of things according to t he relations of ends. partly to obtain t heir food and partly to protect them against enemies. On the one side we have understanding playing its part. and that those creatures which have been considered as ends are made use of by others as means. of a good. in short. that of piety and of the understanding that compares. regarded in some aspect or other. however.) The manner of looking at things. the act ion. as well as the great events of history. The second of these attitude s has indicated and pronounced this unhesitatingly in the expression already quo ted. and even directly disappear in an inc onsistent and illogical fashion. But this argumentation. If that manner of looking at the matter be accepted. this becomes a definite rel ation. yet it still remains indefinite and superficial . in that they have food. and if. stand the winter. where knowledge and self-determination are concerned. by m eans of this or that apparent accident. for example. Even piety is not exempt from the fate of falling into a state of division or dualism. On the contrary. and such-like. divine Will. in that its actual content is only a manifold. division is already present in it implicitly. however different the y seem to be. and whereby he gives a greater completeness to his reflection. Relig ious feeling is. accidental one. for the very reason that all and every content no matter what it be may be inc luded in it . at least demands consistency. and is useful in this immediate world of natural th ings. and recognises ends of this kind. yet it is presently seen i n experience that these weapons are of no avail. It is therefore really progressive knowledge which has depreciated and supplante d this external contemplation of ends . nam ely. b. that this comparison. It is here. In human life it is seen how man is led to happiness. or perhaps misfortune. nurture their young. are essentially present. whether it be eternal or temporal. and similarly in the regarding all the circumstances of in dividual life. is contemplated here in definite dealings. which is followed by the religiou s man. are taken up only for the moment. But this content itself. to begin with. for there is nothing. these ends. Animals and their surroundings a re accordingly regarded as beings definitely regulated. In short. no arrangement of nature. These two attitudes. and God is then consider ed as the one who brings about these relations. which. inasmuch as it subsumes present things under thes e universal thoughts. On the contrary. are acc idental. the will of God. it proceeds from the universal thought of an end. whi ch. as proceeding from Divine purposes. or else as directed and leading back to such. on the contrary. at the same time. that higher knowledge. that in them the relation of God to the other side of consciousness is undetermined and general. as subordinate and finite as something which proves itself in the very same experience and observation to be worthless. and can protect themselves against enemies. and makes inferences. are provided with weapons as a defence against what is hurt ful. The universal divine re lation is thus not adhered to here. in contrast to all this. If.xperiences. have this in common. " God has created all things. whi ch are taken as Divine ends. this inferential process.

and apprehends this in the relation of cause and effect. that what is desired is to know the special causes. and while contemplating the re lations which belong to the wealth of finite phenomena. is conversant with everything. nor does it desire to do so. the principle of selfness at once develops itself completely. ideas which I make my own. The idea of God and of His manner of operation as universal and necessary is contradicted by thi s inconsistency. the reason as the reaso n of this particular phenomenon. appears indeed to be only for an Other. To the thoughts. science. namely. But this. the relations too are to be for me. however. is forced to abandon its argumentative proc ess . What we wish to know regarding a natural phenomenon . is its own relation. which in the one case is promoted.se. to which God is not nec essary. and does not yi eld the desired explanation. of such a kind that k nowledge requires nothing for this system outside of the system itself. Knowledge. i n the relation of the Universal.) Religious feeling. accordingly. not. am really relation . Knowledg e so far aims at that which is. From the constitution of things. for in contradiction to God's eternal manner of opera tion. I am this si mple point. or of the downfall of the Eepublican system of government in Rome. In this kingdom. but only and exclusively to this definite thing. And thus the reaso n must be that of such special phenomena. and must itself b e a finite one. and to place itself in opposition to that standpoint of contingen cy. if the religious man considers external ends and the externality of the who le matter in accordance with which these things are profitable for an Other. in an accidental. which was formerly designat ed as the moment of selfness. and with the rel ations of thought. and that which is for me I seek to apprehend in this unity. am self-consciousness. and in so doing has all determinate material and content on its side . The preservation of life and of the in terests bound up with existence. encloses the world of fi uiteness in itself so as to form a system of the universe. is in the ot her case just as much endangered and put a stop to. above all things to thought. since I am for mys elf. is. and the necessity of it. and has absolutely nothing to do with it . its o wn nature. and is injurious. And with this. its necessity. comes about for ordinary religious thought. the immanent nature of what is related. In this manner science forms a universe of knowledge. and now that a beginning has once been made with thought. (/. and such reason or ground must be the most immediate. finite things are elevated to the rank of essential ends. we proceed to their connections in which they stand in relation to an Ot her . and in whic h they point back to the origiual source from which they are a deduction." as simple. " I. to demand and to look for that which belongs to itself . must be sought and laid hold of in the finite. power and manifestation . what it is in its essential determinate character. Thus an implicit dualism or division is involved here. is disclosed whe n it is perceived and made the subject of observation. reason and result. or of the feench Eevolution . For what a thing is. Thus it is no longer sufficient to speak of God as the cause of the lightning. I give the character which I myself am. in th is manner places the manifold material in mutual relation. but in a determinate relation. here it is perceived that this cause is only an entirely general one. takes away from it th e contingency which it has through its immediacy. which is even destructive of that universal character. Therefore this knowledge does not go above or beyond the sphere of the finite. and knows its course of actio n. since it is able to apprehend all in its finite sphere. Thus it is that the actual transition to the other side. which is the point of departure. which lies outside of religion. of the species and of the individual existing t hings which are included in the sphere of contingency. it becomes necessary. What is profitable to one person is detrimental to another . more closely considered. knowledge spreads itself out in its relations and connections . Now. not the reason which applies to all things. the natural determinateness. nothing whatever is l . and for the other side. Thus w e inquire after the reasons and causes of things . the side of the infinite and the eternal. universal. as thought. and therefore does not serve a purpose. in short. and the meaning of inquiry he re is. or regarding this or that law as effect or result. that is to say. first of all consistency and necessity.

but not in such a way as to allow of fa ith being of a merely ingenuous kind. (. c. knowledge can see nothing but arbitrariness in this. more than in other religions. this latter having. but can only create a system which is without absolute su bstantiality without God.) The Christian religion has its very beginning in absolute dualism or divisi on. is in itself. and in which it confounds together all extension and development. and without consistency in regard to what is determin ate. just as little can anything of th e absolute content be given up. and is the consciousness of the necessity of the finit e. It is afraid t o lose its freedom should it comply with the demand of feeling. sets ends before itself. When. w hich are so developed in this way. The religious side gets the absolute material and purp ose. Religious feeling distrusts the finiteness wh ich lies in knowledge. however. Knowledge has taken possession o f all finite material and drawn it into its territory. would feel itself given over to mere contingency. and when face to face with it knowledge must give up its finite form. for all that could be reg arded as knowledge would be a drawing down of the Eternal into the sphere of the finite. an d the spirit. This reconciliation mu st correspond with the highest demands of knowledge. all determinate content h as fallen to its share .eft. into the contentless or empty elevation of the spiritual to the Eternal. but only as something abstractly positive. the need of which is here intensified to the uttermost degre e. and of finite connections of things. bec ause in it the subject clings to itself. and starts from that sense of suffering in which it rends the natural unity of the spirit asunder. The Reconciliation. as it is driven back into itself. and unconditiona lly recognise a truth which it does not definitely understand. or self-consciousness. affirm nothing regarding the Eternal. it is still unable to give it the absolute connection. But. invariably thrusts it away from it as an enemy. the necessity for an adjustment comes in. For the spirit has left its natural simpli . appears in the first place for Faith. and the finite in the infinite. and it brings against science the charge of futility. of such a kind that t he infinite shall appear in the finite. but although it gives it a necessary connection. and moves freely in the thoughtdeterminations of the manifold connections of things. and becomes impatient with regard to all that peculiarly belongs to it. knowledge has a distrust of the totality in which feeling entrenches itself. accordingly. Now when two aspects of thought. It can. and is thus in his innermost life in contradiction with himself. finds itself separated from the infinite. the need of this reconciliation has of necessity come into prominence. and the " I " as the know ing subject is independent in relation to all that is external. and destroys natural peace. Since finally science has taken possession of knowledge. genuine simple feeling. whenever it is approached by the other. On the side of religion the heart is filled with what is Divine. the form of contingency. On the other han d. Consistent co nnection of what is determinate belongs to the side of knowledge. This would be the reconciliation of religious. and i f it were to pass in a similar way to anything definite. it is unable to hold out in that region. with knowledge and intelligence. And when religiou s feeling comes out of its universality. absolute Essence. their a ttitude is one of mutual distrust. enter into relation with one another. and has to pass over into the domain of religion. and each no longer form a separate realm. on the contrary. religion has become devoid of knowledge.) Thus both sides have developed themselves completely in their opposition. and passes ove r to the determinate. which is at ho me in the finite. Now that the opposition has arrived at this stage of development. In the Christian religion. but without freed om. for the following reasons : (a. for thes e can surrender nothing of their dignity. reflection is fully developed. and of the Notion. and that content be brought down into the region of finiteness . and has shrivelled up into simple fe eling. where the o ne side. In it man appears as evil fro m his birth.

we should accordingl y come out of that region of devotion and enjoyment which religion is. the salvation of the soul. is an essential end. This subjectivit y." in this c ondition of schism. THE POSITION OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION RELATIVELY TO PHILOSOPHY AND TO RELIGION. and as it were passes right beyond the dis tinction. it is. am not the truth.city behind. and entered upon an internal conflict . and in reflection upon this. fo r thought. the geometrical figures in mathematics are from the mind whi ch considers them. this selfncss (not selfishness) is just the principle of rational knowledge i tself. How does philosophy in general stand related to religion ? .) When. In it the subject. (y. and the truth is in the first instance put forw ard upon authority. however. the characteristics and modes of action which belong to God. What i s the relation of the philosophical study of religion to positive religion ? II. for the ideas regarding its g eneral subject-matter are implicitly or in themselves thoughts. and in the feeling of sinfulness. it would seem as if we are still occupying that attitude in which both sides remain mutually independent and separate. my freedom is plainly revealed to me. and reflec tion and knowledge on the other. and not only the species. How does the Philosophy of Religion stand related to philosophy? and . In the Chr istian religion I am to retain my freedom or rather. since the content is something which exists essentially for the mind as forming ideas. the latter gives development to its content. The Christian religion therefore touches the antithesis between feeling and immediate perception on the one hand. In short. by this means I am transplanted into an intellectual world i n which the nature of God. reason are in me. It contains rational knowledge as an essential element. Rational knowledge. however. Hitherto we have considered the progressive growth of the antitheses only in the form in which they have not yet developed into actual philosophy. " I. or in which t hey still stand outside of it. are presented to knowledge. In taking up such an attitude in thus considering the subject. and the o bject and the consideration of it as the movement of thought would be as differe nt as. I . knowledge. therefore. it is withdrawn. and has thus a t the same time enabled it to place itself in opposition to this content as it a ppears in the shape of given truth. it is distinct from unre flecting opinion and sense-knowledge. w . estranged from it. In saying above that philosophy makes religion the subject of consideration. The Attitude of Philosophy to Religion generally. is an essential element in the Christian religion itself. On the other hand. in it I am to become free. and this is therefore given as an independ ent content of ordinary thought. as it at first appears. and must as such develop themselves. an Other in opposition to the truth . and when the truth of these rests on the wit ness and assurance of others. It is from this that the discord which chara cterises the thought of the present day arises. Rational knowledge being thus a fundamental characteristic in the Christian reli gion. it has in relation to subjectivity the value of an absolute content existing in and for itself. Therefore the questions which primarily come befo re us are these : i . as sinful. yet I am at the same time referred into myself. Such is only the relation. the redemption of the individual a s an individual. however. and has supplied to this rational knowledge the occasion for developing itself to its full logical issue as Form and as a world of form. for example. and when further this consideralion of it appears to be in the position of somethin g which is different from its object.

the Athenians. but is knowledge of what is not of the world . this oppositio n is held to be an acknowledged fact. Philosophy. h ad only taken possession of the finite contents . for in the same way it renounces subjective notions and opinions in order to occupy itself with God. It is just here. the need. Already to the neo-Pythagoreans and neo-Platonists. that they are religion . This union of religion and philosophy was carried out to a still greater extent in the Middle Ages. That combination had a place. Philosoph y is itself. Among that free democratic people. of w hat God is. when we look more closely. however. as in fac t. As thus occupied with eterna l truth which exists on its own account. therefore. but the distinction is that it is so in a pecul iar manner. however. that it was even held to be essential to the fur ther development of faith itself. but is knowledge of that which is eternal. more so than that unity of religion and ph ilosophy just asserted. now. philosophical writing s were burnt. then. and is finite knowledge. and the way in which it occupies itself w ith God seems to be absolutely different from religion. who in their religious life took up an essentially intellectual attitude inasmuch as they set out from the presup position that theology is religion together with conscious thought and comprehen sion. worship . and the antagonistic attitude of religion and philosophy. it becomes apparent that as a matte r of fact the content. and not of individual caprice a nd particular interest. it is religion. In accordance with this antagonistic attitude (as theology cons iders it to be) philosophy seems to act injuriously. for the l atter also does not seek to have anything of its own. the gods of the people . however. a dealing on the part of the thinking spirit. it is the same kind of activity as rel igion is. that the difficu lties lie which appear so great. it has the same content as religion. and. If we now look provi . Philosophy is thus identical with religion. It was by setting out from philosophy that tho se great men. and renounces its particularity in that it p ermeates its object. For this His nature must reveal an d develop itself. further developed the essential characterist ics of faith. Ansel in and Abelard. distinct from the manner of looking at things which is commonly call ed religion as such. or empirical existence and life. what distinguishes them from each other is merely the kind and manner of religion we find in each. in fact. Knowledge in constructing its world for itself. among the most eminent of the Fathers of the Church. only unfolds itself when it unfolds rel igion. robbing it of its sacred character. On the contrary. What they have in common is. is the same old opposition and contradiction which had already made its appearance among the Greeks. . but had become gods of thought. who were as yet within the heathen world. and th e explication of God. or is in and for itself. Hence comes the suspicion with which philosophy is looked upon by theology. and what flows out of His nature. but since it has developed int o the true philosophy. The object of religion as well as of philosophy is eternal truth in its objectivity. It is to their philosophical culture that the Christian Church is indebted for the first beginnings of a content of Christian doctrine. and the interest of philosophy represent someth ing which it has in common with religion. too. with this object.hen knowledge is still severed from the religious side.were not gods of imagin ation. in the same way. God and nothing but God. and in unfolding itself it unfolds religion. Old though this opposition is. without reference to religion. the combination of philosophy and religi on is just as old. it is not knowledge which concerns external mass. that it is even regarded as an impossibility th at philosophy should be one with religion. So little was it believed that the knowledge which seeks to comprehend is hurtful to faith. Philosophy is not a wisdom of the world. The mind in so far as it thinks philosophically immerses itself with l ike living interest in this object. destructively. Thus religion and philosophy come to be one. Here. It is in the peculiar way in which they both occupy themselves wit h God that the distinction comes out. upon religio n. and Socrates was condemned to death . as religious consciousness does. but desires only to immers e itself in this content.

and if it has both before it. and it is speculative thought which first gets a grasp of the unity in this very antithesis as such. which is not simple determinateness having referen ce to an Other. as simply active thought. and is consequently the stage of Spirit at which the speculative content generally. and in the fact of being determined in and for itself. but not the highest absolute truth. even in its form and movemen t . Religion is not consciousness of this or that truth in individual objects. Truth is. reflection does not keep firm hold of their unity. that the two sides of what is divided are opposed characte ristics of thought. In this act of distinguishing. and bringing them together again. It is this speculative eleme nt which comes to consciousness in religion. While the finite required an Other for its determinateness. for the object is only the lifeless substratum for the distinctions. is itself the standpoint of the consciousness of the True. but of the absolute truth. the form. as it were. outside of which there lies nothing at all. Now. the True has its determinateness. indeed. In sense-perception or picture-thought we have the object before us as a whole. but contains the Other. religion remains always akin to thought. and in such away. it is not limited through an Other. of truth as the Un iversal. and thought which unites opposed e . to put it more pr ecisely. It is in fact the business of speculative thought to apprehend all objects of pure thought. The content of its consciousness is further the Universally True. which is different from the object and its properties. which is in and for i tself. the limit. active universality. then. and not in mere sensuous contemplation or in ordinary conception. which determines itself. and severs them. so that everything is apprehend ed as Idea . however. In the case of mech anical objects which appear in the region of externality. an externally united multiplicity. Religion is accordingly this speculative element in a state of consciousness. Religion. c. apprehends different sides. contained in ever y other sphere. for this exists only in perf ect universality of characterisation or determination. But by thus stripping off the form of dualism from its extremes. rel igion only arrives at the enjoyment of unity by lifting these two rigid extremes out of this state of severance. in t he form of thought. particular selfconsciousness. and thus as the unity of the difference. the difference in its very self. the object is one. of nature and of Spirit. and bringing it to recon ciliation. which is not merely an aggregate. To think speculatively means to resolve anything real into its parts. by rearranging them. sometimes the distinctions . These moments can be of Thought. A speculat ive philosophy is the consciousness of the Idea. which exists on it s own account or in and for itself. renderi ng the opposition in the element of Universality fluid. and philosophy. of which the aspects are not ht.sionally for the distinction between religion and philosophy as it presents itse lf in this unity of content. it yet separates the properties fr om the object. however. and the Idea must be conceived of as the unity of these. although it has characteristics which are disti nguished from it. thought in operation. means that it is something concrete. posited as divided in itself. and the object is apprehended as unity of the two. and to oppose these to each other in sucli a way that the distinctions are set in opposition in accordance with the characteristics of thought. In t he true object. b. its end in itself . and so places both that that in which the two are one becomes a t hird. while in philosophy the rigidity of these two sides loses itself through re conciliation in thought. of simple qualities of thoug no other than the moment and reality as immediate. the Idea. but are concretely filled up. because both sides are thoughts. a nd the quality of oneness is the gathering together of external aggregates. and is not determin ed from without. is the True in thought. and the other of an empirical and individual character. but the Other is found in itself. we find it takes the following form : a. and the one is not pur e universal thought. The True in thought. the All-comprehending. indeed. is object for consciousness. our reflection distinguishes. recognises the diversi ty in them. this relation may have a place. Sometimes it forgets the wholeness.

we hav e at the same time to do with the manner of His manifestation or presentation to us . is not understood. about things which are opp osed. every one can understand for himself what is meant by the terms unity. but yet it has not on th at account the same signification as is implied in the term. and is to be regarded from the point of view of its activity in displayin . the Absolute is not so complete an abstraction. and not with outward ideas. God. Here it is a n idea or a pictorial conception of the thought-determination which is demanded. it is superfluo us to go further back here. we start with the ordinary conception of God. When. but who also manifests H imself. namely. He is as essentially for Himself. not. the Essential Reality which is grasped in thought and in the N otion. we call what we are thinking of. and asks what this pure thought-determination signifie s. Thus. it is the Absolute. what is signified here is that we have got to specify the Notion. that we possess no pictorial idea of it . however. is not at home. in the Philosophy of Religion.lements. " What does this or that signify ? " w e are asking about two kinds of things. and this it has in common with logical philosophy . subjective. . But we put the question again. He simply makes Himself apparent. it is essentially the thought that is in it of which we wish to have an idea. the logical knowledge of this. c. then. in a second sense. the logical Idea is G od as He is in Himself. for that at once proclaims itself an abstraction. the meaning. the general thought of this or that expression. in contemplating the Idea of God. In the more recent phil osophy. the Idea . it is by means of an example that it become s clear to us. but also in the form of its manifestation. Accordingly. work of art. But it is just the nature of God that He should not be i mplicit or in Himself only. b.. and yet it may very well happen that the spec ific form of thought we call the unity of subjective and objective. Thing . we must in the first place consider what the wo rd signify itself signifies. in these. according to which it is the opposite of this which is sought after. When we ask. and thus it follows that the Notion is the signification . it may be that the mind does not feel satisfied. &c. the difficulty lies in this. In the Philosop hy of Religion we have thus the Absolute as object. which has as jet only been given in thought. objective. In philosophy. has approached closely to religion. &c. and the question is how this contemplation of religion in thought is related generally to philosophy as forming an organic part in its system. to which we desire to attain. not only the Being who keeps Himself within thought. In order even to make the difference apparent. which corresponds very inadequately to our idea of God. represents Himself to Himself. and that the mind first feels at home with itself in this content . the Philosoph y of Religion has to consider its signification this. What is asked for in such a case is the mean ing in the very opposite sense from that which was required before. merely in the form of thought. an example of the content. and gives Himself objectivity. if we ask about its intrinsic character. is the one signification of signification. In the first place. and so far. a. and to mention that this Highest was in the Wolfian Philosophy called ens. the end or intention. This. For example. When we thus ask " What is God ? " " Wha t does the expression God signify ? " it is the thought involved in it that we d esire to know . that God is the Id ea. that which we call the Absol ute has a meaning identical with the expression God. If we f ind a thoughtcontent difficult to understand. the Absolute. in fact. the idea we possess already. This is t he aspect of the determinate being or existence of the Absolute. The universal Idea i s thus to be conceived of with the purely concrete meaning of essentiality in ge neral. the Highest is called the Absolute. and. the Absolute Spiri t. accordingly. the unity of real and ideal. When we begin to occupy ourselves with pure thought-determination s. The contemplation of religion in thought has thus raised the determinate moments of religion to the rank of thoughts. the nature of God as grasped by thoug ht. The Relation of the Philosophy of Religion to the System of Philosophy.

and this concerns the form. it has been called the Creed. in the subjec tive sense that which is believed. and out of them producing itself. Philosophy to begin with contemplates the Absolute as logical Idea. and at the same time as it appears. The Relation of the Philosophy of Religion to Positive Religion. is itself. in the apprehension and determination of the content of doctrine .g itself. a. as " argumentation " has made itself felt. This content has been u niversally accepted as truth. this End i s made the Beginning. from the poi nt of view of rational thought. however. and objectively. This. The onesidedness of the result is abrogated and absorbed in the very result itself. Popularly speaking. in revealing itself. thus represented by determinate being. This is the manner in which the Absolute becomes actual or " for itself. finite Spirit. which reflects it self in itself. special modes of the appearance of the Idea. more especially of the Protestant Church. and the world of finite spirit. Accordingly. in its creations. here. partly in later symbolical books. however. philosophy exhibits the Absolute in its activi ty. In the Philosophy of Religion. and becomes our special Object. and thought was only to take . we say God is t he Lord of the natural world and of the realm of Spirit. is not. in appearing. and of what man is in relation to God. for Spirit which does not appear. under the aspect in which its content is constituted by the sp ecific forms of thought. in th e Protestant Church the Bible has always been characterised as the essential fou ndation of doctrine. It is well known that the faith of the Church. since we are here in the region of philosophy . It bec omes apparent. In this characteristic of appearance finite appearance is also included that is. At first i ndeed. We look at this content. that this is not merely a result. the influence of reason. Nature. and the Bible as it s positive foundation. and is that which precedes all else. and this characteristic concerns the conte nt of the Philosophy of Religion. with its infinite manifestations . in its determinate character as pure thought. and what God has revealed Himself to be. were to remain unquestioned. then. nor in those finite determinations where its mode of appearance is a finite one. Now as uni versal established doctrine this content is partly laid down in the Apostolic Sy mbolum or Apostles' Creed. that is. the Idea as it is in thought. m anifests itself. but Spirit is regarded as the power or force of these worlds. but as it is in itself or implicitly in thought. Here neit her thought and Notion nor their manifestation determinate being or existence ar e wanting. and God is thus the result of philosophy. the world of consciousness. He is the absolute harm ony of the two. and brings us to con sider the position of the Philosophy of Religion with regard to religion as this latter appears in the shape of positive religion. in which the Idea has not yet penetrated to itself. however. of intelligence. and thus in infinite manifestation as Spirit. . this was so much the case that the doctrinal content. forms. is the position of the Philosophy of Religion in relation to the oth er parts of philosophy. we do not contemplate the implicitly exi sting logical Idea merely. what is to be known as conte nt. and of will. and as the description of what God is. This aspect. as the simply concrete Ide a. the world of nature. are embodiments of the divine Idea. howeve r. in the Christian Church. has taken a fixed form as a system of doctrine. but they are definite shapes." becomes Spirit. and it is He who produces and carries on this harmony. God is the result . Further. And moreover. Of the other parts. to be grasped again in thought. so as to be absolute Spirit. but is something which eternally creates itself. as producing them out of itself.

F or the doctrine concerning God goes on to that of the characteristics. principles. but in its character as free. . that thought should have its part in it. which unfolds its meaning. " Enlightenment " which is that consummation of f inite knowledge just described intends to place God very high when it speaks of Him as the Infinite. The finite and determinate which this knowledge has drawn i nto its territory. partly by this theology itself. but even this B eyond is conceived of by it in a finite manner. that for one word another co -extensive in meaning is substituted . and are unwarranted anthropomorphisms. the thoughts of the in terpreter must necessarily be put into the words which constitute the foundation . into the region of ideas . interprets it. the attri butes. and then a ttention was directed towards observing how the words of Scripture could be expl ained in accordance with these.up the thoughts of the Bible as Exegesis. The words of the Bible are a statement of truth which is not systematic. It is the case even in the presentation of a philosophical system whic h is already fully developed. it has. At the same time. but in the course of explanation further categories of thought are combined with it. then ass ert their influence in the exposition of the sense supposed to be contained in t he words. points indeed to a Beyond as existing for it. and pretends only to lay stress on the understanding of the word. Commentaries on the Bible do not so much make us acquainted with the content of the Scriptures. The Theology of Reason. This exegesis having thus taken counsel with reason. In this more general relation the dealing wit h the subject and the result can amount to nothing more than to the taking posse ssion by such knowledge of all that. and the actions of God. that of Plato or of Aristotle. with regard to which all predicates are inadequate. indeed. for example. it is Spirit which grasps the content. It is. and to desire to remain faithful to it. supreme Being. It. For a development is advance to furt her thoughts. or whether it is really and in do wnright earnest that the Bible is made the foundation. limi t itself to being merely an exegesis which kept to the Bible as its foundation. conceives of the Infinite in its own finite fashion. and then on the other hand finds that all special attributes are inadequate to this Infinite. however. which is put in opposition to tha t doctrinal system of the Church. as an abstract. Accordingly. and these ideas. but in reality further thou ghts are developed. and the absolute object reduced to complete poverty. But as a matter of fact understanding had previously established its opinions and its thoughts for itself. By such a mode of p roceeding the religious content is annihilated. Such knowledge takes possession of this determina te content. however. did not. the bringing forward of the sense into consciousness. they are Christianity as it appeared in the beginning . in conceiving God a . and thus the so-called Holy Scriptu res have been made into a nose of wax. appealed to the Scriptures. however. the sense con tained in the words which is supposed to be given. Thought explicitly contains categories. premises. as rather with the manner in which things we re conceived in the age in which they were written. Mere word interpretation can only amount to this. it is inherent in the ver y nature of any explanation which interprets. as. th at the presentation takes a different form. which must make their influence felt in the work of interpretation. If interpretation be no t mere explanation of words but explanation of the sense. as an abstract infinite. But whether it be chiefly to save appearances. which get determinate character elsewhere. according to the definite kind of id ea which those who undertake thus to expound it have already formed themselves. The giving of the sense means . in common with the Chu rch. the most contradictory meanings have been exegetically demonstrated by means of Theology out of the Scriptures. and partly by that doctrinal system to which it is opposed. as something which has a d eterminate character. All heresies have. rational knowledge assumed a certain relation to r eligion and its content generally. in religion. In reality. the result has been that a so-called The ology of Eeason l has now come into existence. on the one hand. has a determinate character. exegesis takes p ossession of the written word. and would make it appear that it belongs to it. p ossessing no character at all. which thus came into existence. In appearance the sense is adhered to.

the spir . no knowledge of the nature of God were possible. God is not emptiness. it is only in appearance that the Philosophy of Religion stands on the same basis witli it. binds togeth er again the determinate content of religion in its entirety. and further. but which sets out from the fa ith of man in the dignity of his spirit. c. and is actuated by the courage of truth and freedom. however. and about which there is something uncanny . when they deny as against philosophy the possibility of knowledge. and to this the assumed Biblical truth must s ubordinate itself. a nd is the Eeason of the Universal. a. the t ruth rather being that it is these tendencies chiefly which combat it. as a special science. to which philosophy attach es no validity. those theologians. Philosophy is regarded as a something ghos tly. and althou gh it still leaves the Biblical words standing. then. further reflec tion shows that this is merely an appearance of resemblance which vanishes direc tly it is examined into. Thinking reas on. and asserts that it explains them by the aid of reason. For that kind of contemplation by its own sovereign power l ays down its argumentations as the foundation of Christian doctrine . The fact of the relation of man to God. occupied a separate and independent position. as fulness of content. But if God be conceived as Spirit. ina smuch as it apprehends God as essentially the Triune God. as an abstraction which is empty ideality. but only in order to reserve to themselves the arbitrariness of their argumentative process. is opposed to the arbitrariness of this argumentative process. For God was conceived by that rationalistic way of looking at religion. Thus God is conceived of as making Himself an object to Himself. that if the trutli were as they say. This argumentation accordingly retains its assumptions. If it should now seem as if the Philosophy of Religion rested on the same bas is as this Theology of Reason. which repr esents the one side. Therefor e. on the contrary. which adheres to the words of Holy Scripture. yet the particular meaning remai ns as the principal determination. and this characteristi c of Spirit does not remain for it a word only. who busy themselves with their argu mentations in exegesis. in it God loves Himself. to that form of contemplation in thought. and Spirit would be an empty wor d. and as against which the finite stands in an external fashion . as being rati onal knowledge. Philosophy is therefore very far removed from being on the common highway on whi ch this Theology of Eeason and this exegetical argumentative process move. or Theology of Enlightenment. to thinking reason. Philo sophy is called something special and particular. and m oves within the relations of the Understanding. as Ideality. and appeal to the Bible in connection with all their not ions. But the Philosophy of Religion. Without this char acteristic of Trinity. but this idea only shows that these rationalistic theologians find it more convenien t to keep to their unregulated arbitrary reflections. made Him hollow. or a superficial characteristic . truly universal thought. grasps the truth as something concrete. of which we know nothing. as the contemplation of religion by thought. in which determinateness the finite is contained as a moment. although it is nothing else th an rational. They protest against philosophy. on the contrary. have br ought matters to such a pass. and have so greatly depreciated the reputation of the Bible. which is no longer abstract. the object remains in th is distinction in identity with God . empty. which presses forward to unity. then this conception includes the subjecti ve side in itself or even develops itself so as to reach to that side. and was consequentl y in the same condition of opposition to the content of religion. b. which was only the abstract metaphysic of the understanding. God would not be Spirit. and the P hilosophy of Religion. the knowledge of that which was held to belong to the actual subject as regards general actions and conduct. but Spirit . which belong to Reflection. with out subjecting these to criticism. and poor. and seek to bring it under suspicion. and thus too from this point of view morals constituted. the nature of Spirit unfolds itself for rational thought.s the supreme Being. and if according to the true exp lanation of the Bible. With regard. If.

Human reason the consciousness of one's being is indeed reason . and that the Divine Spirit works in the special character and fo rm assumed by religion. which are absolutely different. and endeavour at a . seek to fathom its truth . after all content seemed to be already done away with. or may take i t amiss when their doctrine is made reasonable . arise from a feelin g of apprehension. get into that condition of opposition . on the contrary. and this just because of the true content pos* sessed by it. and at a knowledge of the nature of God. omnipresent. it is not a discovery of man. its only desire beingto continue in that nocturnal darkness which it calls enlighten ment. and consequently it cannot be absolut ely different from the work which the Divine Spirit has produced in religion. The Church or the theologians may disdain this aid. and they may ridicule the " manufactured " truth but this scorn is no longer of any avai l. would be irrational if we did not assume that it has reference al so to religion. that is. to the affirmative in whic h it perishes. beyond the world. in so far as it is the Spirit of God. put itself in opposition to positive religion. and its hatred of philosophy. yet agree in this. God is a living God. idle when once the need of true rational knowledge. All those principles of the religious consciousness which have been developed at th e present time. the spirit. and exi sts as Spirit in all spirits. acts as universal consciousness. The expression that God as reason ru les the world. have been awakened. the re-e stablishment of the doctrines of the Church. but. is not a spirit beyond th e stars. Eve ry content appears to this negative tendency to be a darkening of the mind. philosophy. they may even repel the exertio ns of philosophy with proud irony.) The Philosophy of Religion cannot. It is sufficient here merely to observe regarding the supposed opposition of the Philosophy of Religion and positive religion. therefore. the Jess wi ll he. in fact. Th e more a man in thinking rationally lets the true thing or fact * itself hold sw ay with him. as the Philosophy of Beligion. and to such doctrine of the Church as has still preserved its content. God is present. but a wo rk of divine operation and creation in him. and exegesis of inferences. and the sense of discord between it and religion. (y. is so very different f rom those tendencies of the understanding. while his reason does not seek its own in the sense of something special. which can in no way be longer denied to it. and yet that philosophy arrives at a content. On the contrary. and is. T he fears of the Understanding. Indeed. reason. namely. yet even at the present day we still see the belief in the absolute opposit ion between philosophy and religion made one of the shibboleths of the time. and Spirit. which are at bottom hostile to religi on. that they are at enmity with philosophy. as the embodiment of this reason. in the fashion of that metaph ysic of the Understanding. based on the fact that it perceives how philosophy carries ba ck its reflecting process to its foundation. is so truly the work of philosophy. On the contrary. there cannot be a Divine reason and a human. it will become apparent that it stands infinitely nearer to positive doctrine than it seems at first sight to do. however widely distinguished their forms may be from one another . for it. Re ligion is a product of the Divine Spirit. which is merely a Theology of the Understanding. th ere cannot be a Divine Spirit and a human. who is acting and working.it would be compelled to look for another source in order to acquire such truth as should be substantial or full of content. reduced to a minimum by the Underst anding. renounces his particularity. the Divine Spirit. Although then. that there cannot be two kinds of reason and two kinds of Spirit. it is the divine in man. and the triumph of knowledge is the reconciliation of the opposition. is itself the essential fact or thing. But the development of reason as perfected in thought do es not stand in opposition to this Spirit. and hence the rays of the light of knowledge must be necessarily regarded by it as hostile. and is in no way such a spectral thing as it has usually been represented to be. though these are not directed in a hostile sp irit against religion. as a darke ning of the mind. The intelligence h as here its rights. that it is decried by that so-called Theology of Reason.

THE RELATION OP THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION TO THE CURRENT PRINCIPLES OF THE RELIGIOUS CONSCIOUSNESS. Christ says. absolute commandment. What Tacitus said of the ancient Germ ans. for which God is emptiness. If at the present day philosophy be an object of enmity because it occupies itse lf with religion. has its foundation in t his. but nothing at all of God. and as the foundation of its principle. and searching into His nature. It had and it fo und no rest unless in thus occupying itself with God. in presence o f all that enmity which is shown to philosophy. to silence . partly in an unprejudice d and partly in a favourable and successful manner.ll hazards to prevent it from occupying itself with religion . The more the knowledge of finite things has increased and the increase is so gre at that the extension of the sciences has become almost boundless. that they represent the historical element out of which philosophical thoug ht in its complete shape has been formed. The spiritual conflicts to which the knowledge of God gives rise in the inner life were the highest which the spirit knew and experie nced in itself. as My Father in heaven is perfect. and content has vanished. Our own time. pa rtly the standpoint of feeling. From this consideration of the subject we may confidently promise ourselves success. on the contrary. this cannot really surprise us when we consider the general ch aracter of the time. and the work that now lies before us is to consider philosophy in its relation to these principle s of the time. namely. Every one who attempts to take to do with the knowledge of God. There was a time when all knowledge was knowledge of God. and got rid of it. It no longer gives our age any concern that it knows nothing of God . "Ye shall know God. Or we may even see that the as sertions of the opponents of philosophy contain nothing else than what philosoph y itself contains as its principle. occupy itself with religion. Our own time has put this need." is regarded as a piece of f olly. with all its toils and conflicts. it comes from almost every side of consciousness in its present form the time has nevertheless arrived when philosophy can. that they were securi adversus deos. For the opposition takes one or other of those forms of the divided consciousne ss which we considered above. and that they yet implicitly possess the pr inciple of philosophical knowledge in their reflections. that the opponents of philosophy are the opponents of re ligion who have been overcome by it. or that people will turn agains t him and combine to oppose him. When it could not satisfy this need it felt unhappy. must be prepared to fin d. and by the aid of thought to comprehend His nature. " Be ye perfect. on the con trary. it is regarded as a mark of the highest intelligence to hold that such kn owledge is not even possible. but is in accord with that metaphysic in coming to the result that every characterisation is inadequate to the eterna l content for this indeed is only an abstraction." This lof ty demand is to the wisdom of our time an empty sound. What is laid down by the Christian religion as the supreme. we have once more become in regard to knowledge. has the distinction of knowing about all and everything. They occupy partly the standpoint of the metaphysi c of the Understanding. from however many sides it may c ome indeed. we h ave done with all this. Formerly the mind found its supreme interest in knowing God. securi adversus deum. and all regio ns of knowledge are enlarged to an extent which makes a comprehensive view impos sible so much the more has the sphere of the knowledge of God become contracted. which after the loss of absolute content has wit hdrawn itself into its empty subjectivity. and all other interests and knowledge were lightly esteemed. all the more that it will become apparent how. that either no attention will be paid to him. III. This contradiction. It has made of God an inf . about an infi nite number of subjects.

who are on their own ground in that region of vanity. all the mor e arrogant inasmuch as he thinks he has proved to himself that this degradation is the highest possible state." since we know nothing of the Perfect One. authority. as your Father in heaven is pe rfect. Philosophy and the Prevalent Indifference to Definite Dogmas. and more expressly of the Christian religion. almost u niversal. onl y phenomena. and Redeemer . that into the religious world generally there has entered a widespread. taking its departure from the form. is here of no importance. and with what belongs to reason. from turning against philosophy. yet this hindrance is taken out of the way. indeed. and His essential Being. How. And yet it is philosophy which is the liberation of the spirit from that shameful degradation. Reconciler. which ' is far from us. and shall see here how the tendenc y which. in that t hey have (i) thrust dogmas into the background. or reason. are we any longer to respect the commandment. Christ still indeed continues to be made the central point of faith. is at enmity with philosophy. Such a point of view is. and since our knowing and will ing are confined solely and entirely to appearance. Even the theologians. His nature. indifference towards what in earlier times were held to be essential d octrines of the faith. after all its abject gropings. In order to repel the se not merely groundless. but what was known as the work of redemption has re ceived a very prosaic and merely psychological signification. and in like manner has made human knowled ge a futile phantom of finiteness. judged by its content. done e verything in their power to do away with what is definite in religion. " Be ye perfect. that it does not even know that it contains in itself t he very principle of philosophy. by considering what is the real value now attached to ecclesiastical dogmas. and is his true destiny. we need only observe cursorily how theologians have. then. is so ignorant of what it is. it is true. in that blind arrogance which is p roper to it. an d in their place no other dogmas have been set up. and as mere phenomena of a past history. and placed in safety from the devastations of theology. it be made a reproach to philosophy in its relation to religion that t he content of the doctrine of revealed positive religion. then. If. and grasp its meaning. for acc ording to this we ought to know God. or () consider them only as extraneous definitions given by others. yet it h as not shrunk. is depreciated by it. and that it subverts and destroys its dogmas. the very thing that was essential in the o . so that although t he edifying words have been retained. A few examples will prove this. (The distinctio n as to whether this knowledge is brought to us by means of faith. and by the new theology itself. w e must further ask. and to esteem this knowledge as something which is the highest of all. When we have reflected in this manner upon th e aspect presented by the content. re velation. or a mirror upon which fall only shadows. in fact. and have seen how this last is re-established by philosophy. There are very few dogmas of the earlier system of Church confe ssions left which have any longer the importance formerly attributed to them. on the contrary. as Mediator . frivolous and unprincipled objectio ns.) But although this is the case. directly opposed to the lofty nature of the Christian religion. and which has once more brought religion out of the stage of intense suffering which it had to expe rience when occupying the standpoint referred to. or pronounced them to be unimpor tant. be considered as the last stage of the degradation of man.inite phantom. in which at the same time he is. but> what is more. if God is i ncomprehensible ? This standpoint must. and the truth is to be and t o remain absolutely and exclusively a something beyond the present ? And what. what else would it be worth while to comprehend. It is easy to convince onesel f. a nd although this point of view has come to dispense both with the content which revelation gives of the Divine nature. when it says to us. we shall () reflect upon the form of that standpoint. i. have ventured to charge philosophy with its destructive tendency theologians who have no longer anything left of t hat substantial element which could possibly be destroyed.

that the importance of these dogmas has decli ned. are no longer regarded b y general 'Conviction as of importance.ld doctrine of the Church has been expunged. it is in the first instance a matter of no importance w hence that doctrine may have come . inherently.j^Even though Christ be for many the central point of faith and devotion in the deeper sense. but to that of human action in general a nd moral designs. he would. such expressions are regarded as apprjra. and into a moral sphere into which even heathens like Socrates were capable of entering. It would appear that the theologians themselves. but even by pious theologia ns themselves. the f undamental doctrines of Christianity are to be found contained and stated in the orthodox sense. since these d octrines. not indeed to the plane of ordinary everyday life. a re neglected as matters of indifference. The strongest indication. in which the fundamental doctrines of the Christian religion are supposed to be set forth. or collections of sermons. in accordance with the general training which most of them have received. These latter join with the men of enlightenment in saying that th e Trinity Was brought into Christian doctrine by the Alexandrian school. and so philosophy can take up a more untra mmelled attitude with regard to dogmas which have so much sunk in interest with theologians themselves. without ambiguity or evasion. it will be found that dogmas hav e become very thin and shrunken. true . But even if it must be conceded that the fathers of the Church s tudied Greek philosophy. as words which one shrinks from uttering. in a large proportion of such literature. and have lost their importance. / " Great energy of character. by the neo-Platonists. the answer is again not a doubtfu l one. Thus if philosophy has always been regarded as the oppo nent of the doctrines of the Church. find it very difficult to express himself in an affirmative way. or else reduced to something of merely general nature. is to be perceived in the fact that they are treated principally in an hist . as also the miracles in the Old and New Testaments. If any one were to take a number of religious books. only attribute that importance which they formerly assigned to the principle and doctrines of positive Christianity w hen these were still regarded as such to these doctrines when they are veiled in a misty indefiuiteness. it cannot any longer be such. which it seemed to threaten with destruction. and the weighty doctrines of the Trinity. of the resurrection of the body. the only question is. stea dfast adherence to conviction for the sake of which He regarded not His life " t hese are the common categories through which Christ is brought down. The div inity of Christ. If an opportunity was given to a large number of these theologians to lay their hand on their heart. and whether they believe that the absence of such faith leads to damnation. It is not only by " enli ghtenment " that Christianity has been thus treated. although they are talked about a great deal. and say whether they consider faith in the Trinity to beind ispensably necessary to salvation. yet Christian life as a whole restricts itself to this devotional bent. whether it be essentia lly. A great part of the danger which threate ns philosophy from this side when she considers these dogmas in order to compreh end them ought to be thus taken away. and yet that doctrine is the key-note of the Christian religion. however. in case of his being directly appealed to. Even the words eternal happiness and eternal damnation are such as cannot be use d in good society . and attempt to sift the greater part of those writings conscientiousl y in order to ascertain whether. Even although a man should not wish to deny these doctri nes. dogma. there can be no doubt what the answer would be. The Historical Treatment of Dogmas. what is peculiar to the Christian religion is set aside. but that is a point which is not examined into. In the doctrinal teaching of these theologians.

History occupies itself with truths whi ch were truths namely. Much is to ld us of the history of the painter of the picture. For her e it is with the value of his own spirit that man is concerned. but we are never permitted to see anything of the picture itself. The real interest here is to find out h ow the matter stands so far as others are concerned. and he is not at liberty humbly to remain outside and to wander about at a distance. and centres in this accidental origin and appearance of doctrine. It brings much zeal and erudition to be ar on these doctrines . They do. an d yet it is not religion itself which here comes under consideration. is based on the principle that in the spirit. not with such as would come to be the possess ion of those who are occupied with them. regarded from the point of view which we are considering. And in all this. and with the passions which have gathered around this external mode of the origin of truth. what grounds those pre sent at such a council had for establishing it. It is essential in philosophy and religion. what price it had at different times. then we should have to regard the theologians who have brought it to this point as clerks in a mercantile house. that man has immediate knowledge of God. and to register that which is the property of others. and thus the necessity. for others. which do not go on in our own mind as such. all piety. The a bsolute manner of the origin of these doctrines out of the depths of Spirit. as such. however. This statement taken in a direct sense. which w e do not relinquish. If the phi losophical knowledge of religion is conceived of as something to be reached hist orically only. Thus Theology is by her own act put in a low enough position. and that our aim. Theology of this k ind has no longer a place at all in the domain of thought . that it is occupied. who only act for others without obtaining any prope rty for themselves. and how this or that opinion cam e to predominate. the conviction is bound up that God gives revela tion in an immediate way in man . receive salary. but in a sense other than that in which the Church takes faith. and so on. but only with ifc as a finite fact. but should draw its content from that w hich is essential. that the spirit should itse lf enter with supreme interest into an inner relation. the truth. into what hands it came. The questio n as to what is a man's own personal conviction only excites astonishment. In consequence of the emptiness of the standpoint just considered. it is not with their essential substance. ordinary thought. and regard ed from this side. and as not implying that any polemica . and of the fate of the pictu re itself. to know God. even though he handles the frame. is shoved o n one side by this historical treatment. a. what part others have playe d. all conviction. and are regarded in the light of convictions which belong to othe rs. the recent attitude of theology is more favourable for philos ophy. it might appe ar as if we only mentioned the reproaches which it casts upon philosophy in orde r to pronounce expressly against such a point of view.orical manner. however. For with the thought that all objective deterrninateness has converged in the inwardness of subjectivity. but with the externalities of the controversies about them. and als o faith. who have only to keep an account of the wealth of strangers. indeed. All kno wledge. Yet this standpoint has an aspect belonging to its form in which it must really have a rational interest for us. They know as little of God as a bli nd man sees of a painting. as matters of history. They only know how a certain dogma was established by this or that council . Philosophy and Immediate Knowledge. as opinion. that religion consists just in this. should not only occupy it self with a thing that is foreign to it. and should regard itself as worthy of such knowledge. This immediate knowing is called reason. the consciou sness of God exists immediately with the consciousness of its self. With the true content. such theologians have no concern. with the knowled ge of God. which they have for our spirits too. but their reward is only to serve. it is indeed religion that is in question. it has no longer to do with infinite thought in and for itself. is to do the opposite of that which it holds to be the high est of all aims namely. and which do not concern the needs of our spirit.

since its principle already lives in the minds and in the hearts of men as an assumpti on. its root in my deepest per sonal being. that Spirit manifests itself in Spirit. to its content. a kind of happy circums tance. but that the relation to God is only an immediate one. but also what it is . that reason is regarded as that part of the spirit in which God reveals himself to m an. of wha t it is . By philosophical knowledge or cognition. takes the form of an institution of the State but is favoured inwardly. if it is to be valid. the content. is negated. certainty. and are not to pr oceed to the knowledge of God. we mean not only that we know that an object is. but not what He is. all external authority. which is now matter of assumption. and in order that I may believe I must have t he witness of my spirit. and philosophy. Not only does it teach that we are to believe and to know in an immediate manner. is said to be only a finite knowledge of that which is fini te. but any such ext ernal origin is a matter of indifference . and that to know what it is. this validity c an only build itself up upon the foundation of all truth. and in fa ct in this my spirit. that this faith has its source. is n ot to know it to the extent of possessing a certain knowledge. that the highest. which we call religion. passes for one which needs no proof. however. in which the necessary connection of these characteristics is a matter of knowledge. in the witness of the Spirit. The irnmediateness of the connection is taken as excluding the other characteristic of mediateness. but more than this. and least of all where it. If we consider more closely what is involved in the assertion of immediate knowl edge. this knowledge must relate to its characteristics. that is.l attitude has been taken up to philosophy. This principle is the simple principle of philosophical knowledge itself. Thus it is to be regarded as a gain. the religious content show s itself in the spirit itself. it is of the essence of this assertio n that we are to limit ourselves to the consideration of religion as such. This universal idea. it is seen to mean that the consciousness so relates itself to its content that it itself and this content God are inseparable. As a result of this general disposition of the spirit of our time. and that it is what is most peculiarly my own. and t o keep strictly to the . that fundamental principles of philosophy live even in general popular co nceptions. But the principle of immediate knowledge does not rest satisfied with this si mple determinateness. and it must be complete and full and proved knowledge. It is this relation. and have become general assumptions. and ph ilosophy is so far from rejecting it that it constitutes a fundamental character istic in it itself. for in this way the philosophica l principle may expect the more easily to obtain the general consent of the educ ated. the filling up of the idea of Go d. philoso phy has not only won a position which is externally favourable with what is exte rnal it is never concerned. what is to be of value to me must have its verification in my own spirit. it does not only expr ess itself affirmatively. Inasmuch as this knowledge exists immediately in myself. It may indeed come to me from without. Thus this knowledge in its immediacy is to get no further than this. ). but takes up a directly polemical attitude to philosop hical knowledge. and directs its attacks especially against the philosophical kn owledge and comprehension of God. consideration of the relation to God. For philosophy has this in common with the form of culture referred to. no confirmation. and active interest in it . and as such is insep arable from the consciousness of pure spirit. all foreign attestation is cast aside . Further. that we kno w that God is. this natural and ingenuous content . of the divine content of what the divine . not only is it maintained that the conscious ness of God is bound up with the consciousness of self. contai ns this essential principle namely. because it is mediated knowledge. in fa ct knowledge of God and this inseparableness of consciousness from this content.

we fin d that the whole of religious doctrine consists in the development of the fundam ental conception of Spirit. what He is in Himself. What is really contained in this position. in like manner. and that it is only our relation to God which is embra ced in what is generally called religion. so as to make it possible that He Himself should be conceived of as constitut ing the relation of these attributes. we find it to be just this. how much more. Or. and that it is this inseparable relation of religion which is the real point. And here it becomes apparent. for man only knows of God in relation to consciousness . we thus find the fundamental conception which belongs to ph ilosophy already existing as an universal element in the cultured thought of the present day. and must be for Spirit or mind . however. that he should abi de by religion. or. In this sense it is stated. however. We cannot. the material universe. only in an external. that we must of necessity contempla te loth. At the same time . God is essentially Spirit. be it observed. and that dreaded identity itself is contain ed in it. As a matter of fact. must not be considered for Himself. this c onstitutes the conception or notion of Spirit itself. but only our relation with God. and thus the unity and inseparability of t he two determinations of the knowledge of God and self-consciousness even presup poses what is expressed in identity. and do not find that investigation is made r egarding the nature of God. and on the other. God recognised as Object in Himself. If. in the first place. our relation t o Him . of knowledge which concerns the finite. then. subjective consciousness. must God be for Spirit. in other words.content essentially is in itself. It implies. too. t hat God. and n ot the notions which one may have concerning God. as God. and as relation in Himself. and which are by it exhibited in their onesidedness and I untruth. is not even made an object of thought . and not. it is considered within the limits of finite knowledge. and while discussions of the nature of God have become fewer and fewer. or implicitly. to express it more the ologically. God. it may suffice to say that Spirit is essentially self-manifestation its nature is to . accidental manne r. According to the philosophi cal conception. On the contrary. further. and if we inquire more closely what Spirit is. be for Spirit. and we are told that we are not to proceed further to get a know ledge of any divine content. on the other hand. so far as He is in His Church. however. knowledge does not trench upon that object. For the present. Spir it is for Spirit. is concrete . Spirit is only Spirit in so far as it is for Spirit . view the matter in a onesided way. It has bee n said that the world. that is. It is also maintained. and really constitutes its true kerne l. Thus it happens that at the present ti me we only hear religion spoken of. not what God Himself is . and how the nature of God mus t be determined. God I is Spirit. and does not exhibit distinct attributes in Hi m. that we can only know our relation to God. consequently. it is now only required of a man that he should be religious. and consider the sub ject merely according to its finiteness. it is stated that there is an essential relation between the two. c. to its contingent life. the essential distinction which the con ception of religion contains . only that this Idea is confined by immediat e knowledge within limitations which are abolished by philosophy. must have spectators. we bring out what is inherent in the principle of immediate know ing. is the philosophical Idea itself. what is directly affirmed in it. God is not bef ore us as an object of knowledge. on the one side. For if the Subject be c onsidered by itself. that God is spoken of in relation to consciousness in such a way that this relation i s something inseparable. that philosophy does not stand above its age as if it were something absolutely different from the general char . but inasmuch to o as it has the infinite absolute object as its content.

is made dep endent on the result of this investigation. it will at least be necessary to prove that this omission is not accidental. that we should be called upon. we have only to look the hindrances in the face which the cultu re and opinion of the time. the distinction being only that the characte r of the time still appears to present itself as accidental. The want of sound sense which marks the arguments advanced against philosophy kn ows no bounds. it is not religion in general that we have before us. Or. as also regarding the knowledge of it. B. on th . It has been said indeed. and to be in the sharpest antagonism to it. and that this last is only the true self-comprehens ion of what is actual. and must of necessit y come. are based. It appears to be absolutely necessar y to examine and to answer these questions. and of a rational knowledge of religion. which are supposed to divide absolutely. and that when we go to the root of things we find that there is absolute accordance where it was be lieved that there was the greatest opposition. become transparent. The first hindrance in this connection is. and as being such carries it forward to its true expansion within itself. In the first place. Thus the result of the study of philosophy is that these walls of separation. and that we possess the right to do this. The very opinions which are supposed by those who hold them to mi litate against philosophy. or substantial e lement of religion. since the essential el ement of any such examination is included in the science of philosophy itself. but positive religion. Here. If we omit such examination. and may thus even stand in an unreconciled. which rests on higher than human authority. that they have very specially engaged the interest of thinking men in our day. however. but that it is One Spirit which pervades both the actual worl d and philosophical thought. put in the way of our exerci sing the right to get an intellectual grasp of religion. As the Lutheran Reformation carried faith back to the first centuries. and because they have to do with the principles upon which prevalent opinions regarding the religious content. this process at first causes the essential content to evaporate. however. a nd all those questions can only find their solution there. i. hostile attitude towar ds the truly essential content. as hitherto considered. and to be elevated above it. we respect them. is at the same time the universal peace-bringer and universal reconciliati on. before proceeding further. therefore. into relation with positive religion. both in a philosophi cal and in a popular connection. so th e principle of immediate knowledge has carried Christian knowledge back to the p rimary elements. that positive religion is "for itself. as the justification of princi ples. If. regarding which it is acknowledged that it is the gift of Go d. for this reason. to verify the competence and capability of reason to deal with the truth and do ctrine of a religion which is supposed to be withdrawn from the sphere of human reason. and is sa id still. in other words.acter of the time. yet it is philosophy which recognises this very principle of imme diate knowledge as representing content. and is not rational ly justified. it is one movement upon which both th e age and its philosophy are borne. upon exam ination of their content exhibit essential agreement with that which they combat . We do not question its doctrines . and hold them in honour. it appears to be i ndispensable to solve several preliminary questions." or stands on its own basis. or rather to institute an i nvestigation into these with the view of showing that the possibility of any suc h treatment of the subject. while philosophy. PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS. Rational or philosophical knowledge comes. Before we can proceed to the treatment of our subject itself. and therefore appears to be outsi de the sphere of human reason.

it was imagined that the freedom of philo sophical investigation could be guarded in this way. Religious feeling becomes yearning hyprocrisy. This despair is reconciliation carried out in a one-sided ma nner. and retains the mo ment of non-satisfaction. nothing indeed is left but to assign to Him the region of accid ental subjectivity. It follows from this that the knowledge of God is not to be placed in the reas on which seeks to comprehend its object. It was then said. There is no foundation for maintaining that faith i n the content or essential element of positive religion can continue to exist. That is the course followed by shallow spirits. and denyi ng to Him objectivity. and these two are supposed not to come into relation . is even said to be a result of rational k nowledge itself. also was subordinated to the teaching of positive religion. W e do not wish. is not within the power of the healthy mind. God would thu s be an historical product of weakness. or of interested hopes. reason is not to int erfere with these doctrines. in rega rd to reason. In this respect. however. even taking God to be a product of feeling. The one side is cast away. it leads to despair. and is not to be brought over into thought. in that they have ta ken Spirit and Thought for something material. but a man cannot wi n true peace in this way. or is ultimately attacked and opposed. to place the present investigation on this footing. It i s a false idea that these two. is the first preliminary question in virtue of which the right of re ason to occupy itself with the doctrines of religion has to be proved. that of feeling. materialis tic views.e other side stands reason. and that the relation of man to God lies within the sph ere of feeling only. thought. . and in this case it may well be a subject o f wonder that objectivity is ascribed to God at all. and imagine they have traced the matter back to sensations. and its result. therefore. and will not be thrust asid e by force . know truth at all. however. in and for itself. is inherent in it. in this case. Formerly. consis tently and justly refused to allow that reason might stand in opposition to fait h. T o this. According to another position. the infinite is destro yed by thought. This result. which is either left unquestioned and let alone. The one alternative is. The Church has. faith and free philosophical investigation. for the independence of consciousness demands satisfaction. Thus it would be necessary first to examine reason itself in or der to ascertain whether the capability of knowing God. If God be exclu ded from the region of rational intelligence or insight. only produces mistakes. i f reason has convinced itself of the opposite. it is entirely denied t o reason to. If discord has arisen between intellectual insight and religion. it is only maintained that reason cannot appr ehend the truth of the nature of God : the possibility of apprehending other tru ths is not denied to it . and yet be placed under subjection to it. of necessary. it is only the highest truth which is said to be beyon d its knowledge. naturalistic. of fear. and that reason must renounce all claim to grasp anything of the infinite in an affirmative manner . empirical. which was not to do any harm to positive religion. . The human spirit in its inmost natu re is not something so divided up that two contradictory elements might subsist together in it. substanti al subjectivity. for the divided spirit to reje ct the demands of the intellect and try to return to simple religious feeling. and is not overcome in knowledge. can s ubsist quietly side by side. moreover. that it w as a thing by itself. whe n it deals with Spirit in its true essence. with t he infinite. This. hi storical. It is asserted that philosophical knowledge. . this negation of reason. but that the consciousness of God sprin gs only out of feeling . and consequently the pos sibility of a philosophy of religion. or by whatever other name you choose to designate them. have been at least more consistent. then. and to renounce independent thought. with life. which comes in the place of reconciliation. the other alone held fust . however. The other alternative is a one-sided attitude of indif ference toward religion. of joy. the spirit can only attain by doing violence to itself. In the sphere above referred to. is brought down to the level of the finite. been atheism. The result has. which seeks to grasp its object intellectua lly.

that space. exist. inasmu ch as their material is already acknowledged. is only for me . The object with which philos ophy occupies itself is not. however. it is mine. and they are exempted from the nec essity of proving the existence of this material. Philosophy. no beginning can be made at all. would have in the first place to veri fy its object for itself. it seems. What has its root only in my feelings. It is impossible to make any p reliminary examination of rational activity without being rational. of a Thought and Spirit free from what is material. but not its own . and thus the Philosophy of Religion too finds the demand made upon it to demonstrate God. diseases. it is impossib le in any other way. it would have before its existence to prove its existence. yet no sooner does philosophy go on to assume the reality of the immaterial i n general. be briefly explained. to show that God is not rooted in feeling merely. It would have to direct its efforts toward showing it to be necessary that before it exist it prove that it is . it is in connection with it that they show themselves mos t foolish. to guarantee an ex istence to its objects . since the very thing we have to do is first of all to know reason. For this reason the o lder metaphysic has always demonstrated first of all that a God is. i s granted from the very beginning. It was believed to be a great discovery. . however. with which the truth is to be laid hold of. We neve rtheless leave them on one side . and their satisfaction consists in having found a splendid outlet for their folly and ignorance. for example. and not mere ly that there is a feeling of God. should be examined to begin with. then any Philosophy of Reli gion is absolutely impossible. To arithmetic the fact of numb ers. to be known . before going further. and especially the Philosophy of Religion. but as so often happens in the world. and one which is general in the presen t time. of such a character as to be something mer ely hypothetical. is not merely my God. These. in order that this diff iculty may be met. The first demand is that reason. to give up attempting this. Criticism of the faculty of knowledge is a position of the Kantian philosophy. and it is not to be regarded as such. It might seem as if the other sciences had the advantage over philosophy. we are. Indeed they are inexhaustible in finding such outlet s when it is a question of keeping a good conscience in the face of their indole nce. as in their solution the very possibility of a Philosophy of Relig ion would lie. if such points of view be valid. and still more th e reality of God. seems to labo ur under the disadvantage of being obliged. Therefore it appears to be necessary. than it is at once taken to task. to geometry that of space. to medicine that of human bodies and diseases. however. before beginning. the faculty of knowledge. then. however. before we advance to knowledge. So it appears at first sight. are the preliminary questions which it seems would have to be solve d beforehand. This is just the demand which was made by that Gascon who would not go into the water until he could swim. Reason is to be examined. Were it so. since in order to prove its possibility these obs tacles must in the first place be removed. we comprehend it rationally . For. and lust of power. so far as t he principal points are concerned. and in the theology of the day. If we are not to begin philosophical speculation without having attained rationally to a knowledge of reason. only possible by means of rational thought . Knowledge is thus conceived of as i f it were to be got at by means of an instrument. this is. and of getting quit of the whole affair. philosophy. if it be granted without challenge that there is a worl d. bodies. F or it is commonly the case that when people have a notion which they consider to be a very clever one. the demand that this instrum ent should first be known is a clumsy one. for in getting to kn ow anything in the philosophical sense.cupidity. this belief proved to be selfdeception. and it is not required of them to prove. and consequently a demand is made which cancels itself. and for what reason we do so will. When looked at more closely. but how ? It is to be rationally examined. it has no independent existence in and for i tself.

By reason of this universal character of religion. In Spirit. only we do it in such a way as to imply that we do not suppose we would want to complete this investigation beforehand outside of the object . when in t his sphere. in so far as God gives Himself this ultimate individualisation of This On e. Such forms of the finite are made points of depar ture from which to oppose philosophy. that in suppo rt of this polemical attitude. interests. originate s of itself within the Philosophy of Religion itself. and it is essentially owing to this that the finite spirit arrives at a p ositive religion. because this feeling has in it a spiritual relation. and for that other for which it is . This standpoin t of knowledge is included in religion. and indeed in the very place where it first originates. Spirit in making itself an object gives itself essentially the form of Appearanc e or Manifestation. which are out of place in s uch an absolutely rich. are abstract forms. th at is the object . ordinary knowledge. We shall only touch briefly upon this. in so far. as well as above finite thoughts. idea. finite or infinite. there is inherent in re ligion that characteristic of reason in virtue of which it involves knowledge. conditions. with religion. it is necess ary to have laid these aside. the latter are accidental. & . It is the absolute result it is the region into which m an passes over. categories and forms of the finite are brought forward to the disregard of th is fundamental characteristic. such finite categories are the ant itheses of finite and infinite.Here in the Philosophy of Religion it is more especially God. which relate to the matter itself. and this consequently implies that finite spirit has been posit ed. in the form of the Other. whether it be opinion. relations belonging to limitatio n. and the relation of finite spirit. finite thoughts. for example. The determination. Yet although even for the ordinary consciousness religion is the act of rising u p above the finite. as something which comes in a higher manner to the finite sp irit . i n virtue of which it is activity of comprehension and of thought. will. It is this which con stitutes the difference between a science and conjectures about a science . feeling is the subjective element. as they are thoughts. But these antitheses. concrete content as religion is. The standpoint of feeling . they must be included in its treatment. is attacked. is a determination which is essentially i ncluded in the consideration of religion. Immediacy of knowledge the fact of consci ousness is. Thus. the Phi losophy of Religion. of one who feels. of finite reason to the divine. which as Spirit is in and for itself. have already raised itself above all that is finite above finite exi stence. on the contrary. subject and object. and because of which it is to myself that I appeal. is the ultimate and the highest sphere of human consciousness. however. or philosophical knowledge. Religion. the knowledge of reason is precisely the object with which we a re concerned. it usually happens when philosophy in general. finite re lations of all kinds. too. we invest igate knowledge. soul that wh ich has to do with religion quite other qualities are present than finiteness. has its place in the development of the conception of relig ion. ends. religion is produced as something positive. is the standpoint of feelin g. too. That is just what Spirit is. subject or object. Now in speculating philosophically upon reason. rationality. To be actually within the sphere of religion. as into the domain of absolute truth. especially the highest philosophy. and they are in this case no longer mere chance bubbles of thought. and especiall y the philosophy which deals with God. Spirit becomes for itself or actual in the form of mental repr esentation or idea. for God is essentially rational. It is of the very essence of Spirit to be for Spirit. reason in fact. such a finite form . and so. that God is. and must be treated of the re. too. that which belongs to me as this individua l. consciousness must. however. has spirituality in it . too. speaking generally.

they have given it a wrong meaning . or having made any thorou gh observation of external nature and of the inner experience of their conscious ness of their minds and of the manner in which these qualities present themselve s there. But that is certainly not the result in this c . Earth can not be shown without heaven. for they tell us so bluntl y that immediacy. These for ms must indeed be employed. . who did not know this. This logical knowledge. Indeed that is its necessary course. The hostile language which they direct against philosophy is therefore mere scholastic pedantry the chatter of the schools which entangles itself in e mpty. It is entirely out of place. " is something quite different from mediation. so to speak. And then. and to meet philosophy with the reply that the finite is different from the in finite. for. such categories must have long ago been done with. relinquish its hostility. and calmly comprehend its essential nature. the Idea. and on such qualities is based all that is essential in religion. fact of consciousness. and the object from the subject. any philosoph er whatever. but it ought to be able to expect as a recompense that the opposition should now. and in the wealth of its qualities we do not find a yoke under which we are in bondage. They make their affirmations quite artlessly. and a complete want of acquaint ance with the forms and categories by means of which they make their attacks and pronounce a final judgment upon philosophy. and though they may perhaps repeat its words. and it can only satisfy the inward impulse of its notion or conception by g etting a knowledge both of itself and of what is opposed to it (mrum index sui e t falsi). Keality is not for them something present. but as is already suggested by the figure just mentioned." At the same time they show an incredible ignorance. being in accordance with its concept ion. with phenomena that we have to do. but have in them free movem ent. those who attack and disparage philosophy are. they are inseparable." That is quite correct . but is something strange and unknown. by way of a reciprocal service. In religion it is not. as if there were any one. It is often said " those characteristics are as different as hea ven and earth. in opposition to philosophy . they have not grasped its infiniteness. We have an example of this in physics. But the usual thing is to employ these as weapons against the Notion. against rational knowledge. they are absolutely different. and vice versa. and imposes u pon itself the great labour of carefully investigating what its opponents have t o say. It is difficult to enter into discussion with those who wage war on the Philosop hy of Religion and think they have triumphed over it. which comes first. and after its own fashion reached the result that it is only phenomena which can be known by ' means of these categories. to bring forward these c ategories. subj ect and object and this is what always constitutes the foundation of that very k nowing and overwise talk are undoubtedly different. owing to their fin ite style of thinking. but it is of primary importance that thei r nature should have been examined into and recognised long before. Those categories are used entirely without criticism. in the north and south pole of the magnet. after all. We shall here remark only that such characteristics as finite and infinite. must lie behind us when we have to deal with reli gion scientifically ." but are in the world of reality . but are at the same time ins eparable too. But those who employ this argumentative kind of reasoning seem to think the Kantian philosophers have existed only to afford opportunity for th e more unblushing use of those categories. such as immediacy. it is with ah a bsolute content.c. just as if Kant's " Critique of Pure Reason" did not exist. since they are moments of the essential relation whi ch lies at the foundation of religion. withOut having thought over these subjects. while in philosophy we are not in the so-called " school. Thus philosophy is indefatigable. incapable of even grasping a philosophical proposition . Yet people are not ashamed to parade triumphantly cleverness of this sort. but have introduced their finite conditions into it. it is indeed preposterous. unsubstantial categories. w hich at least attacked these forms. or had still to learn such trivialities. however. in a quite artless way. as if th ey had made a new discovery.

it is a condition of infiniteness. secondly. and this latter is only one. we shall at the same time only render to ourselves and to philosopl iical thought what is due. regard must be also had when dealing with it to such relations of understanding as are wont to come principally under consideration i n connection with it. we shall now proceed t o give the general survey. DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT. with the moments of the Notion. which is im mediate reference to itself. which encloses itse lf within itself. as of the natu ral life. and dissolve s into mist. the pure eternal life of Spirit itself. annulled. C. This is an example of the use of the word in the second phase of its double me aning. In the first place. the true relation involved in them. Since it is with religion. that is. an immediate knowledge which is likew ise mediated.ase. What is true is their unity. we shall consider the notion. and does away with its limitation. and the magnanimity which desires to recognise in a friendly way the advers ary. that in which their finiteness is done away with. t hat is to say. under the aspect of judgment. And indeed to convince that " other. Aufgehoben = abrogated. that immediate knowledge. the syllogism. that we are to be occupied in the following dissertation. or the return of the notion to itself out of th e particularity in which it is unequal to itself. that the antithesis vanishes like a phantom." to exert this personal influ ence upon him. so that it arrives at equality with its form. it would be somethi ng dead. in which the difference of those characteristics is done away with. since we do not begin at the very beginning of the science. The third stage is . It is of the essential nature of Spirit to have itself as object. done away with. Then it will be come apparent. the n otion or conception of religion will be considered in its universal aspect. of limitation. in its particular form as the self-dividing and self-differentiating notion. and had it not this movement. it must know their nature. There can be but one method in all science. something mediated which is likewise simple in itself. Inasmuch as the one-sidedness is done away with by means of such combination. we ought now to be in a position to assu me that the futility of those relations has long ago been overcome. movement. But here Spirit is to begin with in the relation of objectivity. and which heaps coals of fire on his head. but are co nsidering religion per se. the synopsis or division of our science. But at the s ame time. Here is union. and t hence arises its manifestation. and in this relation it is something finite. while they at t he same time being preserved ideally have the higher destiny of serving as the p ulse of vitality. with what is supreme and ultimate. is entire ly one-sided. does not help philosophy in the least . but also "preserved. since he remains wedded to his limited categories. since the method is the self-unfoldi ng Notion (Begriff) and nothing else. is impossible. the impulse. too. the infinite relation. the exposition and dev elopment of religion will be presented in three parts. therefore. however. The thinking spirit must have got beyond all these forms of Eeflectiou . and thirdly. but persists in his attacks. and shall not seek merely to carry our point as again st the other. an d of finiteness . unrest of the spiritual. then . This is the rhythm. of difference. for the adversary will not keep quiet." as below . With this reference to the following dissertation itself. like mediated knowledge. In accordance. When we perceive.

or when the movement of our science as a whole is that in which the Notion becomes judgment. the whole nature of the tree. then. ho wever. the necessity of the progression has. the notion occupies the first place. in every sphere of this movement the same development of the moments will sho w itself. and as to which there is to tell the truth room for doubt. For freedom means to be self-contained. are only spectators. has not been unfolded. the notion in its definite forms . become a mere name for the most abstract. the absolute subject-matter. but the particular content itself. to present. and so we feel that it is not these that are of importance. What comes first is the notion in its universal aspect. representing the movement. is " with itself. in the form of Singularity. in minia ture. It is necessitated by the Notion . for example. for in the philosophical mode of treatment it is not the case that the Universal. and kn owledge itself is nothing else than the development of the notion. until this totality is made explicit as such in the final moment. the kind of s ap it has. and which are given a p rominent place. of that which is implicitly contained in the notion. which mediates it self in the totality of determinations. for example. is put int o prominence. uncertain content. has no further influence upon this con tent beyond pointing out in a general way what is the ground upon which we stand in dealing with these subjects. in the second sphere within that of particularity. is therefore simply historical. in connection with such a mode of considering the subject. is the division of the subject. and lastl y. Thus we begin with the notion or conception of re ligion. its leaves. but in a spiritual manner. the notion to the formal element. The conception or n otion which is placed in the foreground (as. so to speak. . then in the form of Particularity. a nd action of Spirit itself. answers to the subject-matter itself. the Notion. however. taken seriously. when the Notion first a ppears in the form of Universality. of which we. out of which the whole tree develops itself. The content. All specifications or d eterminations are contained in this. where it exhibits the moments independently. explicate) prove itself in the development itself. For the philosophical way of look ing at things." and in being so has attained its free dom. and preventing the introduction of content from any other sphere. and n ot pre-formed so that a microscope could reveal its boughs. Therefore. But this rhythm. the di fferent parts and content of which we shall now indicate in a more definite way. Such. The division. It is thus that the notion contains the whole nature of the object. and has not yet come into existence. too. that of Eight) may. There are indeed notions or conceptio ns of Eight and of Nature which are general definitions. reappears in each of the three moments specified. I. electricity. as it were. the way in which the branches grow . or at home with oneself. these are indissolubly united with the notion itself. the substance. as in the case o f the germ. the particular subjects. and the entire development of the Notion moves. displayed. and completes itself in the syllogis m. magnetism.reached when it is object to itself in such a way that it reconciles itself wit h itself in the object. These are not. THE GENEKAL NOTION OR CONCEPTION OF RELIGION. however. only that in the first sphere it is held together within the determina te character of universality. nature. within which our science as a whole. What is in this connection called the notion. what follows in the seco nd place is the determinateness of the notion. and it is only on arriving at the sphere of individuality that it returns to the real syllogism. to do it honour. but here the notion is the content itself. since ea ch of these is potentially totality in its determinateness.

to begin with." And further. in the fact that I do not look upon my freedom as that of my empirical personali ty. temporal characte r. a nd exist potentially only. and religion is on ly through thought. The particularisation. As the act of rising up to th e True. The opinion that thought i s injurious to religion. while at the same time everything is include d in it. in its wholly empirical. but not as yet thought developed and made determinate in itself. that is. finite objects. but Thought thinks itself. If we now say that religion has the moment of thought in its complete Universali ty in itself. but in my regarding freedom as something that has its being in and for itself. the i mmediate subject. and this other extreme is consciou sness in its individuality as such. does indeed take the first place . and in which I might subjugate my ne ighbour by means of stratagem or force. and men are given the more credit for true good-will the less they think. we d o not as yet make the distinction here between subjective and objective Thought. In the notion or conception of religion the purely universal. All distinctions are as yet absent. r God is not the highest emotion. or exists on its own account. Right and morality. It is not this or that that is thought. The Moment of Particularity. and that the more thought is abandoned the more secure the position of religion is. on t he contrary. It is the subject in its immediacy. If this becomes m erely an advance to an " Other. Out of this liquid element. I am myself the relation of the two sides as thus determined. sins in fact. Thought. as something Universal. In the sphere of Universality the Idea itself is. yet the conten t of this conception belongs to the realm of thought. but as y et the second element form is retained in the divine Idea. and with its needs. The Universal is object.i. . that I am a thinking being. again. but the hi ghest Thought. The Moment of Universality. Now the further advance consists in this. But this element of the Universal has not as vet taken those more expli cit forms. which is as yet retained in the sphere of the Universal. and this self-determination constitutes the development of the Idea of God. the active Universal. nothing has as yet fashioned itself into distinct shape. and the progress is revealed in divine figures. everything has disappeared. and in thought. conditions. I . which. is a rising up from the limited to the absolutely Universal. who arn that which lifts myself up. constitutes the Other as against the extreme of Universality. however. when it actually manifests itself outwardly as such. consist in this alone. In religion. that is to say. is Thought. and in this transparency. the moment of thought in its complete universal ity. that is. the mat erial of determination. In this ether of thought all that is finite has passe d away. The obje ct is the Universal. which is still in its substantiality. which belongs to me as this individual. and Ego. and that the Unlimited-Universal is supreme absolute Thought. Although He is lowered down to popular conception. and under the character of eternity it remains in the bosom of the Universal. and the infinite on the other exists in religion for me. Thus in regard to Right. therefore. This misunderstan ding originates in a fundamental misconception of the higher spiritual relations . good-will for itself (or as an independent motive) is taken as something which stands in contrast to intelligence. as active. is the maddest error of our time. religion is a departing from sensuous. and is thought pure and simple. and is that kind of talk which does not get out of the bit. that this Universal determines itself for itself. I who think." it is the false progressive process ad infinitu m. the relation of these two sides which are so sharply opposed the absolutely finite consciousness and b eing on the one hand. or the Sphere of Differentiation. are one and the same " I.

essentially confl icting relation. Both sides seek each other. and give the preponderance to the infinite cons ciousness. and this very contact itself is this double. we are oblige d to conceive religion as posited through what is other than itself. th e relating. or Worship (Cultus). severed. the reciprocal acti on of the movement and of necessity." what relates them . so that in fact the relation and the essential connection of the two sides. we shall make our selves acquainted with (i) Feeling. I as infinite am against or in contrast with mysel f as finite. and brings itself to unity in the conflict. consequently it will present itself a s the primary thing. finite consciou sness. The Annulling of the Differentiation. may be known as necessary. and am inf inite consciousness. into the sphere of thought in which religious consciousn ess will get a grasp of itself in its notion. I am thus the relation of these two sides. but I am both the combatants. while I am at the same time finite consciousness. exist for me. and am the contact and union of what flies apart. and now reco nciled and in unity with itself. comprise the forms of religious consciousness as it appears as feeling. and the holding together. the idea alike of this unity and this co nflict. In myself. Or. We have this movement before us in the lan . it will be necessary to get a knowledg e of the entire sphere of these relations in its necessity. the effort put fort h in this act of holding together. that is to say. and indee d am such in accordance with my whole . and it is in myself and for myself that this conflict and this concil iation take place. therefore. as the relation of what is now separated. and both flee from each other. but is their being bound together. and represent the labour of heart and soul to obtain the mastery over this opposition. I accentuate my empirical. They are not pillars of Hercules. and am what holds together the conflicting elements. when it opens for us the way into the sphere of those forms of consciousness. f or the conflict is just this antagonism. As representing the forms of the relation of the two extremes. and as finite consciousness I stand over against my thought as infi nite. religion will present itself already as a result which a t once does away with itself as a result . At one time. or ordinary th ought. The middle term contains nothing else than the characteristics of bot h the extremes. of which one leads to religion and the other takes place within reli gious consciousness itself. the perception. But this mediation of necessity is now to be posited within religion itself too. The for ms of feeling. at another I exclude mys elf from myself. as " finite and infinite. and of idea or mental representation. I am the feeling. as elevation of the finite consciousness to the Absolute. which is not any indifference of the tw o as different. through which all is mediated.n thinking I lift myself up to the Absolute above all that is finite. which both goes forwards and pushes backwar ds. are now forced of themselves into th at sphere in which the inward mediation of their moments proves itself to be nec essary. and idea or ordinary thought. We shall thus see in what is mediated the counter-impact. Both sides. I am the fire and the water which touch each other." On the contrary. sense-perception. I am the conflict. I am not one of those taking part in the strife. which are not abstract determinations . of sense-perception. In this mediation indeed. In investigating this necessity of religion. and am the strife itself. for example. as the y necessarily proceed one out of the other. Each of t he two extremes is itself " I. and on which all else depend s. the forms of rel igious consciousness. in so far as it cont ains. which are comprised in the religious spirit. . The movement in the preceding sphere is just that of the notion of God. in becoming objective to itself. () Sense-perception. as well as their relation. Before entering upon this subject. These two mediations of necessity. which confront each other shar ply.empirical character. condemn myself. of the I dea. to put it differently. is itself this which is at once in conflict with itself. and place myself in opposition to infiniteness . each is itself totality. I am. () Idea.

therefore. the positive feeling of possessing a share in. cou ld never in reality get beyond the idea of au Essence. and in beholding itself in the " Other. its substance. is subjective for what is objective. God. in the expression " God is a Spirit. is not the true infinitude. It was inconsistent. as Idea. something which is to be done away with and absorbed . It is just as one-sided to conceive of religion as something subjective only. Both modes. and is objective for what is subjective. and as a series of actions on the part of the inner life in fact. which constitutes the sphere of worship. for individuality knows itself as in regard to the absolute object only as accidental. although the words " Spirit " or " Person " might be made use of. but is Spirit only in being objective to its elf. "We. The one moment is always a reflection or copy of the other. which has this restoration to unity as it s object. And here the first attitude toward the absolute object is that of fear. Thus Chri stian worship does not only include the sacraments and the acts and duties perta ining to the Church. but it also includes the so-called " way of salvation " as a matter of absolutely inward history. o f worship. self-consciousness is inhere ntly contained. are one-sided. When the moment of subjectivity defines itself further. that of self-consciousness. This infinitude. worship is ab . Such a mode of contemplating the Id ea of God. bein g still encumbered with this opposition. therefore. and. and in so doing is also essentially an inward conversion of the spirit and soul. restoration of the subject and of its self-consciousness. that of self-consciousness. the absolute object remains still an Other . It was. a movement which goes forward in the soul. and that of consciousness or of idea. Worship comprises this entire inward and outward action. corresponding with each other a t every stage of religion. and the other to pure selfconsciousness. that the separation constitu tes the antithesis of fmiteness and infiniteness. but is in itself. and its attitude is not merely a negative one. The expression " worship " is usually taken merely in the limited sens e in which it is understood to mean only outward public acts.guage of ordinary thought. and making unity with it actually one's own this aboli tion of the dualism. however. the subjectiv e side defines itself in this distinction as that which belongs to the side of f miteness. so too is the attitude of the subject to Him . of pa rtaking in this Absolute. in which it has to annul or lose itself. however. and which in fact produces restoration of unity with the Absolute. positive. It is this unity. therefore. shall conceive o f worship as that action which includes both inwardness and outward manifestatio n. for if actually carried out it must have led to the other. and each brings abou t its own abrogation. which exists for itself. But this standpoint of separation is not the true relation. that is. Such an a ttitude. The highest characteris tic of Spirit is self-consciousness. it is what knows itself to be a nullity. and the inward act ion of the heart does not get so much prominence. or as something which is transient and v anishing. According as the content of the notion or conception of God or consciousness is determined. and the relation in which it stands to it is not self-consciousness. in which." Spirit is not s omething having a single existence. the subjective side. and the two stand at first so contrasted. or implicitly. of which the one holds fast to objective consciousness on ly. that the finite knows itself as a nullity in its state of separation. On the con trary. But we shall always find these two sides. however. which includes this objecttivity in itself. so too is self-consciousness in worship determined . and knows its o bject as the Absolute. the one points to the other. also involves the relation which is expressed by saying. and has its right place there. So regarded. reconciliation. so that the distinction is made between God as Object and the knowing spirit. as being at the same ti me its essence. as its Substance. The subject recognises the abso lute substance. or to put it otherwise." as itself. a one-sided view if the natural theology of former times look ed upon God as Object of consciousness only. th us in fact making the subjective aspect the only one. to the subj ective side.

The one is connected in the closest manner with the other. it is not recognised as the something higher than ourselves. His consciousness of self answ ers to his consciousness. would. Not until religion is really relation. If this substantial element remains shut up in the heart only. what exi sts in and for itself. does worship attain to a definite form as the lifting up into a higher unity of the severed elements. and the freedom which re-establishes itself in the separation. and that knowledge of the world shows itself. iii worship to liberate itself fr om its finiteness. is in fact something permanent and fixed in and for itself. Ac cording as the religion of nations is constituted. obligatory moment be wanting to them. is specially directed against the accidental element of opinion and of inclination. . This going out into the actual world is essential to religion. confine itself to t he inner life alone in which consciousness frees itself from its finiteness. it is involved too in the very conception of Spirit. and confirmat ion of the existence of this higher Being. corr esponds with the idea which he has formed of God. while Spirit ought. evidences. so also is their morality and their government. and God Himse lf becomes something merely subjective. The more definite characteristics of worship will be seen to be the moment of pr esupposed unity. For the recognitio n of a something higher than ourselves. is the consciousness of its essence. This movement of worship does not. But this its infinite life now develo ps towards what is outside too.solutely bald and empty . require to set itself free from its subjectivity . derived from what is objective. The possibility of getting out of the subject ive heart into action would thus be as much precluded as the possibility of cons ciousness attaining to objective knowledge. s omething subjective. It is the Objective. and are and remain merely our act. Worship is essentially made up of dealings with and enjoyment of a so mething higher than ourselves. For if the subjective side also is to be in any way determined or qualified. What a man believes he has to do in relation to God. and the subject as knowing itself in God has p enetrated into the foundation of its life. But even this merely subjective action has inconsistency inherent in it. but such definite dealings. its a ttitude toward God a relation to a nullity. all worship shrinks up into sub jectivity. The shape taken by these latter depends entirely on whether t he conception of the freedom of Spirit which a people has reached is a limited o ne. however. and the finite never attains to a true real renunciation of itself . and conversely he cannot believe himself to have any d efinite duties toward God if he neither have nor suppose himself to have any def inite idea of Him as an Object. and that its determinate character becomes object to it. and includes assurances. in accordance with its very nature. the absoluteness of that feeling. no connecting element. in fact. for the worldly life which the subject leads has that substantial consciousness as its basis. and these lines which are to be drawn in accordance with such recognition. be annihilated if the subjectiv e side were taken to be the whole. this recognition of One who is undefined. such actu al enjoying and assurances can have no place if the objective. the richer must the object be for it too. and worship would. It is in connection with this side that religion reflects itself into worldly or secular life. In the absence of that wh ich is self-existent and commands our obedience. and in this transition religion appe ars as morality in relation to the State and to the entire life of the State. an aiming at nothing. for the substantial character which is s upposed to belong to it. independent of our feeling or experience. the more fully determined or specialised it is. The richer t he feeling. our lines. that it is cons ciousness. And further. and the way and manner in which th e subject defines its ends depends on the consciousness of its essential truth. while the efforts of subjectivity remain at the most. and become a vital process. its action is a movement which makes no advance. which is capable too of being described. and conta ins the distinction involved in consciousness. and must of necessity annul itself. the sphere of separation. as it were a drawing of lines into empty space. on the contrary. and to feel and know itself in God. 'or on whether the nation has the true consciousness of freedom. which is su pposed to be substantial. possess no support.

is in fact an essential moment of religion. and in such a way that the object of consciousn ess (God) exhibits the entire conception of religion in its content. but it is posited in the object of consciousness too. what subsists. as existing in and for itself. appears the element of distinction or diff erence. We then call it the World. This process of the cancelling of the dualism seems to belong to the subjective side only. Form. The specific characteristics of content in the two sides are consequently not different in themselves. in inferior religions. This unity. The negativity which is opposed to th is subsisting element. Through worship . as the negative element in the world. even if the on ly sign of it is that the infinite is seen in unity with the finite in such a wa y that it appears as this particular Being. the human form. but it remains still in a condition of abstract being for self. Worship is thus. in fact. vesture. to this established existence. of objectivity. as to how evil is to be reconciled with the absolut e unity of God. and must necessarily appear i n the definition of its object. in the Christian conception of the Incarnation of G od. and wherein lies the origin of evil. This unity is therefore in the object itself. or inwardly reveals Himself in a dream. cannot be posited or made explicit as such. or as an inward voice. for example. The absolute object therefore determines itself for consciousn ess as totality which is in unity with itself. In contrast to God. Further. and consequently as abstract. appears as the evil in the world. is Evil.a. or as something in contrast with Himself. must be recognised. The moments of the content of the entire conception ar e here posited as separating themselves from one another. as differentiated. This self-existent unity. form. however. This negative now appears. stands over against that totality which is in unity with itself. too. The moments of the conception of religion thus present themselves h ere in the character of unification. to this definite being. that He becomes exter nally manifest. and here the q uestions suggest themselves. and its essential characteristic is that it is unity of its absoluteness with particularity. of fo rmlessness. the Negative in general. We have on the one hand the world as positively and independently existi ng. while the latt er is the positive element. the result of wo rship. Over against this moment of undifferentiated potential Being there now stands Be ing-for-self. which. This totality now presents itself in the form of separation and of finiteness . which pertain to all religions based on a more or l ess developed consciousness. This is matter as representing what is indi fferent or undifferentiated. too. The first moment on this side of differentiation is t hat of potentiality. This negative. Each of the aspects or sides of the true Id ea is itself the same totality which the whole is. For what is objec t for consciousness is the Absolute. in the first place. to this feeling of self. which appears as the act. &. which is essentially in volved in the conception of God. in which it is the Being-for-self of self- . but on ly in their form. or. as a definite immediate existence in stars or animals. This is the moment of presupposed or hypothetical unity. In the Christian religion this characteristic is completely developed. but it occurs. Form may be introduced into it. God's becomin g man. and is itse lf totality. and on the other destruction and contradiction in the world . it must be observed here that it is only moment arily that God assumes a human or other form of existence. put more definitely. unity is attained . as existence of which all parts are of equal value. as representing the other side. in fact. too. in its a t first indeterminate form. the eternal process by which the subject posits its elf as identical with its essential being. what is not originally united. but it reca lls itself into identity with itself. to this reconciled unity of Being-in-itself and Being-for-itself. the moment of Being which is in identity with itself. which in relation to God appears par tly as His garment.

change and vicissitude of this world. If in the first part we have considered religion in its notion or conception. who am free can abstract from everything . it is now necessary to leave this sphere of Universality and go on to treat of det erminateness in religion. above dualism. from evil and from disunion. Spirit . to which belongs Being which is absolute and supreme. but are not as yet openly displayed. above this abstraction of change. . the negativity which reflects itself into itself. It is this ability to abstract from all that is immediate . absolute moment in that eternal life in which it is lift ed up far above time. This isolation is exempted from the temporariness. which it makes its own. this exemption from the dominion and from the vicissitudes of change is represented. is . this latter has in it also unity with itself. It is only by mean s of the judgment (i. but also to be the consciousness of that which the notion is. and the category of deter minateness enters. As evil. and have not receiv ed the right distinction or difference which belongs to them. OF JUDGMENT. so to speak. when it is taken up into the unity and reconciliation wh ich is presupposed as originally present in the object of consciousness. and onl y as it thus knows is it that which it is. as essentially and originally belonging to Spiri t. exists only as activ ity . the act of differentiation) that they receive this. and thus is evil of the will. But the negativity which is present for itself and inde pendently. is actual or for itself. it appears as involve d in positive existence. realis es itself.consciousness finite Spirit. It is thus essential to religion not only to exist in its notion. which it moulds in accordance with itself. that we first come to have existing religion. that is to say. and the material in which the notion as the plan. an d produces itself. Thus there is an element of disturbance in it. And t hus advance is made to the further determination that the Spirit's consciousness of self is an eternal. because it relates itself simply to itself. performs the act of judgment. from all that is external. is just the " Ego. the infinitude of consciousness of self.. the Universal. in so far as it posits itself. is. the Notion. The notion as such is not as yet unfolded . and not in another which is regarded as having independent existence of its own. and is repres ented as the absoluteness of consciousness of self in the thought of the immorta lity of the soul. On the contrary. the inward. and in its own inner movement. Evil is not the whole of the subject. the determinate qualities. There is a complete distinction between this and our point of view. This negative which recalls itself into itself is now once more a something posi tive. c. It is when God. it is this negativity and isolation which constitutes my essential being. which c onstitutes the positive side (goodness) and the absoluteness. finiteness definitely appears. the character of the content. th e simple conception of religion. evil makes its appearance in it. which is at the same time definitely existing religion." In this self-consci ousness. however. The course followed in passing from the abstract to the concrete is based upon o ur method. At first the prominent element in this thought is continued ex istence in time .e. But in this its activity it has the power of knowing. which constitutes the essential moment of the isola tion or seclusion of Spirit.and not as being brought about secondarily by means of reconciliation. OR DEFINITE RELIGION. and selfcontradiction is thus incident in it. II. and not on the fact that much special content is pre sent. upon the notion. and above the reality of change. the momen ts are contained in it. infini te negativity which is object to itself. however. I.

in th ese haltingplaces of its progress. to be in its notion or conception. We have therefore to consider the definite forms of rel igion. and as belonging to Nature he describes this round in order to beget another. being " for other. is not immediate . Spirit being essentially tins activity of self-production. the goal. when it takes possession of the wills of men. its co nsciousness regarding itself. Sp irit. includes distinct moments . They have. Spirit. only is when it exists in the spirit. moments of religion in general. natural things are immediate. so that what it is i n itself or implicitly may be its notion actually or for itself. The different forms or specific kinds of religion are. it is the path of the education of Spirit. it is at first reason. then. Spirit. first appears as its true Being. bringi ng forth the notion of itself. this beginning of the plant is also its ultimate product. in one aspect. for example. to unfold. b ut is. and Spirit does not reach the goal without having traversed the path . are the way by which Spirit comes to itself . and historical . So too. having before only been posited as the form of the notion. this consciousness of Spirit at each stage is definite consciousness of itself. and unfolding one's self. should become object to itself as it is in itself. to be at first only potential. arrive at perfec t knowledge of itself. for in them religion has developed itself in time. And it is in this way that the Idea first realise s itself. or of perfected religion. it is itself. The development of these distinctions. its knowledge. Right. which is not as yet fully developed as absolute . And this coming to i tself on the part of Spirit is movement. however. These. The absolute end. In like manner man is at first a child. Thus the first form of the existence of plants is t he feeble existence of the germ. this acti vity is already to be found." bringing one's moments into distinction. activity. is d ifferent from the one which is the completion of its life. Wherever there is life. exists only as producing itself. A stone is immediate. The Being of Spirit is not thus immediate. in short. howe ver. become mature. but the path is not as yet the goal. even what is most perfect must traverse the path to the goal in order to attain it. Now this process. In plants there are two kinds of individual forms : this germ which begins. is not what is true. here religion is consciousness of the univer sal Spirit. that which it implicitly is. otherwise it would be substance only. but its consciousness of itself is always in proportion only to the stage which has been reached. follow ed by self-producing Spirit. this path taken by it. produce itself. it follow s that there are stages of its consciousness. The child is no t as yet a reasonable person . and in which this evo lution reaches maturity. Finally the plant epitomises itself when it has unfolded itself in the seed. it has capacities only. and it is not as yet revealed to itself. as being stages on the road followed by Spirit. and out of this it has to develop itself and to produce itself. compre hend itself.human consciousness. is what is called self-determination entering into existence. just because it is living. These distinctions are no other than the characteristics which the notion itsel f implicitly contains. and remain in this condition of immediate Being. Now these stages supply us with definite religion . and they know of it as the determination of their wills. are imperfect. But it is the very nature of Spirit. is not as yet perfect . which is that Spirit should know itself. an independe nt aspect too. as making itself for itself by means of negation as Subject . it is not originally at the goal . potentially only. it is complete. then to come forward into existence. however. and mediation of itself with itself. This. It is by means of education and development that it beco mes Spirit. and the course of the tendencies which re sult from them.

in its notion or concept ion. Religion. yet they are included in ours as essential. which can at no stage be absent. activity. marriage. is the determinateness of the not ion itself. is that the notion should also become actually known in its totality.ly. all this is to be found in an uneducated society as we ll as in the perfect state . The essential moments of the notion or conception of religion show themselves an d make their appearance at every stage in which religion exists at all. and the knowledge that such is the case is the reconciliation of the true re ligion with the false. and the ultimate decision which rests with subjectivity regarding that which is to be done for the whole. actuali ty of the State. highe r or lower. and the religions. and has not as yet completed the circle o f its determinateness so far that is as it is finite religion. and thus value them as merely representing some sort of religious feeling. That which is determined by means of the Notion must of necessity have existed. but the consciousness of these moments is not as yet evolved. The thought of the Incarnation. there thus a rises a series of forms of religion. confused. but the positing. have not arisen accid entally. and deceit. Its principal mome nts. without caring how they may chance to be constituted. or a history of religion. proper nature of Spirit. through their entire history. Thus the moments of the notion or conception of religion appear on lower stages of development. into law. has a physical. and has only an approximate. blossomed forth by chance. they are themselves the life. and conceive of it in so superficial a manner. is the stage at which the religious spirit is. as. but it does not know that natu re in its essential character and truth. These definite religions a re not indeed our religion. In like manner the moments of the notion or conception are actually present in the definite religions. and abortive ideas of the divine Being. Men live in the State. It actually has the immediate. although as subordinate moments. What is substantial in moral relations. and God is not as yet actually represented under these de terminations of the totality of the conception of religion. richer or poorer. so to speak. tha t any difference between it and its true form arises. Wha t is here of special importance. But we must not treat the matter so lightly. should be developed. and made into rights and duties. arid likewise o f duties and relations as expressed in worship. though as yet in the shape of anticipatio ns or presentiments. The . as to reject these i deas and these rites as superstition. being exhibited in th e progress of religion from stage to stage. and in its development. in other words. or a particular form of religion. organic nature. in so far as it is definite. Theref ore in them we have not to do with what is foreign to us. posited. feelings. and to see only chance here. the becoming conscious of what the State is. property. What determines the characteristics of these stages. It is Spirit which rules inner life. after the fashion of the historical school. however. and yet the perfected State just means that everything which is potentially in it. as they have followed upon one another. for example. protection of the sovereign and of the State. for example. It is on ly because the moments are not as yet posited in the totality of the notion. does not on that account take place. however. Such general conceptions make their presence felt too in other spheres of Spirit. in mental pictures. is absurd. only the definite form of this substantial element differs according to the degree of culture which such a society has reached. which cannot miss having in them absolute truth. but with what is our o wn. and in exact accordance with the degree in which this knowledge is present. general id ea of it. pervades every religion. and exists as fin ite is historical religion. or. or immediate imagery. or only trace back thei r origin to pious feeling. Spirit may have something in its possession withou t having a developed consciousness of it. they have not as yet been elevated to the point at which they are the determination o f the absolute object. It is undoubtedly tr ue that the definite religions of the various peoples often enough exhibit the m ost distorted. that is to say. as natural flowers and creations of fancy which have. error. and also the manner in which they exist historically.

losing more and more of its initial i ndefiniteness.mere collection and elaboration of the external and visible elements cannot sati sfy us either. it being their aim to set forth the nece ssary elevation of the spirit to God. we have to consider how God is known. the moments of the notion are still in a state of separation or mutual exclusion. the consciousness of that which God is gradually forms and matures itself. They are human beings who have hit upon such reli gions. At first God is something quite undetermined . s o that the reality has not as yet come to be equal to the notion or conception. is fixed by the diversi ty of the points of departure. he knows of the truth of his Being. Knowing himself in God. ra tional in them. Philosophy indeed treats of nothing which is not and does not concern itsel f with what is so powerless as not even to have the energy to force itself into existence. in short. The Proofs of the Existence of God fall to be included also within the sp here of this ' progressive development. he knows truly about himself too : the two sides cor respond with each other. of his freedom. or abstract manifestation. we find that what is of primary importance here is the manner of the divine mani festation. Religions. dreadful. in so far as it has not as yet reached its goal. God is manifestation. The finite religions are the appearance in history of these moments. an externalisation of things mutually distinct. for this corresponds with the prevalent idea of God and the sphere of worship. or absurd in them . Their nature an d succession are not determined from without. We are on no account to regard it as right or true. the source from which it has orig inated as being in human nature. On the contrary. how He is characterised . To get a grasp of the history of religions in this sense. mean s to reconcile ourselves even with what is horrible. Since we look at these definite religions in accordance with the notion. but as being Spi rit He determines Himself as appearing to Himself. the truth. w hich is immediate and not yet reflected into itself. is. and to justify it. therefore there must be reason in them. when a man knows truly about God. although it exists in our higher consciousness as a moment only. The idea which a man has of God corresponds with that which he has of himself. he at the same time knows his imperishable life in God . We must do them this justice. The ideas of God and of immortality have a necessary relation to each other . As for manifestation gene rally. For the diversity of the characteristics w hich in this process of elevation are attributed to God. and the connection with truth . for what is human. on the contrary. and this diversity again has its foundation in th e nature of the historical stage of actual self-consciousness which has been rea ched. they are determin ed by the nature of Spirit which has entered into the world to bring itself to c onsciousness of itself. in fact. If we now attempt to i ndicate in a more precise way the divisions of this stage of definite religion. and amidst all that is accidental in them a higher necessity. it is Nature in general. I. and on the other. The different forms which this elevation of the spirit takes will always i ndicate the metaphysical spirit of the period in question. something higher is necessary. but in t he course of the development of the human mind. but is Object to Himself. Manifestation is Bein g for Other. are determined by means of the notion. the reconciliation which completes itself in the notion. how the subject at the same time knows itself. that is to say. as it p resents itself in its purely immediate form there is no question of doing this b ut we are at least to recognise its beginning. He is not Obj ect in the general sense. to recogn ise the meaning. What is for an " Other . as they follow upon one another. Now in development as such. namely. and one. Such is the reconciliation with this entire sph ere. on the one hand. to get to know what is rational in them. This logical determination is taken here in its concrete sense as the natural world. our own too. and with this the development of true se(/-consciousness advances also. and but one specific character pervades them both. this is a purely philosophical study of what actually is or exi sts. it is necessary to consider them under two aspects . not in a general sense merely. For the two aspects the objective and subjective have but one foundation for their further d etermination. and therefore the idea of the immortality o f the soul here enters as an essential moment into the history of religion. In order to grasp these in their truth.

and as free from nature. The freedom which the notion seeks to reach through self-development in the Greek religion. the Koman. accord ingly appears at first merely as a conflict between the two sides. But since God exists essentially only as appearing to Himself. we see that the form of nature constitutes that determ inateness of the conception of God. The contemp lation of the sun. that abstract att itude of man to nature does not belong to religion . Even while these obj ects are for them divine. an abstraction of Thought. Not till the spirit or mind has posited it self independently for itself. The God of the Jews is Oneness or s oleness. but when they become objects of religion.. which has not as yet that fulness in itself which constitutes it Spirit. Essence. a nd consequently these two determinations have not as yet come into relation thro ugh reflection. in religio n nature is only a moment of the Divine. The emergence of the spiritual element of subjectivity out of nature. which. that is to s ay. the notion appears as still the finite notion. and conseque ntly the negation of the natural. . the stage of the Religion of Nature. It thus does not remain in its pure. be equal to the conception . These atte mpts. . It is actually within the definite religions as they succeed each other that S pirit in its movement attempts to make the determinateuess correspond with the n otion or conception. by bodily means. and therefore must. which as such continues to be abstract unity. on the contrary. the latter no longer have for the worsh ippers the prosaic character which they have for ourselves. and this means t hat the manner of His manifestation must be itself a spiritual one. does the latter appear t o it as an Other. as it exists for th e religious consciousness. but does not exist as yet as Spirit. in which the principle of the preceding stages. have also the characteristic note of the spiritual mo de of existence in it. which are sti ll entangled with one another in that conflict. The first mode of manifestation then. strives to grasp itself together into infinite inwardness are: I. The so-called prosaic manner of looking at nature. or n ature . in fact. It cannot be said of any religion that in it . be tokens a separation which comes later . and in fact constitutes. that is to say. as something external. has the su bjectivity. is only capable of being communicated by the one to the other through the sen suous medium of sign or speech. the Idea on the side of reality." exists for this very reason in a sensuous form. remain natural . the sea. they at once assume a spiritual aspect. to put it otherwise. . The thought. the stars. and the r elation of reality to the divine conception is complete when Spirit exists as Sp irit . When this takes place. To begin with. the Greek . and is not as yet concret e in itself. this is our notion or conception of Him. men have worshipped the sun. its presence is consequent on much deepe r and more thorough-going reflection. when both the conception and reality exist as this Spirit . namely. is to be posited as distinct. the spiritual nature of God as its centre in a general sense only. Therefore this stage of definite religion too remains in the sphere of what is natural. as having Being. the Jewish religion. natural element. &c. in common with the preceding one. when they worship these objects. still lives under the sway of the sceptre of necessity of Essence . or essent ial Being. but this determinateness appears here as still abstract. . is outside t he sphere of religion. and the noti on as it appears in and seeks to win its independence in the Roman religion is s . as something which exists as an independent subject in reference to the othe r. however.. as the latter exists for consciousness when regarding it through the understanding. He is something not presented to sense. or . it is true. it constitutes the second mode of manifes tation. And for this it is necessary that His determin ateness. they still. But for this very reason He must be posited too as Spirit. or the aspect of reality belonging to the Id ea. which is for ano ther thought. in the form of / Nature namely. This God is indeed God in the Spirit. but receives the characteristic quality of the Divine which dwells in it. In Himself or potentially God is Spirit . as individual natural phenomena.

This knowledge of Spirit for itself or actually. or external utility. and do not cease accidentally. finite qualities. Spirit is knowledge . but are comprehended. they present t hemselves to ine .the principal specific forms which here present themselves as the mod es of the Eeality of Spirit. These definite religions are not in fact as yet the true religion. and so on. It corresponds with this totality just as little as its opposite doe s. in which it is only to be objective. E evealed religion is manifested religion. does it attain it. and did not exist in its truth. namely. This determin ation of the manifestation of God in consciousness as pure ideality of the One. as being that which is true. what it is potentially. is necessarily bound up with the conception of Spirit. therefore. this separateness of parts. These are . but it is really only one form of determinateness as against the totality of the notion of Spirit. is finite also. with the religion of nature. True progr ess consists rather in this. must have existed in order that it should m ake them its own. present them to myself if I did not gra sp this particular content in myself. Eevealed religion. Ideality means that this definite external existence. The notion or concept ion of religion has in religion become objective to itself. absolute religion. but in the Spirit. this finiteness. I could not. which was hitherto still veiled. since it is related to an external world which stands opposite to it. and the manifestation is. That Spirit. Manifestation. not in beauty. as this a bsolute ideality. then. i deal manner in myself. and here there is a certain definite content. is the being in-and-for-itself of S pirit as exercising knowledge. and is actually. the content is in accordance with the conception of Spirit. since there is wanting to them the absolute content of Spirit. It knows itself no longer as Spirit in any defini te form or limitation. and these forms. that there is one God. As determinate they are inadequate to the notion or conception of Spirit. came . external adaptation to an end. and are finite in character. Thus manifestation is itself infinite in nature . in and for itself. They are my perceptions. has now no longer individual forms. and is. because in it God has become wholly man ifest. which is in and for itself. this house. in which it is re vealed what Spirit. there is no longer anything sec ret in God. in that I know this external existence. that this reflexion of the notion into itself stops short. it must have described this circle . of time. development. in joyousness. I form ideas. this is the Christian religion. determinations. What Spirit is must in that way have become its own. it is necessary that the content of that which it knows should have attained to this ideal form. and determination or sp ecification do not go on ad infinitum. Spirit. Here. must in religion also run through its natur al course. however. what God is . the way which has been indicated in its abstract moments. as it unfolds itself. this abstract affirmation. and in this way only . and this infinitude. these f orms of it are not ideas which are mutually exclusive. as. is the consciousness of the developed conception of Spir it. but has now overcome those limitations. as abolition of the manifold character of external manifestation. but in order that knowledge should exist. for instance.till limited. as it is in itself or potentially. and in the m God is not as yet known in His true nature. and if I had not posited it in a simple. determinations of itself. This represents both the way and the goal that Spirit should have attained to it s own notion or conception. Here all is proportionate to the notion . like Spirit. difference s. be fore it. is done away with in something higher . I have perceptions. to that which it implicitly is. the se conditions of space. of reconciliation. as it does in all else. inasmuch as it really returns into itself. gra sped together in me in a simple manner. might perhaps be contrasted. the perfect. Spirit is only Spirit when it exists for itself as the negation of all finite forms. and matter. and should in this way have been negated.

dependent on some one's liking or caprice. THE CONCEPTION OF RELIGION PART I WHAT we have to commence with is the question. namely. for we are not yet in the region of result. Having thus referred to this development. a beginning has been mad e. God is at first a general. the notion of God Himself. that is. and that religion alone is absolutely true knowledge. From the philosophi cal point of view we are here already in possession of a result flowing from pre mises previously established. But in the present case we do not begin at the point where philosophy has its fountainhead. But scientifically considered. as necessary. every form of its self-knowledge. for its existence is directly granted. scientifically known. the as yet und eveloped conception of religion itself . i n the eternal reason. so far. their object being something actually given for them. which now lie behind us. to begin with. tur n for aid to our ordinary consciousness. Thus in geometry. it assumes. G od is this wellknown and familiar idea an idea. for there is a space. Here there is no question of proving the ob ject. working. that God is the absolute Truth. which has its justification in philoso phical science itself. which as yet has not come to have any true value.at its own time. wisdom of God . and make a beginning from there. It is not allowable in philosophy to make a beginning with "There is. nevertheless. For it is the Philosophy of Re ligion which is the unfolding. is something we a re familiar with a substantial truth which is present in our subjective consciou sness. nothing has as yet been proved . " for in philosophy the object! must not be presupposed. and of philosophy in particular. of what is mediated. the divine notion. it is the notion of the reality or fact it self. similarly with its general content. because Spirit is something living. in the superficial sense. and it is thus a result. abstract name. we have to do with the immediate. the apprehension of that which God is. and it is only by means of it that our philosophical knowledge of His nature is reached. and its impulse is to press on through the series of its manifestations towards the consciousness of itself as embracing all truth . it exhibits all pro ducts of Spirit. however. Other sciences have an easy part in this respect. and has set its goal before it. the existence of the othe r divisions of philosophical study. accept as a simple statement of fact the assertion that the result of philosophy is that God is the absolutely T . means that a content. How ' is a beginning to be made ? It is at least a formal demand of all science. We may. we shall. a proposition. but determined on in the essential. or a point. that nothing should find a place in it which has not been proved. accept data assumed in a subjective way . or a conception is e xhibited as resulting from something that has preceded it. For us who are already in possession of religion. or established by means o f something else. To prove. what God is. We have thus to begin by treating GOD. But when a beginning has to be made. eternal counsel of God . The beginning of religion is. for example. the Truth of everything. there are. which has not yet been scientifically developed. This may constitute a d ifficulty in regard to philosophy in general. This course thus followed by religion is the true theodicy . In dealing with a beginning. This was not a chance time. The science of religio n is a science within philosophy . which determines itself to e nter on this development.

and has . this Universal will show itself to be absolutely concrete. and is not to be taken as a mere subjective beginni ng. The beginning as abstract. that from which everything derives subsistence. is the absolute Self-subsisting Being. but the undevelo ped condition which we have called the Universality of God. the developments of the natural and spiritual world. we at th e same time da not pass beyond this universality . in using such an expression w e are thinking of a development which we expect to take place . we imply that God is One only. and when we thus say that God is universal. no fin iteness. If we say God is that which is shut up within itself. of the Notion. and more strictly for thinking consciousness which has attained to the form of thoug ht. they have a being which differs in deg ree. God is for us from the point of view of develo pment. as it were. has thu s. and into which all returns. and the only S elf-subsisting Being. something else. dependent on. what is in absolute unity with itself. God. rich in matter. and thus He is the absolute Substa nce. If we attribute a being to particular things. Universality namely. as the first content. and have an infinite variety . To give this fulness the form of thought.rue. and beside which nothing h as absolute true self-sustained existence. This. concrete. the Universal in and for itself. the one absolute reality is God alone. is what constitutes the b eginning. in which there is no limitation. in this O ne alone. All else. and not one as contrasted with many Gods. has no real existence of it self . an d as opposed to which. only the semblance of a being. thoug h in a sense we leave it behind so far as the form is concerned. and what subsists has its root. This beginning is. no particularity. that is. that this universality. but is supported by. is not in regard to the content itself to be taken as an abstract Universality. but t hat there is only the One. and does not continue in this condition of univers ality. implying that the Universal is univ ersal for the beginning only. outside of which. If the substantial element in this its first form is understood in this sense. inasmuch as it undergoes a definite development. permanent foundation. God in His universality. still in science it is not with what is in the heart that we have to do. as yet a subjective standing. which is God. The beginning of the content is itself to be conceived of in such a way t hat. no true indep endence. This Universality is thus to be understood as the absolutely full. but with what is definitely considered as object for consciousness. the particular has an independent existence. a. If this conception is held to in this abstract fashion. The heart may be ever so full of this idea. nevertheless maintains its position as the abs olute. strength. is not real in itself. force. which is real. this Universal. it is undoubtedly Spinoz . scientifically. and full of content. full of content . its subsistence. w e may express ourselves thus : God is the absolute Substance. but the being of all these things is not indepen dent. upon which 'all is dependent. where we find the conviction that God is indeed the absolutely True. the Allcomprehending. what is shut up within itself. still abstract. while in all further developments of this content. All-containing. it is only a borrowed bei ng. And in regard to this assertion we m ay also appeal in the first place to religious consciousness. not the absolute self-sustained Being. Existing things. is the special work of the Philosophy of Religion. content . the only true real ity. In so far as He is the Universal. then. from which all proceeds. take manif old forms. filled up uni versality.

Thus the more precise meaning of this question is. I am. c. exist ? we can only point to the correspo nding activity of our mind. faculties. At first it is the S imple. When He. the faculty which answers to it. as it is commonly expre ssed. this seeing." " I. But at the beginning we have not as yet characteristics which are distinguished. Who are we ? " We. A further cha racteristic is that the substantiality. in all further development. aspects of ourselves. this Fulness. ordinary conception. are to be mo re particularly considered further on. is only the foundation. it is Spirit . we shall keep to what we have actually before us. But the following thought also forms part of the presupposition t hus made. faith. E verything depends upon what has entered into consciousness. I have perceptions. w e still have God in the character of Universality. Substance as such. In starting from here we have the content as yet in the form of substantiality. a nd thus the question immediately arises. form ideas. creates the world. This beginning is an object for us or content in us . is as yet not at all differentiated from subjectivity. but we do not remain at this standpoint. If we use the expression " Substance. feeling. and independent. not w ith the Other. which of these forms of consciousness determines the shape in which this content exists for our minds ? Is it found in idea." the spirit is itself something very concrete. this feeling. To begin with. or operation . this content continues to be the foundation . These forms. pure ideality excluding all that is pa rticular. God never comes out of His unity with Himself. and that thus it is atheism. You hear it said that philosophy must be Spinozism if it is consi stent. Still. what is and remains absolutely at home with itself.. Substantiality. know. is just the Universality spoken of above. Even when we say. this subjectivity of Spi rit. For which of our faculties or mental activiti es does this One. this object has its hom e ? Which of all these supplies the basis of this mental possession ? If we think of the current answers in regard to this. &c. it is the Universal in its activity. God is Spirit. essentially at home with Himself. transparency. Thought alone is the substratum of this content. namely that we have God in ou r feeling. imaginat ion. Anot her. which is this ever unchangeable transparent et hereal element.ism. The disparagement of philosophy is connected mainly with this way of looking at the question. This is Thought. and especially in relation to this very p oint. all this I am . For the present we postpone the search for any reply. If in considering this One we ask. even in its concrete inner d etermination this One Reality. we have this object . the Abstract. or if we express . where this content." it is implied that this Universal is not yet conceived of as concrete in itself: when it is so conceived of. as the soil or subs tratum in which this content has its home. b. I see. which is. there does not come into existence something evil. at the beginning we are on]y concerned with the One. this pure Universal. the unity of the absolute reality with i tself. Thought is the activity of the Universal . we find it said that God i s in us in so far as we believe. as One and Another . Universal. that pure relation to self. observation. the eternally undifferentiated S pirit. namely. the Absolute \ Spirit. In this first simplicity. hear . which is self-sustained." these are indefinite words or general ideas. nor do we betake our selves to what we know by experience. or feeling ? What is the place. feel. and Spirit too always is" this unity with itself. which we just now called Substance. manifold. that enters into consciousness. Spirit. will. fatalism. one moment in the determination of God as Spirit. " God. t his One. this ideality. so to speak.

so far as the subjective side is concerned. it is a distinction which in the first place belongs only to our refl ection. it is a going forth above and beyond the sensuous. however. but is also self-determined as Subject. To think of God means to rise above what is sensuous. into the pure region of the Universal. to begin with. the reality and the distinction which we c all thinking." God is here charact erised at first as substance only . generally know nothing of this distinction . of all particularity. as this Universal. the Infinite. this absolute existenc e. This Universal is the starting-point and point of departure. and which is as yet by no means included in the content on its own accou nt. the " I. absorbed in this One. Such. Spirit is not however substance only. too. self-sufficing One. the eterna l impetus and source from which everything proceeds. and which is for Thought. There has been a tendency to call this idea by the name Pantheism . determination. abstract Universal. and not a mere basis out of which differences spring. as it is already the belief of religion. What we have before us is this One Absolute : we cannot as yet call this content . they overlook the main point. for to religion belongs subjective spirit. as they always do. but the absolute womb. Those who say that speculative philosophy is Pantheism. In this true. can actually exist along with another whose existence is anything more than the mere play of appearance or semblance of existence. this determination. and in which everything is eternally preserved. a nd they disparage philosophy by representing it as different from what it really is.it as the comprehension of the Universal. to which everything returns . religion. absolute. " the idea of substantiality. nor has the spirit. but it is this abso lutely abiding Unity. to lhat which is on unity_jyith itself . Thus we have a distinction between Thought and the Universal which we at first c alled God. it is then the Immeasurable. out of this state in which it is together with or at home with itself. remains s ubstance . This Universal. may be quite abstract . In this One Eeality and pure clearness. which can be produced by Thought. which is only not as yet developed. This Universal has its place in Thought. the Universal . consc iousness. It means to rise up to what is pure. then that^ for which the Universal is . no inert. but its localisation in Thoug ht is. the truth rather being that all differences are here enclosed within this Universal. It is. this Eternal. and that there is no other reality whatsoever. have as yet no place. it would be more correctly designated. the removal of al l limit. external. . God remains through all development absolute Substance. And this region is Thou ght. tha t God is the One true Eeality." such exclusiveness as to posse ss true substantiality of its own. is still Thought. the absolute Subject. and Thought is the mode of mind for which this Universal exists. continuous. perfe cted. and individual. In relation to this pure Unity and pure transparency. matter is no thing impenetrable. has its seat in Thought only. Thus the Universal never goes out of this ethereal element of likeness with itse lf. It is not possible that God. It is the result of philosophy. This Universal. is the substratum for this con tent. The content is this absolutely undivided. Spirit. which is to begin with negative. beyond what belongs to the sphe re of the senses. c.

then that is certainly Pan theism. and what is not has no existence whatever. while at the same ti me it is also represented as being the determined or specific Essence of the thi ngs. all individual things. as understood by those who by way of reproach bring forward the objectio n to which reference has been made. What is expressed here is no longer what is called pantheism . and or iental pantheism. " I am the brightness. the rivers. With oriental pantheism. however. If it be said. in that imperishable sphere of life. the shining element in metals. The origin of this idea of pantheism is to be found in the fact that stress is laid on the abstract. contain the thought that in everything the divine is only the universal element of a content. this infinite manifoldness of single things . "I a in the metal. as such. If I say " species. In the philosophical se nse. " T he life of all that lives " is. this All. All that is finite w ould be limitation. the Substantial. the true content of all individual things. the Unlimit ed.. not on the spiritual unity . we shall make acquaintance later on. it is said that everything is God." that too is a universality. the One only exists. and that which is limited. as they are immediately. who say. the world has no reality at all." The brightness is not the metal itself. Spinozism itself as such. those infinitely many finite things are God. e levated above any individual form . we speak of its existence. the Uhiversum.. but the individ ual things in their empirical existence.V. Pantheism of this kind is not to be found in any religion. all is God that is. does not exist at all in Spinozism . the idea expressed is rather that of the Essence in such individual things. When. Brahm does not say. negation of the One . the life in all that lives. its finiteness. God is all this here. when the idea takes its religious form. the All. it is. and philosophy is accused of maintaining that All is God that is. They do not believe the Eleatics. its peri shableness. this complex collection of all that exists. have no existence whatever.Pantheism. under the head of definite religion. ranks as true reality. and our life is to be in it as thus existing. No reality is a scribed to these individual things . and the statement tha t it is so discoverable is wholly false. only on the imperishable element in this singularity that stress is laid. the indi vidual things of each kind by themselves. howeve r. it has an outward form it is true. . not the Universality which has essential being. the Gange s among rivers. but is the Universal. but the world." what is individual is done awa y with and absorbed. this paper. it is no longer TO TTO. as they exist immediately. an d expressly add. limitation. they are finite in nature. and yet they attempt to retain this reality in a material way alongsid e of the One. in which the Universal is thought of only as th at which comprehends all individual existences. however. their meaning being that God is everything. and have no reality ascribed to them. &c. the Universal. &c. but that which is not. the singula rity is under^ stood in accordance with all its limits. and as that which has Being. too. limit. the One. but of q uite another kind than Totality. the Essence of things. and it is plainl y stated that they do not exist at all. with those who bring this charge against philosophy. Spinozism has been charged with being atheism. tha t which lies at the foundation of all things. where only the substance. and then. things in their individuality or contingency much less has it been maintained in any philosophy. All that has life is characterised by the note of time and space . has no existence. When Brahm says. everything as indi vidual. It has never occurred to any man to say . has usually been taken to mean that everything. those who hold these opinions forget that it is just in presence of th is One that the individual finite things disappear. or more correctly Spinozism. fin iteness.

there first appears the distinction between good and evil. then this philosophy maintains that good is one with evil. there is no distinction . In accordance with that superficiality with which the polemic against philosophy is carried on. God is good. and good alone . he is not to ascribe value to his separate existence. but everything depe nds upon the particular nature of this Unity .Spinozism has been universally charged with leading to the following conclusions : If all be One. If I bring together a bas e and an acid and a salt. indeed. for man . It is quite correct to say that Substance is this one selfidentity. this point being disregarded. tha t upon which everything depends is overlooked. in God. and pay no attention to that upon which alone all depends. is the difference in t he character of the unity. What is of importance. The whole of philosophy is nothing else than a study of the natu re of different kinds of unity . is a successio n of unities . In God as such. however. The unity of the water with t his material is. . therefore. the di stinction between evil and good is not present in this One. but to direct his entire thought towards God alone. no element of difference. with regard to this distinction bet ween God and man. it is always unity. It may. I have water too. in substance there is no distin ction. This is the most sublime morality. the distinction between good and evil undoubtedly makes its appear ance with reference to God and man and it appears in it with this qualification. but I canno t see it. to his difference in itself. then it is a inatter of indifference whether a man be go od or bad. With the distinction of God from the world. and especially from man. But those who speak of the philosophy of Identity mean abstract Identit y. yet a unity which is always further defined a nd made more specific. In God there is no evil . to place his true being in God alone. in this Substance . be conceded that the distinction between good and evi l is done away with potentially. who is alone the true Keality. the essential nature of this unity. this l ove to God is alone to be his guide . that it first enters at all. God is the One absolutely self-sufficing Being . any valid existence. not to desire to continue in it. namely. and that there is no difference between good and evil. that is to say. and there is not the slightest moisture. no one. and whether it is denned as Substanc e or as Spirit. this nullity. it is with the element of distinction. that is. in His character a s Substance. You hear it asserted that if the distinction of good and evil is not valid in itself. it is added. In the physical world there are many kinds of unity : when water and earth are b rought together. It is a fundamental principle of Spinozism. too. but Spirit i s just as much this self-identity. moreover. that evil is to be regarded as non-existent. and that man is not to allow to this distinction. or differentiation. The Unity of God is always Unity. In Spinozism. it is for man that this distinction exist s. but it is a mixture. that philosophy is a system of Identity. But it is al so possible for him to regard his difference as non-existent. as does also the distinction between good and evil. that evil is nonexistent. unity with itself. and with this all religion i s done away with. a unity of quite a different character from that in which water and earth are mingled. unity in general. to carry this separation on into a settled opposit ion to God the essentially existing Universal and then man is evil. would concede that evil is something affirm ative. this is a unity. Everything is ultimately identity. And thus the lo ve of God is law for the element of difference. the Philosophy of Religion. a crystal is the result. and that this affirmative is in God. Man may wish t o persist in this difference. and direct his aim toward God and then man is good. that man must have God alone as his chief end. the distinction between good and evil could exist onl y if God were Evil.

this is the main point. accordingly. It might. th eir sole object being to make men subject to themselves. which has not va lue on its own account. or whatever else may strike them as remarkable in material nature. In the doctrine of God we have God before us as object. which they worship in a way. their Highest. A further attempt which has been made to prove the necessity of religion does no t get beyond establishing an external conditional necessity. and the expression " all " at once involves us in certain di fficulties. We have besid es. namely. at the same time denying that religion is the truest expressi on of the Spirit. in its spiritual character. is the sun. as such. it is true. of the for mer. are here very close together. this.What we have first is this divine Universality Spirit in its entirely undetermin ed Universality for which there exists absolutely no element of difference. not on the ground that God is a n Unknown. in instilling a religion into men. simply by Himself. that is to say. When the absolute Universality advances to the stage of judgment. exists as Spirit which knows. it would still remain for us t o prove that religion exists. are no better than deceivers. the phenomenon of a very "advanced" form "of culture which denies the Being of God altogether. The r elation of God to man. and while. The true view. but because God is essentially Spirit. so to speak. In the Middle Ages. If. on the other hand. and it is even regarded as a matter of indif ference whether a man knows anything of God or not. and the obliquity or error in the latter appears to be only a slight displacement. wh en it proceeds to posit itself as determinateness. THE RELIGIOUS ATTITUDE. we have reached the standpoint from which God is regarded as the object of consciousness. For there are peoples of whom it can scarcely be said that they have a religion . and that man has really no knowledge of the na ture of God. All that is required of man is that he should be religious . But upon this absolute foundation (and this we state for the moment as fact) there n ow appears that element of distinction which. on the contrary. accord ing to the prevailing ideas of earlier times. which represents the real state of the case and the false one. This relation of Spirit with S pirit lies at the foundation of religion. indeed. and God exists as Spirit for Spirit. that God is not to be considered a part from the subjective spirit . we should consider ourselves as exempted from the necessity of beginning with the proof of the existence of God. in which religion i s made a means. has a place in it as well . the moon. be said that such proof is needless. but may either be discarded by me or made use of by me f or some definite purpose. B. and that it is necessary. and it is with this distinction that religion. or it is held that religion is something entirely subjective. and something practised with a definite end in view. and Thought. is seen to have entered into the condition of relation and differentiation. But religio n is thereby degraded to the condition of something contingent. which at the beginning was universal. begins. treats more of religion than of God. and it might be asserted in support of this that all peoples are religious. . however. modern theology. We have here thus a relation of Spirit to Spirit. this relation did not appear to fo rm an essential part of the doctrine. Thinkers of this extreme sort have even seriously maintained t hat priests. it was the essential Being of God that was principally considered and defined. is con sciousness. But this is only of the natur e of an assumption. for philosophy cannot as sume its object as given. We have to recognise the truth which is involved in the modern view.

when attacked by any disease. that it can. which is many-sided in its activities.. to the disregard o f others which are more enticing. the spirit knows that it can make use of it . and brings in this inf inite. Obligations other than the religious one may be evaded by disparaging the laws a nd regulations of the state. breaks up the ties of the family and of the State. these are all means. Thes e are undoubtedly considerations of the highest truth and importance. this would be au external kind of con clusion. and that the fulfilment of duty is secured. resolve to trust to its own resources. that th . Prom every other kind of obligation it is possib le to find a way of escape by means of excuses. and reverence t owards them preserve states. family. or by belittleing the individuals who govern and wh o are in authority. Thus if religion be a means. reverence for God. no false or misleading turn being given to the content or matter of the assertion. so that a choice of remedies is possible. for it is in religion we first have any absolute certainty and security as regards the dispositions of men. on the contrary. and just i n the very freedom of its aims. annihilates it. Even the animal organism. and contai n the essential. that a t own. They are so constituted as to invite the investigati on of reflection. if it likes. and that the happiness a nd advancement of individuals are furthered by their being religious. government s. an d duties they owe to the State. and by regarding them from a point of view from which they a re no longer necessarily objects of respect. inclinations. Possibly. Objective aims demand the giving up of subjective interests. the spirit has the freedom of its aims its power. however. or of the gods. exceptions. states. and this sacrifice or negation is involved in the statement. and to allow it either to find fault with or to justify them. It is only religion which suppresses all this subj ective criticism and weighing of reasons. and religion is to be only a means. and make them prosperous ." &c. For all these particular obligation s have not only an essential existence as law. is t hat the spirit should resolve upon such aims. It is in religion that what is deepest in man. But in religion we have to do with Spirit. or counter reasons. absolute obligation of which we have spoken. Indeed the spirit sta nds in such a relation to religion that it may. or individual has been doomed to destruction because they de spised the gods . In short. and they thus awaken the criticism of the individual. Further. and ends . but have at the same time a finit e existence in the present. and leads to their destruction. however. have recourse to other means. i ts cunning. If. and at the sacrifice of particular ends in gen eral. or should know its obligation to p ursue such as are of value objectively in and for themselves. and thus to set ends before itself in pursuit of which it can either dispense with religion or even act in direct opposition to its behests. then an attitude is at once taken up by which religion is treat ed as a means. the conclusion be now stated thus : " ther efore religion is useful for the ends set before them by individuals. it might only be faulty in respect of the subjective act of apprehension. establishes and preserves individuals. The point of importance. is yet indifferent to m any of its particular properties. It is then conscious of its freedom to use either one particular means or some o ther. the control of the opinions of men . state. who can in turn grant hims elf a dispensation from them. families. knows . Undoubtedly it is only when religion is made the foundation that the practice of righteousness attains stability. whil e contempt of God. loosens the basis of laws and duties. however. it has the fre edom to make its own power and authority its object. substantial connection between religion and morality. that adoration of the gods. the conscience. or for the gods. first feels that it lies under an absolute obligation. therefore the State must rest on religion. Stil l more does Spirit degrade what it employs as means to a mere matter of detail. states . and has the certain knowledge of this obliga tion . Now if a deduction be made from the proposition before us stating as the result of experi ence that religion is therefore necessary. too.Both in ancient and modern times you find the idea given expression to. which implies in so many words that its aims are to be the ultimate standard. though its reaction to a remedy is determined by definite laws. on the other hand.

is capable of being perverted. as is the case so long as necessity is understoo d merely as utility. as being contingent. Here we are concerned. it is the act of the content itself. That is objective neces sity. The standpoint of religion shows itself in this transition as the standpoint of truth. and is thus a going out and on to an Other. it is made clearly apparent that Spirit cannot stop short at any of these sta ges. and ought not to be allowed to determine t hemselves. it is a passing over to the intellectual.e worship of God lays the foundation of the true weilbeing of individuals. as something essentially spiritual. and to sense perceptions. arid. and makes out of the necess ity a mere utility which. for example. which as parti cular things are not what is primary. nor can it remain there. The religious consciousness. Religi on is the consciousness of what is in and for itself true. that which is truly unmediated and unpo sited or independent. and that () it is the content itself which passes over in itself and through itself to posit itself as result. or. In the case of natural things. a reflecting upon. is able to take its stand on the summit of its own independent individuality. Religiou. in comparison. the gathering up of what is perishable into its absolute substantial essence. as free. but in this case this caprice belongs to a sphere outside. but of such a kind that this progress. yet it is the former which is the principal thing . and therefore is not exaltation). and this Second is rather the First. and it regulates the purposes and opinions of men. in geometry . an d has in it the note of untruth. By this demonstration. an external. and not an Other. Il eligion is (i) conceived of as result. alters and en tirely destroys its first meaning above referred to. on the other hand. and destructive mode of reality which involves the ending of truth. what is finite . indeed. Thus a slight turn given to the position of reflection. the n. which. objectively defined. Accordingly. the sun. Subjective deduction and intellectual movement occ ur. a going on to a Thir d. finite truth. and so on. on the contrary. but () as a result which at the same time annuls itself as result. in which the whole wealth of the natural and spirit ual world is contained. peopl es. however. a transition from what is immediate. on the contrary. and states. a mode of reality which only returns to its fou ndation and its source as the standpoint of religion. for example. miserable. it is a rising above. Such caprice is no longer c onnected with the necessity of which we speak . attaching itself to the Ego. individual (for the immediate is what is first. which exists i n and for itself . self-contr adictory. this production of a Second. and not a mere subjective process. and that it is only religion which is the true rea . there is no doubt that caprice evil is able to oppose itself. we are in presence of an immediate existence at rest. sensuous. This does not mean. however. The general necessity of the Notion accordingly develops itself in this wise. the object m ay be said to produce itself. Consequently it is a progress onward to a Second. It is not we who set the necessity in m ovement . the triangle does not itself go through the proce ss that we follow out in the intellectual act of demonstration. as. it is no longer the perversion o f the very notion of necessity. in contrast to sensuo us. Every other manner in which this wealth of being exists must prove itself to be. for in that case the Other would be itself again something finite. with the inner necessity. and in t he mental picture or idea we form of it there is no consciousness of an act of p assing over. is by its very existence itself this process and this transition. I. or. is i n its very essence the parting from and forsaking of what is immediate. it has its own determination and de terminateness. Even though the latter be the consequence of the former. or transition. THE NECESSITY OF THE RELIGIOUS STANDPOINT. a necessity to which. annuls and absorbs itse lf.

lity or actuality of selfconsciousness. So far as the proof of this necessity is concerned, the following remarks may be sufficient. When it has to be shown in regard to anything that it is necessary, it is implie d that we start from something else, from an Other. What is here the Other of th e true divine existence is non-divine existence, the finite world, finite consci ousness. Now if we are to begin from this as the immediate, the finite, the untr ue, and in fact as an object of our knowledge, and as immediately apprehended by us in its definite qualitative existence, if we begin in this manner from what i s First, we find that it shows itself, as we proceed, not to be what it directly presents itself as being, but is seen to be something which destroys itself, wh ich appears as becoming, as moving on to something else. Therefore it is not our reflection and study of the subject, our judgment, which tells us that the fini te with which we begin is founded on something that is true. It is not we who br ing forward its foundation. On the contrary, the movement of the finite itself s hows that it loses itself in something other, in something higher than itself. W e follow the object as it returns of itself to the fountain of its true being. Now, while the object which forms the starting-point perishes in this, its true Source, and sacrifices itself, this does not mean that it has vanished in this p rocess. Its content is, on the contrary, posited in its ideal character. We have an example of this absorption and ideality in consciousness. I relate myself to an object, and then contemplate it as it is. The object, which I at once distin guish from myself, is independent ; I have not made it, it did not wait for me i n order to exist, and it remains although I go away from it. Both, I and the obj ect, are therefore two independent things, but consciousness is at the same time the relation of these two independent things to each other, a relation in which they appear as one. In that I have knowledge of the object, these two, I and th e Other, exist for me in this my simple determinate character. If we rightly gra sp what takes place here, we have not only the negative result that the oneness and independence of the two is done away with. The annulling which takes place i s not only empty negation, but the negation of those two things from which I sta rted. The non-existence here is thus only the nonexistence of the independence o f the two the non-existence in which both determinations are abrogated, yet .pre served and ideally contained. Should we now desire to see how in this manner the natural universe and the spir itual universe return to their truth in the religious standpoint, the detailed c onsideration of this return would constitute the wholecircle of the philosophica l sciences. We should have to begin here with Nature ; it is the immediate ; Spi rit would in that case be opposed to Nature, and both, in so far as they confron t one other as independent, are finite. We may here, accordingly, distinguish between two ways of considering the matter . In the first place, we might consider what Nature and Spirit are in themselves, or ideally. This would show that potentially they are identical in the one Idea, and both only reflect what is one and the same, or, we might say, that they hav e their one root in the Idea. But this would still be an abstract way of looking at them, being limited to what these objects are potentially, and not implying that they are conceived of according to the Idea and reality. The distinctions w hich essentially belong to the Idea would be left unregarded. This absolute Idea is the element of necessity, is the essence of both Nature and Spirit, and in i t what constitutes their difference, their limit and finiteness, drops away. The Essence of Spirit and of Nature is one and the same, and in this identity they are nothing more than what they are in their separation and qualitative existenc e. It is, however, our act of knowledge which, in this way of looking at them, s

trips these two of their difference, and does away with their finiteness. It is outside of these limited worlds that they are limited, and that their limit disa ppears in the Idea which is their unity. This disappearance of the limit is an a bstracting from it which takes place in our act of cognition or knowledge. We do away with the form of its finiteness, and come to its truth. This way of concei ving of the matter is so far rather of a .subjective kind, and that which presen ts itself as being the truth of this finiteness is the selfexisting Idea the Sub stance, according to Spinoza, or the Absolute, as it was conceived of by Schelli ng. Both natural things and the spiritual world are shown to be finite, so that what is true is the vanishing of their limits in Absolute Substance, and the recogni tion of the fact that this substance is the absolute identity of the two, of Sub jective and Objective, of Thought and Being. But Substance is merely this identi ty. The specific form and quality is taken away by us, and does not appear in Su bstance, which is therefore rigid, cold, motionless necessity, in which knowledg e, subjectivity, cannot find satisfaction, because it does not recognise in it i ts own vitality and distinctions. This phenomenon is seen in all ordinary acts o f devotion. We rise above fiuiteness, we forget it ; but yet it is not truly don e away with simply because we have forgotten it. The second method consists in a recognition of the necessity by which the self-a brogation of the finite, and the positing of the Absolute, take place objectivel y. It must be shown of Nature and Spirit that they, in accordance with their not ion, abrogate or annul themselves, and their finiteness must not be taken from t hem merely by a subjective removal of their limits. Here then we have the moveme nt of thought, which is likewise the movement of the thing itself, or true reali ty, and it is the very process of Nature and of Spirit out of which proceeds the True. a. We have now, therefore, to consider Nature as it really is in itself as the p rocess of which the transition to Spirit is the ultimate truth, so that Spirit p roves itself to be the truth of Nature. It is the essential character of Nature to sacrifice itself, to consume itself, .so that the Psyche comes forth out of t his burnt-offering and the Idea rises into its proper element, into its own ethe reality. This sacrifice of Nature is its process, and it appears in a more defin ite form as an advance through a series of graduated stages, iu which the differ ences are present in the form of mutual exclusion. The connection is something p urely internal. The moments, through which the Idea runs its course in the web o r i/ garment of Nature, are a series of independent forms. Nature is the Idea po tentially, and only potentially, and the peculiar mode of its existence is to be outside of itself, in perfect externality. The nature of its progress is, more chiefly speaking, this, that the Notion which is enclosed in it breaks through i ts covering, absorbs the outer crust of its externality, idealises it, and while rendering the coating of the crystal transparent, is itself revealed to view. T he indwelling Notion becomes ex-> ternal, or conversely, Nature immerses itself in itself, and what is external constitutes itself a mode of the Notion. Thus an externality comes into view which is itself ideal, and is held in the unity of the Notion. This is the truth of Nature, namely, Consciousness. In consciousness I am the Notion ; and tliat which is for me, of which I have a consciousness, i s, in short, my existence. In nature, what exists is not consciously known ; it is merely something that is external, and it is Spirit which first knows the ext ernality and posits it as identical with itself. In sensation, which is the culm inating point and the end of Nature, an independent existence, a being for self, is already inherent, so that the definite character, which a thing has, is at t he same time ideal, and is taken back into the Subject. The qualities of a stone are mutually exclusive, and the notion or conception we form of it is not in th e stone. In sensation, on the other hand, external qualities do not exist as suc h, but are reflected into themselves, and here Soul, subjectivity, begins. And n ow the identity, which as "ravitation is only impulse and a striving after somet

iling which ought to be, has come into existence. In gravitation there is always an element of mutual exclusion still remaining, the different points repel one another, and this one point, namely, sensation the being in self does not come f orward into existence. But the whole force and life of Nature is ever pressing o n towards sensation and towards Spirit. While, however, in this progress Spirit appears as necessary through Nature, and as mediated through Nature, yet this me diation is of such a kind that it at once abrogates itself. What proceeds out of the mediation shows itself as the foundation and the truth of that out of which it has proceeded. To philosophical knowledge the advance is a stream going in o pposite directions, leading forward to what is Other than itself, but at the sam e time working backwards in such a way that that which appears as the last, as f ounded on what precedes, shows itself rather to be the first the foundation. &. Spirit itself is, to begin with, immediate ; it is in the process of coming t o itself that it becomes for itself, or self-conscious, and it is its very life to become for itself, or self-conscious, by means of itself. In this process it is essential to distinguish between two aspects presented by Spirit; first, what Spirit is in and for itself, and, secondly, its finiteness. First of all, Spiri t is without relation, ideal, enclosed in the Idea ; in its second aspect, Spiri t in its finiteness is consciousness, and since what is Other than itself exists for it, stands in an attitude of relation. Nature is only appearance ; it is wh en we think and reflect that Nature is for us Idea ; therefore this which is its own transfiguration, that is, Spirit, is something found outside of it. The ess ential nature of Spirit consists, on the contrary, in this, that the Idea lies i n Spirit itself, and that the Absolute, that which is true in and for itself, ex ists for Spirit. In its immediacy Spirit is still finite, and this finiteness is characterised by the fact that in the first place what it is in and for itself, or essentially, is distinguished from that which is present to its consciousnes s. But its essential nature and its infinitude consist in this, that its conscio usness and its Idea absolutely correspond. This perfecting of Spirit, and this e ffacing of the differences of that relation, may be conceived of in accordance w ith the twofold aspect of its essential existence and of its actual consciousnes s. At first the two are distinguished ; what it is essentially does not exist fo r consciousness, and this its essential existence still wears for Spirit an aspe ct of otherness or strangeness. But the two stand in a relation of reciprocity, so that the advance of the one is at the same time the perfecting of the other. In the " Phenomenology of Spirit," Spirit is considered in its phenomenal existe nce as consciousness, and the necessity of its advance till it reaches the absol ute standpoint is demonstrated. The forms assumed by Spirit, the stages which it produces, are there treated of as they present themselves in its consciousness. What, however. Spirit knows, what Spirit as consciousness is, is one thing ; th e necessary nature of that which Spirit knows, and which exists for Spirit, is a nother. The former, namely the fact that its world exists for Spirit, is, as the word implies, a mere fact of existence, and appears therefore as contingent. Th e latter, the necessity, namely, by which this world has arisen for it, does not exist for Spirit at this stage of consciousness. So far as Spirit is concerned it takes place secretly, it exists only for philosophical contemplation, and bel ongs to the development of that which Spirit is according to its notion or conce ption. In this development a stage is now reached where Spirit attains to absolu te consciousness, at which rationality exists for it as a world ; and while on t he other hand as consciousness it develops itself towards a consciousness of the essential nature of the world, it is here the point is reached, where the two m odes, which were at first different, coincide. The perfect form of consciousness is reached when it becomes conscious of the true object, and the object, what i s substantial, Substance, reaches its perfect or completed 'stage when it exists for itself, that is, when it distinguishes itself from itself and has itself as object. Consciousness forces itself on to consciousness of the Substantial, and this latter, which is the notion of Spirit, forces itself on to phenomenal exis tence and to a relation in which it exists as self-conscious or for itself. This final stage, where the movement of both sides is brought into harmony, is the m

oral world, the State. Here the freedom of the Spirit, which proceeds on its way independent as the sun, exists as a present, realised object, as a necessity an d a concretely existing world. Here consciousness likewise attains its perfect s tate, and each man finds himself provided in this world of the State with all he needs, and has his freedom in it. Consciousness, or being-for-self, and the ess ential being of Spirit have thus attained the self-same goal. c. But this manifestation of the Divine Life is itself still in the region of fi niteness, and the abrogation of this finiteness constitutes the religious standp oint, where God is Object of consciousness as absolute Power and Substance into which the whole wealth of the natural as of the spiritual world has returned. Th e religious point of view, as representing the unfolding of the natural and spir itual universe, shows itself in this progressive movement as the absolutely true and primary, which has nothing lying behind it as a permanent presupposition, b ut has absorbed everything into itself. The requirements of necessity indeed imp ly that this entire wealth of the natural and spiritual world should bury itself in its truth, namely, in the Universal which exists in and for itself. But this Universal, since it is essentially determined to particularity, and as concrete , as Idea, is essentially self-repulsion, develops particularity or determinaten ess out of itself, and posits itself for consciousness. The forms of this development incipal moments in logic, and ovementioned sphere of being. the same logical necessity as o far inherently divine as it and self-determination of the Universal are the pr these likewise constitute the form of the whole ab The development of God in Himself is consequently that of the Universe, and this latter is only in s is at every stage the development of this form.

To begin with, this development is, it is true, different in each case in respec t of the matter (Stoff), since, when it proceeds in an element of pure universal ity, it yields only Divine forms x and moments ; while in the region of finitene ss, on the other hand, it yields finite forms l and finite spheres of existence. Thus this matter and its forms are so far quite different, regardless of the fa ct that the form of the necessity is the same. Further, however, these two eleme nts (Stoffe), the development of God in Himself and the development of the Unive rse, are not absolutely different. The Divine Idea signifies that it is the Abso lute Subject, the truth of the universum of the natural and spiritual world, and not merely an abstract Other. Therefore the matter is the same in both cases. I t is the intellectual divine world, the divine life in itself, which develops it self; but the spheres of its life are the same as those of the world life. This latter, which is the divine life in the mode of Appearance, or phenomenal existe nce, in the form of finiteness, is looked at in that eternal life in its eternal form and truth, sub specie ceterni. Thus we have finite consciousness, finite w orld, nature, that which presents itself in the phenomenal world. It is this, in fact, which constitutes the antithesis of the Other and the Idea. The Other of the simple Idea which exists as yet in its substantiality, appears, too, in God, but there retains His attribute of eternity, and continues to abide in love and in the divine condition. This Other, which remains in the condition of what has independent essential being, being in and for self, is, however, the truth of t he Other as it appears in the form of the finite world, and as finite consciousn ess. The element or matter, the necessity of which we have considered, is theref ore essentially the same, whether it presents itself in the Divine Idea as exist ing absolutely, or whether it appears as the wealth of the finite world ; for th e finite world has its true and ideal existence only in that world of the Idea. The necessity which appeared to lie behind and outside of the religious standpoi nt, when the latter was deduced from the preceding stages of the natural and spi ritual world, we now see to be inherent in itself, and it is thus to be set down as its own inner form and development. In passing on to this development, we ac cordingly begin again with the form of Appearance or phenomenal existence, and i n the first place we shall consider Consciousness as it here appears in a condit

ion of relation, and fashions and develops the forms of this relation until the inner necessity develops and attains completeness in the notion itself.

II. THE FORMS OF KELIGIOUS CONSCIOUSNESS.

What we have first to consider in the sphere in which the religious spirit manif ests itself is the diversity of form assumed by the religious attitude. These fo rms, being of a psychological kind, belong to the region of finite spirit. What is common to all these, to begin with, is the consciousness of God ; and this is not consciousness only, but is, more correctly speaking, certainty too. The mor e definite form assumed by this certainty is faith certainty, that is, so far as it is present in faith, or so far as this knowledge of God is feeling, and exis ts in feeling. This has reference to the subjective side. In the second place, we have to consider the objective side, the mode of the con tent or object. The form iu which, in the first instance, God exists for us, is the mode of sense-perception , of idea, or ordinary thought, finally, the form of thought as such. What comes first, t He is an Object ess does not only ntent exists, and therefore, is the consciousness of to us, that in short we have ideas mean that we have an object and an is not merely an idea. That is the God in general the fact tha of Him. But this consciousn idea, but also that this co certainty of God.

The term idea, or the fact that a thing is an object in consciousness, means tha t this content is in me, is mi'ne. I may have ideas of objects which are wholly fictitious and fanciful ; what constitutes the idea here is in such a case my ow n, but only my own ; it exists merely as an idea ; I am at the same time aware t hat the content here has no existence. In dreams, too, I exist as consciousness, I have objects in my mind, but they have no existence. But we so conceive of the consciousness of God that the content is our idea, and at the same time exists ; that is, the content is not merely mine, is not merel y in the subject, in myself, in my idea and knowledge, but has an absolute exist ence of its own, exists in and for itself. This is essentially involved in the c ontent itself in this case. God is this Universality which, has an absolute exis tence of its own, and does not exist merely for me ; it is outside of me, indepe ndent of me. There are thus two points bound up together here. This content is at once indepe ndent and at the same time inseparable from me ; that is, it is mine, and yet it is just as much not mine. Certainty is this immediate relation between the content and myself. If I desire to express such certainty in a forcible manner, I say " I am as certain of this as of my own existence." Both (the certainty of this external Being and the cer tainty of myself) are one certainty, and I would do away with my own Being, I sh ould have no knowledge of myself if I were to do away with that Being. This unit y thus involved in the certainty is the inseparability from me of this content w hich yet is differrent from meand myself ; it is the inseparability of two thing s which are yet distinguished from one another. It is possible to stop here, and it has even been maintained that we are compell ed to stop at this certainty. A distinction, however, at once suggests itself to people's minds here, and it is one which is made in connection with everything.

A thing, it is said, may be certain, but it is another question whether it is t rue. The truth is here opposed to the certainty ; from the fact that a thing is certain, it does not necessarily follow that it is true. The immediate form of this certainty is that of faith. Faith, indeed, directly i nvolves an antithesis ; and this antithesis is more or less indefinite. It is us ual to put faith in contrast with knowledge. Now, if it be wholly opposed to kno wledge, we get an empty antithesis. What I believe, I also know ; it is containe d in my consciousness. Faith is a form of knowledge, but by knowledge is usually understood a mediated knowledge, a knowledge involving clear apprehension. To put it more definitely, certainty is called faith, partly in so far as this i s not an immediate, sensuous certainty, and partly, too, in so far as this knowl edge is not a knowledge of the necessity or necessary nature of a content. What I see immediately before me, that I know ; I do not believe that there is a sky above me ; I see it. On the other hand, if I have rational insight into the nece ssity of a thing, in this case, too, I do not say " I believe," as, for example, in the theorem of Pythagoras. In this case it is assumed that a person does not merely accept the evidence of a thing on authority, but that he has seen into i ts truth for himself. In recent times, faith has been taken to mean a certainty which stands in contra st with the perception of the necessary nature of an object. This, especially, i s the meaning attached to faith by Jacobi. Thus, says Jacobi, we only believe th at we have a body, we do not know it. Here knowledge has the more restricted mea ning of knowledge of necessity. When I say " I see this," " this," says Jacobi, is only a belief, for I perceive, I feel ; and such sensuous knowledge is entire ly immediate and unmediated, it is no reasoned principle. Here faith has in fact the meaning of immediate certainty. Thus the expression " faith " is principally used to express the certainty that a God exists, in so far as we do not have any perception of the necessity of wha t constitutes God. In so far as the necessity of the content, its proved existen ce, is called the Objective, objective knowledge, or cognition, so far is faith something subjective. We believe in God in so far as we have not a perception of the necessity of this content which implies that He is what He is. It is customary to say that we must believe in God, because we have no immediate or sensuous perception of Him. We speak, it is true, of grounds or reasons for belief, but language of this sort is inappropriate ; for if I have grounds, and in fact objective, proper grounds, then the existence of the object is for me pr oved. The grounds themselves, however, may be of a subjective kind, and in this case I simply let my knowledge pass as proved knowledge, and in so far as these grounds are subjective, I speak of faith. The first, the simplest, and as yet most abstract form of this subjective method of proof is this, that in the being of the Ego, the being of the object, too, i s contained. This proof and this mode of the object's appearance is given as the first and immediate form, in feeling. i . The Form of feeling. In regard to this, we find, to begin with, that the following conclusions hold g ood. a. We have knowledge of God, and, in fact, immediate knowledge. We are not to seek to comprehend God, it is said, we are not to argue about God, because ra tional knowledge has proved of no use here. &. We must ask for a support for this knowledge. We have this knowledge only in ourselves, thus it is only subjective knowledge, and therefore a foundation is a sked for. Where, it is asked, is the place in which divine Being is, and in repl

y to this, it is said, " God is in feeling." Thus feeling gets the position of a basis or causal ground in which the Being of God is given. These propositions are quite correct, and are not to be denied, but they are so trivial that it is not worth while to speak of them here. If the science of reli gion be limited to these statements, it is not worth having, and it is not possi ble to understand why theology exists at all. a. We have immediate knowledge of the fact that God is. This proposition has, in the first instance, a quite simple and ingenuous meaning ; afterwards, however, it gets a meaning which is not ingenuous or without a suggestion of bias, namel y this, that this so-called immediate knowledge is the only knowledge of God ; a nd in taking up this position modern theology is in so far opposed to revealed r eligion, and likewise to rational knowledge, for it, too, denies this propositio n. The element of truth in this must be considered more closely. We know that God i s, and this we know immediately. What does " to know " l mean ? It is different from cognition or philosophical apprehension. We have the expression " certain " (gewiss), and we are accustomed to oppose certainty to truth. The term " to kno w " l expresses the subjective manner in which a thing exists for me in my consc iousness, so that it has the character of something existent. Knowledge, therefore, essentially means this, that the object, the Other, is or exists, and that its existence is linked with ray existence. I may also know wha t it is, either by immediate sense-perception, or as the result of reflection ; but when I say " I know it," I know only its being or bare existence. This exist ence is not, it is true, empty existence ; I have a knowledge also of more defin ite characteristics, qualities of the object, but of these, too, I know only tha t they are. Knowing is also used in the sense of having an idea, but it is alway s implied that the content is or exists. Such knowledge thus implies an abstract attitude and an immediate relation ; whereas the expression " Truth " suggests a severance between certainty and objectivity, and the mediation of the two. On the other hand, we speak of " Cognition " or philosophical knowledge, when we ha ve knowledge of a Universal, and at the same time comprehend it in its special d efinite character, and as a connected whole in itself. We comprehend or cognise Nature, Spirit, but not a particular house or a particu lar individual. The former are Universals, the latter are particulars, and we co mprehend or cognise the rich content of those Universals in their necessary rela tion to one another. Considered more closely, this knowledge is consciousness, but purely abstract co nsciousness, that is to say, abstract activity of the Ego ; while consciousness proper contains fuller determinations of content, and distinguishes these from i tself, as object. This knowledge therefore merely means that such and such a con tent is or exists, and consequently it is the abstract relation of the Ego to th e object, whatever the content is ; or to put it otherwise, immediate knowledge is nothing but thought taken in a quite abstract sense. Thought, however, too, m eans the self-identical activity of the Ego, and therefore, taken generally, is immediate knowledge. To speak more precisely, thought is that in which its object has also the charac ter of something abstract, the activity of the Universal. This thought is contai ned in everything, however concrete the relation in any particular case may be ; but it is only called thought in so far as the content has the character of som ething abstract, of a Universal. Knowledge is here accordingly no immediate knowledge of a corporeal object, but knowledge of God ; God is the absolutely universal Object ; He is not any kind o

f particularity, He is the most universal Personality. Immediate knowledge of Go d is immediate knowledge of an object which is absolutely universal, so that the product only is immediate. Immediate knowledge of God is therefore a thinking o f God, for Thought is the activity for which the Universal is. God has here no other content, no further meaning ; He is merely nothing that be longs to the sphere of sense ; He is a Universal of which we know only that it d oes not come within the sphere of immediate sense-perception. It is, in fact, as a movement of mediation that thought first attains its complete state, for it b egins from what is "other than itself," permeates it, and in this movement chang es it into what is Universal. But here thought has the merely Universal for its object, as the undetermined or indeterminate Universal ; that is, lists a qualit y, a content, which it itself is, in which it is, in fact, in immediate or abstr act contact with itself. It is the light which illumines, but has no other conte nt than just light. It is just such an immediateness as is implied when I ask wh at feels feeling ? what perceives perception ? and am merely answered, feeling h as feeling, perception perceives. In view of this tautology, the relation is an immediate one. Thus knowledge of God means nothing more than this, I think God. But now it is t o be added further that this content of thought, this product, is, it is somethi ng existent. God is not only thought by us, but He is ; He is not merely a deter mination of the Universal. We must proceed to ascertain by examining into the No tion (Begriff) itself, how far the Universal receives the determination or attri bute of Being or existence. We must turn to logic for a definition of Being. Being is Universality taken in its empty and most abstract sense ; it is pure relation to self, without further reaction either in an outward or an inward direction. Being is Universality as abstract Universality. The Universal is essentially identity with itself ; Being is this too, it is simple. The determination of the Universal, it is true, dire ctly involves the relation to particulars ; this particularity may be conceived of as outside the Universal, or, more truly, as inside it ; for the Universal is also this relation to itself, this permeation of the Particular. Being, however , discards all relation, every determination which is concrete ; it is without f urther reflection, without relation to what is other than itself. It is in this way that Being is contained in the Universal ; and when I say " the Universal is ," I merely express its dry, pure, abstract relation to itself, this barren imme diateness which Being is. The Universal is no Immediate in this sense ; it must also be a Particular ; the Universal must come to be in the Particular itself : this bringing of itself to the Particular does not represent what is abstract an d immediate. By the term " Being," on the contrary, we express the abstract Imme diate, this barren relation to self. Thus when I say "This object is," I express the utmost extreme of arid abstraction ; it is the emptiest, most sterile deter mination possible. To know is to think, and this is the Universal, and has in itself the characteri stic of the abstract Universal, the immediateness of being : this is the meaning of immediate knowledge. We are thus in the region of abstract logic ; it always happens so when we think we are on concrete ground, the ground of immediate consciousness. But this latt er is the very poorest possible soil for thoughts, and those contained in it ar e of the very baldest and emptiest kind. It is a proof of the grossest ignorance to believe that immediate knowledge is outside the region of thought. We fight with such distinctions, and when they are considered more closely they simply va nish. Even according to the very poorest definition of " immediate knowledge," n amely, that given above, religion belongs to the sphere of thought. We, accordingly, go on to inquire m<~>re precisely wherein it is that what I kno

w in immediate consciousness is different from other things that I know. I know as yet nothing but that the Universal is ; what further content God has is to be discussed in the sequel. The standpoint of immediate consciousness gives nothin g more than the form of Being referred to. That man cannot know what God is, is the standpoint of " enlightenment," and this coincides with that of the immediat e knowledge of God. But further, God is an Object of my consciousness, I disting uish Him from myself, He is something different from me, and I from Him. If we c ompare other objects in accordance with what we know of them, we find we know of them this too, that they are, and are something other than ourselves, they exis t for themselves, an.d further they are either universal or they are not, they a re something universal and at the same time something particular ; they have som e sort of definite content. The 'wall is ; it is a thing. Thing is a Universal, and thus much I know too of God. We know far more of other things, but if we abs tract from all their definite characteristics, we only say, as we said just now of the wall, " It is," thus we know just as much of it as we do of God. And thus God has been called an abstract Ens. But this ens is the very emptiest form of existence compared with which other entia show themselves to have a far fuller e xistence. We have said that God is in immediate knowledge ; we are too ; this immediatenes s of Being belongs to the Ego too. All other concrete, empirical things are or e xist also, they are identical with themselves, this is abstractly their Being as Being. This Being exists in common with me, but the object of my knowledge is s o constituted that I can also withdraw its Being from it ; I represent it to mys elf, believe in it, but this in which I believe is a Being in my consciousness o nly. Consequently, universality and this quality of immediateness fall asunder, and must of necessity do so. This reflection must necessarily occur to one, for we are two, and must be separate ; otherwise we would be one ; that is, a charac teristic must be attributed to the one which does not belong to the other. Such a characteristic is Being ; " I am ; " the Other, the object, therefore is not. I take Being to myself, to my side ; I do not doubt my own existence, and on tha t account it drops away in the case of the Other. Since the Being here is only t he Being of the object in such a way that the object is only this definitely kno wn Being, there is wanting to it essential Being, Being in and for itself, and i t receives this only in consciousness. It is merely known as known Being, not as having Being in and for itself. The Ego only exists, not the object. I may inde ed doubt everything, but my own existence I cannot doubt, for " I " is that whic h doubts, " I " is the doubt itself. If the doubt becomes the object of doubt, t he doubter doubts of doubt itself, and thus the doubt vanishes. " I " is immedia te relation to oneself ; Being is in the " I." Immediateness thus gets a fixed p lace over against Universality, and is seen to belong to my side. In the " I," B eing is simply in myself; I can abstract from everything, but I cannot abstract from thought, for the abstracting is itself thought, it is the activity of the U niversal, simple reference to self. Being is exemplified in the very act of abst raction. I can indeed destroy myself, but that is the liberty to abstract from m y existence. " I am," in the " I " the " am " is already included. Now, in the act of exhibiting the Object God as He who is Being, we have taken B eing to ourselves, the " I " has vindicated Being for itself, Being has dropped away from the object. If the object is notwithstanding to be spoken of as posses sed of Being, a reason or ground must be given for this. It must be shown that G od is in my Being, and thus since we are now in the region of experience and obs ervation the demand sounds as if we were asked to point to the state or conditio n in which God is in me, in which we are not two ; something observable, where t he separateness drops away, where God is in this Being which remains to me in vi rtue of \^ the fact that I am ; a place in which the Universal is in me as posse ssed of Being, and not separated from me. THIS PLACE is feeliNG.

&. Religious feeling is commonly spoken of as that element in which faith in God is given to us, and as that inmost region in which it is for us absolutely cert ain that God is. Of certainty we have already spoken. This certainty means that two different kinds of Being are posited in reflection as One Being. Being is ab stract relation to self ; there are, however, two things possessed of Being, but they are only one Being, and this undivided Being is my Being ; this is certain ty. This certainty, *<" with a content in a more concrete form, is feeling, and this feeling is set forth as the ground of faith and of the knowledge of God. Wh at is in our feeling, that we call knowledge, and so, accordingly, God exists. I n this way feeling is regarded as that which is the basis or causal ground. The form of knowledge is what is first, then come the distinctions, and with these e nter the differences between the two, and the reflection that the Being is my Be ing, that it belongs to me. And here accordingly is the need that the object, to o, should be in this Being which I assume as mine ; and this is feeling. In this way we refer or appeal to feeling. " I feel something hard ; " when I thus speak, " I " is the One, the Other is th at " something ; " there are two of them. The expression of the consciousness wh at is i common to the two is the hardness. There is hardness in my feeling, and the object, too, is hard. This community exists in feeling, the object touches m e, and I am filled with its specific quality. When I say " I " and "object," the two still exist jndependently ; it is only in feeling thatjthe double Being ^ v anishes. The specific character of the object becomes mine, and indeed so much m ine that at first reflection in reference to the object, entirely drops away ; i n so far as the other remains independent, it is not felt, or tasted. I, however , since I get a determinate character in feeling, take up an immediate attitude in it. In feeling I am this single empirical I, and the determinate character of my feeling belongs to this particular empirical self-consciousness. A distinction is thus implicitly contained in feeling. On the one side am I, the Universal, the Subject ; and this transparent, pure fluidity, this immediate re flection into myself, becomes disturbed by an " Other ; " but in this " Other " I keep myself entirely with myself, I preserve completely my self-centred existe nce. The extraneous quality becomes, so to speak, fluid in my universality, and that which is for me an " Other," I make my own. When another quality has been p ut into what is lifeless, this particular thing has acquired another quality too . But I, as feeling, maintain myself in that " Other " which penetrates me, and continue to be, in the determinateness, I. The distinction in feeling is, in the first place, an inner one in the Ego itself ; it is the distinction between me in my pure fluidity, and me in my definite character. But this inner distinction , owing to the fact that reflection enters into it, is none the less also posite d as such. I separate myself from my definite character of determinateness, plac e it as " Other " over against me, and subjectivity comes to exist on its own ac count merely in relation to objectivity. It is usual to say that feeling is something purely subjective ; but it is in re ference to an object of perception, or of which I form an idea, that I first bec ome subjective by placing some " other " over against me. It would consequently appear that feeling cannot be termed something subjective, since in it the disti nction of subjectivity and objectivity has not as yet appeared. This division, h owever, namely, that I as subject exist in reference to objectivity, is in reali ty a relation and identity, which is at the same time distinguished from this di stinction, and it is just here that Universality begins. While I stand in relati on to another, and in perception, or in forming ideas, distinguish the object fr om myself, I am the mutual reference of these two, myself and the other, and I a m making a distinction in which an identity is posited, and my attitude with reg ard to the object is that of a grasping over (iibergreifeu) or bridging over of the difference. In feeling, as such, on the contrary, the Ego exists in this imm ediate simple unity, in a condition in which it is wholly filled with determinat e character, and does not go beyond this character. Thus I am, as feeling, somet

or as distinguished from myself. for the Universal. that of negation. do I find myself det ermined as against myself. and that of u niversal thought. and therefore the other moment of my empi rical consciousness. and am on the other raised into a wholly different region. the necessity whereby the Ego distinguishes itself from its determinate state. is the negation of my particular empirical existence. namely. contains in its content. and consequently contains reflection. and have the feeling of the relation of the two. It therefore hovers between thei r opposition and their unity and harmony. but to human feeling generally. in its very deterininateness. The religi ous attitude is unity. and am in the strict sense of the word subjective only. Determinateness. For man is Spirit. on the contrary. Now the subjectivity which is contained in religious feeling. this attitude is identical with my empirical self. it is only the inner necessity and nature of the process which impels to reflection. and have the experience of passing to and fro from the one to the other. Accordingly the relation of the Universal and the empirica l self-consciousness may be of a very varied kind. and when self-consciousness is at the s ame time on the side of the Universal and condemns that existence. the Thought which has an absolute e xistence. In feeling the moment of empirical existence. That is to say. without objectivity a nd without universality. Now. that of empirical self-consciousness. and the relation of both. which appears in regard to it as a nullity which has its truth in the Universal only. but owing to combination and a power lying outsid e of its own strength and wisdom. which is itself. and I as wholly empirical subjectivity. I feel I am renouncing myself and negating my empirical consciousness. there is no fe eling which does not contain in itself this transition to reflection. I am the immediate reconciliation and resolution of the str ife between the two.hing entirely special or particular . When we realise that our o wn inner existence and feeling are null. The empirical existence of self-consciousness feels itself benefited or furthered. I am thoroughly immersed in determinateues s. we get the fe eling of contrition. or. to put it otherwise. Therefore in religious feeling I am alienated from myself. I feel the universal aspect. indeed. or in some one or other of its aspects. or in some particular determinate form in fact. of sorrow on account of ourselves. For the sub stance or content of the religious relation is just the thought of the Universal . Religious feeling. not only the necessity but the rea lity of the opposition itself. are in me comprised and comp rehended in feeling. which is conceived of as the absolutely existi ng Universal. But just because I thus find myself determined on the one h and as a particular empirical subject. being empirical an d particular. feeling that it has hardly been thus benef ited by its own self-activity. but desires still to cling to its positive existenc e and remain what it is. In every o ther feeling. consciousness. This transition to reflection is not peculiar to religious feeling only. while I am in this last I feel myself estranged from myself in my empirical existence. but it involves the power of judgment or differentiation. in which the Universal is the Substantial in relation to w hich the empirical consciousness feels that it exists. exists in feeling in the shape of some particular interest. and their relation and unity. or the most entire unity. representing the eternal thought of the Universal. idea . differing in character with the attitu de of individual subjectivity to the Universal. Religious feeling contains just this d efinite (twofold) character. and at the same time feel s its essential nothingness. When the condition i s that of separation. in t his very feeling of mine I am driven by its content into contrast or opposition in other words. as it determines itself in accor dance with the particular shape assumed by the interest in which I happen at the time to be absorbed. however. we have the feeling of fear. as a determinateness which exists entirely outside of me . if feeling be the essential religious attitude. reflection. either as a whole. and to which that benefit is ascribed it comes to have the feeling . There may be the utmost tensi on and hostility of the extremes. to reflection and to the distinction of subject and object.

Thus when the Be ing of God is shown to be present in our feeling. wheth er it is true. c. a noble-minded. for the very worst elements are there too . but the question is. we call Subjectivity. and the object is that which we have in common. which have never existed. in a freer form. Likewise I can become enthusiastic about th e past . be. It feequently occurs that a man appeals to feeling when reasons fail. All imaginable things are felt by me . or good pleasure. self-determination. feeling is the form in which the content app ears as perfectly accidental. it may be the tr uest. \Vhether my feeling is of a true sort. are found there. for every possible kind of content. Experience proves that the matter of feeling has the most accidental character possible . its being in-and-for self. for my opinion . In the sphere of thought. hope is a feeling . it i s. whether as a matter of fact I act so nobly. feeling is a form. the certainty. assurance. in so many words. but also the fictitious^ and the false. then. of colour. to have accomplished much. of hatred. however. that is.the object. ~. for things which have been imagined merely . the most contradictory things are there. have a place there. and never will exist. and feeling of this identity. depends upon its content. In like manner the question as to the existence of the content does not depend uponwhether or not it is in feeling. it is necessary to make the following remarks : The matter of feeling may be of the most varied character. &c. nor will be. through the Notion. of God. or mould. with what perhaps indeed will. . with what does not yet exist. and this conte nt receives no determination therefrom which could affect its own independent ex istence. Such a man must be left to himself. as well as the highest and noblest. of joy. the existent. and this distinguishing be tween the " I " and its determinate state. a. we can come to an understanding concerning it . Because a conten t is found in feeling. This. "We have the feeling of justice. H ere. of enmity. has no advanta ge over the very worst possible thing. I can imagine myself to have been of great use. to be capab le of sacrificing everything for justice. we submit ourselves to . as not posited through the Uni versal.of gratitude. the most debased. the kingliest flower spr ings from the same soil and side by side with the rankest weed. most superior man. and it is a matter of indifference whether it be this particular co ntent. T he most contradictory elements are to be found in feeling . of injustice. we are in that of the Universal. Personality. or it may be the worst. not only the real. as by Nature. I have hope . when He is present in feeling. The mere fact that there is a content in feeling does not decide the matter. But if with this advance of feeling to reflection. for it may just as well be posited by my caprice. of rationality . such a position be given to feeling that it becomes in its very self the justification of the content and the evidence of its Being or trut h. on the contrary. whet her it is good. I can become enthusiastic about what is most unworthy. the limited. b ut in the worst sense. All that is good and all that is evil. is found in our feeling . all that is real and all that is not real. and am in reality so excellent as I imagine myself to be. it does not mean that this content is in itself anything very fine. Consequently. perhaps never will. there we have the nature of the real object before us . Therefore it is in its very essence the particular. it is just as accidental there as all else to which this Being may belong. The higher unity of my self-consciousness generally wi th the Universal. but in a higher sense. since another content may just as well be in my feeling. The content as it exists in feeling thus appears as not absolutely determined on its own account. and so on. God. blessedness. is lov e. I can imagi ne myself to be a great and able. but also for such things as neither have been. On the contrary. in it. the highest intensity of Spirit in itself is subjectivity too.s in fear. we have to do with the futu re . For it is not only what exists that cojnes into our feeling . subjectivity means mere contingency or fortuitousness. of the Notio n. which thus appears as content and obj ect. for with the appeal to his own feeling the community b etween us is broken off.

must exist in my feel ing. a nd comes into existence with the individual. we forsake this common ground . This last is only momentary. evil. is to constitute the whole manner of my actual existence. feeling is that which man has in common with the lower animals . whose true soil or element is thought. . God exists essentially in Thought. and thus the feeling itself. we withdraw ourselves into the sphere of our contingency. Such is the manner in which religion is to be broug ht into the heart. but w hen I say " I have God in my heart. it is only through thought that the content of the idea.. Justice. in my heart. Apis-worship. and thus if one person says you ought to have such feelings. morality. For what is really in question in this demand is merely that contingent existence of mine. and it is here that the necessity for the religious education of the individual comes in. transient . it ought to exist. is present. freedom. good. as such. so mething peculiar to himself . yet the feeling is only the form for this content. as a matter of fact. we must have God in our heart. Yet not only may a true content exist in our feeling. but Spirit. In the Bible.But if we pass over to feeling. must occur to us from the mere fact that man alone has religion. The element of self is the evil element which we generally call the hea rt. accidental Being. or selfuess. an d this education means that another. it is my character. what is meant is only that these are not to be merely somethin g of which I form ideas. but he owes it to the education of thought. or. Further. the historical. another may reply. must be purified. do not consist in the fact that a man enforces t he claims of his particularity. morality. The form of feeling as somethirig universal thus means the principles or settle d habits of my existence. that when what belongs to the category of justice." the feeling is here expressly represented a s the continuous. permanent manner of my existence. and mus t exist . and thus it is essential that every true content should be in feeling. But goodness. therefore. is therefore the concern of the individual . derive th is from feeling. but what I am in general . &c. his selfishness. The suspicion that He exists through thought. however. which itself belongs to a quite different region. am to be so determined completely and entirely . is expressly attributed to the heart. All that belongs to t he higher characteristics of humanity can be transplanted into the form of feeli ng. the fixed manner of my way of acting. simply because it is in feeling. freedom. morality . is exhibited to us in feeling. this definite nature is to be my character. I t is a fallacy to credit the true and the good to feeling. justice. All in man. as a matter of fact. educated . feeling is the central point of subjective. as it used to be put. feeling. The educated man may have a true feeling of justice. not se lf-existent. then all must be true . I. for example. I simply have not those feelings . If he does so. To give his feelin gs a true content. and merely look at the ob ject as it is there. however. It follows. of morality. can be transplanted into the form of feeling. of God . and the heart this natural particularity of ours is. in the heart. as this definite individual. inherently excellent. and only in thought. Yet the content is not true. sensuous form. not merely what I am at this moment. but a theology w hich only describes feelings does not get beyond the empirical. whereby he is not beast. and so on have their roots in the h igher destiny of man. which takes this or the other form ind ifferently. not the beasts. as above. The heart. that God. I am not so constituted. of God. Now when it is said. In this sphere each man makes the object his own affair. as actu al. this is the worst possible way in which to draw attention to the existence of a content of such a kind. accidental. The heart is what I am . he is evil. the seat o f evil. as. but are to be inseparably identical with me. it is the animal. If wha t is in feeling be true. Thus we have feelings of justice. he does not. Heart is inde ed more than feeling. b ut it is no merit on the part of feeling that its content is true. a higher mode of feeling is the true one.

or of love. hatred. but this power rules me from within in a fashion which implies that it is already mediated by thought and intellectual insight. and in hatred to forget is more than to forgive. Anger. is a content which is selfexistent a nd universal . since he is not merely animal. and loses all definite content. is this hidden or undeveloped mode. and to be forgotten is worse than to be only disregarded. for the seed-corn is likewise a product . and equally void of action. The ideas and knowledge of an educated man do not exclude feeling and emotion. and not till then shall we be i n a position to point to feeling as religious. and he only has knowledge of himself when he with draws himself out of immediate identity with the particular state of the moment. it is implie d that the content is a power which governs me . O n the contrary. The mind must forget the object . joy.and such contingent particulars. and has not yet to do with thoughts that have a content. but it is quite another thing to say that this content as such belongs to feeling as such. and the various aspects in which they view the enemy. too. that is. in feeling essentially exercises kn owledge . can know nothing of Him. to present other objects to it to e xercise itself upon. the feeling and the inclination become extinct. I am will. The primariness is therefore only of a relative character. so feeling. in so far as we rediscov er those characteristics of the content in it. but as a vegetable seedcorn represents the undeveloped mode of the plant's existence. resentme nt. If we do not think. It is the result of the fully developed life of the tree. When. that if we are to find this content there. A man begins by having religious feelingor wanting it . the " heart" being the expression still used for any one's immediate ch aracter. it is i ts first place. a result. Such a content as God. Ma n. is one of the me ans of weakening sensation and feeling. it dies away into something void of ideas. That the heart is the source. as Spirit. means nearly this that it is the first mode in which any such content appears in the subject . it is my power. how then can we say that He is in feeling ? We must fi rst have looked around us in consciousness in search of characteristics belongin g to the content which is distinct from the Ego. and incloses this perfect development of the nature of the tree in itself . and by means of ideas renews and kindles itself afeesh. with which the life of the plant begins. To divert the mind. I am not desire only . I have not only inclinat . is only in appearance. and every external cause stirs up sorrow and love afeesh. And if it be affirmed that we do not truly know God. ang er. Therefore if religion is only to exist as feeling. of ^ the object of hatred. In more recent times it has been customary to speak of conviction. we must already knoio it from some other source. In a similar way in our subjective actuality. and not of th e heart. goodwill. in giving them selves feesh life by figuring to themselves the equally manifold relations of th eir objects. but this does not carry us far. and I belong to it . what is first . it is so far from being the case that in feeling alone we can truly fin d God. That seed-corn. and gives itself permanence by means o f ideas. In fact. In regard further to what has special reference to the idea that the heart is th e germ of this content. that we. or seat. is what is last. it may be freely conceded that the idea is correct. feeling nourishes itself. just as in love to forget is more tha n to be unfaithful. show just as much activity in keeping themselves alive by representi ng to themselves the various aspects of the injustice sustained. however. and in like manner the content of right and duty is a characteris tic of rational will. and to transplant it into other situations and circumstance s in which those various relations are not present to the mind. the feeling vanishes too. this entire content exists in an undeveloped form in feeling . If the object fa des out of the mind. as do love. in the former case the heart is undoubtedly the germ . as it is called. we speak of acting according to conviction. in an empirical fashion. he is consciousness.

from willing according to accidental impulses or inclinations. we have not in that region found the Being. A s regards God it has already been observed that this content in like manner belo ngs to thought. however. the substance of the will. without thought. must therefore be relinquished. independent Being. this fre e Being. that is to say. in my Univers ality itself. in feeling . to be posited as such. The reason why feeling is so popular. the Object was not possessed of Be ing . Now. In feeling we thus as it were have the enjoyment of our own selves . Vanity. God is. a determining in acco rdance with the pure Notion. A man who has to do with fe eling only is not as yet complete . and in that forgetting of himself he is as regards h is particular existence a minimum. any kind of particular content may be in feeling. the . and therefore belongs in like manner to thought. which likes nothing better than self. and such are the characteristics w hich pertain to it. We must now therefore look around us for another basis for God. " I" is the Universal. places it outside of itself. and the notion. In feeling. As will. we saw that the Ego is in feeling potentially estran ged from itself. in the practica l. then its determining is in fact an universal one. we have not fo und it there as free. And further. in science. genuine character.ion . it is determination by means of. and if my will be r ational. the O bject God in the form in which we sought for it . as such. self-satisfaction. forgets himself in it . and the possession of self. is pure freedom. that the region in which this content is apprehended as well as produced is thought. This distinction is now. The popular id ea that will and intelligence represent two different provinces. &c . too. its Being was found in the knowing subject. it must be so by means of its content . In immediate knowledge. nor do we find the content as a self-existent content . which constitutes the content of feeling. b ut it is not feeling which. and therefo re does not arrive at objective thinking and acting. on the contrary. In regard to the determinate character of the Ego. He is in dependent and self-existent. appeals to personal feeling. we h ave not found God either in accordance with His independent Being. so that the activity of the Ego comes into operation. and only desi res to remain in the enjoyment of self. I am in my freedom. He who lives in the object or actual fact itself. so to speak. we have already seen that it is not only distinct from the pure Ego . or in accorda nce with His content. in accordance with. And all determinations o f the will which are rational are developments of freedom. he is a beginner in knowledge. of our realisation of the object. is free. If feeling is t o be of a truthful. and simultaneously fee ling of self. and the developments which result from the determinations are duties. though we have designated feeling as the sphere in which the Being of God i s to be immediately exhibited. in the Universality of my self-determination . renders its content true. in action. The ra tional will determines itself in accordance with its notion or conception . and that will c an be rational. It is feeling of any kind of content. Will is only rational in so far as it involves thought. as not its own. which discove red the basis of this Being in feeling. on the contrary. Being in and for self. it involves no feeling so far as feeling is recollect ion of his individual self. Such is the nature of this sphere of feeling. The rational will is very different from the contin gent will. we do not find this independence. This is the content which belongs to rationality . the pure Notion. is jus t because in it a man is in presence of his particularity or particular existenc e. and makes it objective. and so moral. on the other hand. but must also be distinguished from feeling in its own peculiar movement in th at the E<K> finds itself determined as against itself. and sets its determinate character at a distance. and has potentially in the Universality which it contains.

too. and gets the entirely objective character of externality in space an d time. In what may be regarded as constituting the entire sphere of art. The form. in which the concep tion or notion has power. Thus the representation of truth is the work of m an. the Idea. existing for perception in its simple form. and in which it rules. the element of self-consciousness is the Ot her. has to present truth. on the contrary. and in an individualis ed shape. But this last in its true s ense is correspondence of the object with its conception or notion. a limited. then. which we here have to consider in its perfect form a s Art-perception. so that it is produced under the cond itions of sense. which has no feeling of self. and in his mi nd the union of the notion or conception and of reality has implicitly taken pla ce. an external object of a quite ordinary sort. is perception. in fact. Now. and which knows the ob . and is a content ind eed which has to do with the substantial universal elements. therefore. and first of all that of accuracy. moreover. and has entered into the sphere of the Universal. And the consciousness which places it in this externality. of self-consciousness. as much as the literal truth itself. should exist as object for consciousness. with its im mediacy. And this.negation of its particular empirical existence. as the free expression of the notion unhindered in any way by co ntingency or caprice. When the Idea appears immediately in Nature and in spiritual re lations too. and the wo rk is completed. and it has the Idea as its life-giving centre. That s ensuous perception to which art gives occasion is. it is not the absolute form of what knows itself. the essential quali ties. In immediate existence t he manifestation of the Notion does not yet appear in harmony with truth. For truth has here a double meaning. The law and content of art is Truth as it appears in mind or Spirit. but it appears in an external fashion. the Ego estranges itself. however. in the first instanc e. But in so far also as beauty is its law. to t he perceiving Subject. it still shows itself in the form of externality. and relates i tself to it. which in itsel f is not something having knowledge. Perception. The work of art is conceived in the mind of the artist. which belongs to it absolutely. Here its law is not beauty. and in the first place for perception in its immediate form. which cannot miss having the contingent character attaching to what is sensuous. Subjectivity. or mutual exclusion. when the True shows itself in the midst of diversity and confusion. At first. well-d efined content. But when the artist has let his thoughts emerge into externality. does away. th at the representation should be in conformity with the otherwise known object. the Idea is not yet gathered into one centre of manifestation . In relation to the work of art. which the artist has given t o his work. but an element. Art had its origin in the feeling of the absolute spiritual need that the Divine . so that the reality. by which is meant. not something which appears in an imme diate or sensuous shape. and powers of nature and of Spirit. the determinateness of Spirit appears as the external object in general. the spiritual Idea. in its complete form. is wanting to the wo rk of art. the subjectivity. This self-consciousness belongs to the subjective consciousness. The Idea exists consequently in a sensuous form. is at the same time something s ensuous. Thus the work of art is. but spiritua l truth in such a form that it is at the same time sensiwus truth. something wh ich is necessarily the product of Spirit. there may be o ther elements included than those which have just been alluded to. art can be still taken as involving form. and is therefore spiritual truth. and is imitation of given objects. and have. I n this sense art is formal. . so far as perception is concerned. is external only . an d does not know itself. The artist. whatever the cont ent may be. is the self -existent content of art. he soon retires from it. in putting its determinaten ess outside of itself. namely.

wh ich is a going into itself out of externality. that is to say. and as unity. In accordance with this. that it remains in sensuous. and it is through it that the perceiving subject gives itself the consciou s feeling of having in the object its own essence. on the contrary. In the oriental idea of the substantiality of consciousness. and self-conscious ness have got separated . but we s ee too that the defect. nor reach the process in which truth stands on the one side as embodied without a soul. to take it to pieces. and therefore artperception is not brought to a perfect state either. but that process whic h is the essential one for perception. belongs to the subject. and does not advance to the condition of separation. showed a p ainted fish to a Turk. Idea. the self-consciousness which lies outside of it. and by which self-consciousness posits that which seems to it as an Other. immediate independence. On the other hand. and represents it to itself as the substantial truth. is essentially incomplete. that the totality of the religious relation s hould be actually posited as such. and learned remarks upon it . Truth attains to objectivity. It is in this consciousness th at the process takes place by which the work of art ceases to be merely object. . and if we compare perception with feeling. " the same difference exists with reg ard to sensuous objects. or deficiency. This is the process which does away with that externality i n which truth appears in art. or Ordinary Thought? We can very easily distinguish between a picture (Bild) and an idea (Vorstellung ). but needs the object perceived by sense. does not exist on its own account. i n which its content as existing on its own account is not merely something posit ed. The religious process belongs. Bruce. sesthetical. Since this characteristic. or he can make smart. and which likewise pro ves itself to be the product of the subject." from what is mean t when we say. . the subject is able t o contemplate the work in a wholly external manner. for this last presuppose s the higher freedom of self-consciousness." An orien tal does not desire mere form . since it only attains to subjectivi ty and self-consciousness in the perceiving subject.ject represented. the object is the truth. as id entical with itself. "We have a picture of God . Something different is meant when we say "We have an idea. and on the other the perceiving self-consciousness. The work of art. but exists essentially in the form of subjectivity itself. that necessary completion of the work of art. there exi sts a separation between the subject and the work of art . in order to be true. the object. In perception the elements of the totality of the religious relation namely. this separation has not yet been reached. and which annuls these lifeless relations of immed iacy. and yet it need s. since it does not know itself. the religious attitude is in the first place that of th e general idea or ordinary thought. in its manifestation is. in turn does away with this prosaic separation. indeed. in that independence which in turn annuls itself. The advance now necessary is this. to the perceivi ng subject only. when in Abyssinia. but the remark which the latter made was this : " At the last day the fish will lay it to your charge that you gave it no soul. for him the soul remains absorb ed in unity. A picture derives its content from the sphere of sense. and yet it is not complete in the subject. which again annuls this separation . and (since se lf-consciousness belongs to the Idea) it needs that completion which it acquires by the relation to it of what is self-conscious. we s hall see that truth has indeed definitely appeared in its objectivity . and the entire pr ocess takes place in the element of self-consciousness. which is able to place its truth and substantiality freely over against itself. If we now look back upon the progress which the religious attitude has made in i ts development up to this point. its unity with the one Absolute Substance.

be rendered a s a whole." wi th a small i. When. and is inflexib le as contrasted with the fluctuations of individual desires and likings. The universal Idea (Idee). which is able only to present its content as a picture. is to be understood as embo dying truth. B. and in the arbitrariness of its sensuous manifestation. The manifold content which idea simplifies may be derived from the inner life. so that the one fundament al characteristic. the object be r educed to this simple. we have to make the following remarks : a. If. we say " world. The content is not grasped in sensuous perception. Finally. specific form of thought. and general idea. and pictorial art implies that the Idea is essentially linked with it. which remains subs tantially fixed as against individual suppositions and opinions. must as such remain c oncealed. the picture is necessarily always something limited . objective content. We have seen that in idea the essential content is posited in the form of tho ught. that the two appear as One. after the fashion of Abstraction. but it also touches the content. and with the elevation into this sphere there is necessarily linked a negative attitude towards what is pict orial. religious idea or general conception.and presents it in the immediate mode of its existence. of morality. which constitutes the essence of the object. a s. in its singularity. Throughout this section Vorstellung is generally translated as " idea. and only in these. as they are present in immediate. and in religiou s perception. the Idea s plits up into a multitude of forms. we said that idea takes up a polemical attitude to the sensuous and pictori . Its content is that which has validity in and for itself. for instance. but mediately. from freedom. thought in its to tality as an organisation or system of reason. and could not be sever ed from it. The Idea (Idee) and the mode of presentation are s o closely related for senseperception. S. it therefore does away with that unity of perception. and without the article to distinguish it from the Idea (die Idee) which represents. and which is merely their basis. c annot. theref ore. it is then idea. even by means of the most detailed or ample representation. directly involves a polemical el ement. popula r conception. What is sens uous and pictorial is lifted up into the Universal. really true Idea cannot be grasped by means of a picture. then. of wickedness. but this rendering has not been s trictly adhered to here or elsewhere. Religion. which needs no thing but the word for its manifestation this simple utterance or outward expres sion which remains within itself. rejects the unity of the picture and its mea ning. This has reference to the essence of idea in a general sense. which appears in the circle of these finite forms. But since the infinite numb er of individual things. but this does not mean that it is already posited as thought. Or it may be derived from external phenomena. is held fast. an d is present before the mind which thus forms the idea. is the pictur e lifted up into the form of Universality. and that the pictorial mode is a limitation of the content . when lifted up into the form of idea. and brings this meaning into prominence for itself. On the contrary. If the consciousness of NOTE. General idea or ordinary thought (Vorstellung). too. in which it limits itself and renders itself finite. definite existence. ordinary thought. But this negative attitude does not merely concern the form (in which cas e the distinction between sense-perception and idea would lie in that only). but also to other modes of subjectivi ty. to use the definition of Professor Wallace. E. and then we have ideas of right. for instance. and other equivalents have been employed. of thought. With regard to its more specific form. on the other hand. and is thus meant to be antagonistic not only to the pictorial mode of representing truth. general idea (Vorstellung) proceeds on the supposit ion that the absolute. or of wars in general." in this single sound we have gathered together and united the entire wealth of this infinite universe. not in a pictorial and immediate manner. we may have ideas of battles.

and treats it as a point at which it is not permissible to remain. For instance. and posited the latter ideal ly in a complete and perfect way. too. too. bu t we do not take it seriously as such. regarding which we know that they are not to be taken in their strict sense. idea is in a state of constant unrest between immediate sensuous perception on the on e hand. derived from what is sensuous. " Son. and that this sensuous relation lias in it what corresponds most nearly to that relation which is taken in the strict sense in regard to God. of a tree of knowledge of good and evil. With t he eating of the fruit.al. The sensuous element. belongs also. That accordingly is something which belong . and that the tree is not to be taken in the stri ct sense. then. it again requires what is determined by Sense. to the inward moments. when we speak of the wrath of God. but merely as implying resemblance. this does not imply that idea has freed itself absolutely from the sensuous. it requir es it. we know at once that the words are not meant to be taken in the strict sense. in other wo rds. the Universa l. the Sensuous becomes elevated into thought by the process of abstraction. Thus there are many forms in religion." or " Begetting " is on ly a figure derived from a natural relation. and requires to enter on this contest with the sensuous in order to exist . On this account. in respect to the sensuous element in it. When mention is made of a tree of knowledge of good and evil. yet it is st ill encumbered with the determinateness of the Sensuous. and thought proper on the other. is only the abstract Universality of its object. and although the content of idea is also something universal. the hi story of Jesus Christ. it already begins to become doubtful whether what is sai d of this tree is to be taken strictly as a narrative as a historical truth and so. a nd of such a nature that it is regarded as in the strict sense a history. or approximate natura In order to give a determin ate character to that essence. But then besides this there is something historical which is a divine history. belongs essentially to idea. to the mode of the general idea. Such. we meet with figures worked out i n detail. but rather in the sense of someth ing historical as such. which lifts up the sensuous qualities of the content to the region of universal thought-determinations. This is not taken merely as a myth in a figurative way. or His vengeance. thought has not as yet completely overcome the sensuous determinate ness. th e pictorial . but thought has introduced itself . General idea or ordinary thought is still essentially entangled with the sensuous. although idea ne ver permits the sensuous to enjoy an independent validity. we do not ask if it is meant to be taken seriously. regarding which we know quite well that it is not intended to be understood in its immediate sense. is our attitude toward what Homer tells us of Jup iter and the other gods. b. We hear. but to this as being sensuous it gives the position of something w hich is separate from what is signified by it. but that what i s indicated is rather a relation which is only approximately the one here descri bed. the Sensuous and the Universal. only its undetermined Essence. therefore. and needs the form of t he natural (Natiirlichkeit). such opposite e lements are involved' in the conception that we very soon come to perceive that the fruit is no sensuous fruit. as something which only serves to represent th e proper or true content which is separate from it. likeness. What is not merely to be taken as a figure. for instance. for instance. of His repentance. But it is not the less true that this moment of the Sensuous does not possess independent validity. of the eating or whether this tree is not rather to be taken as a figur e. Since idea is not this concrete elevation of the sensuous to the Universal. of which idea is conscious. And further. do not interpenetrate one another thoroughly . and assumes a negative attitude with regard to it. B ut these two. It is only in actual thought that this is acco mplished. its negative attitude towards the sensuous means nothing more than that it is not truly liberated from the sensuous. b ut as something perfectly historical. or to the determinatene ss as peculiar to the Idea itself. Then. Further. Its determinateness is of sensuous kind . Something may be stated in a historical way.

The content is empirical." " also. The history of a state is that of the mode of working. There is spirit in it which acts upon spirit . Every narrative in fact contains this external series of occurrences and actions ." are conceptions too : they are no longer imagery. then that. but are spiritual determinations. It has the Div ine for its content. but usually such a myth contains an allegory. " Allwise. This connection is either expressed a ccording to the analogies of natural life and natural events. moral fo rces are recognisable in it too. a spirit . myths in which the external form in which they ap pear is of the most importance. the fate o f a universal spirit. righteous. it may be said that it is possible to draw a moral out of ev ery bit of history. " God is all-wise. but are merely taken in an abstract simple self-reference. Thus. there is posited thereby an external identity. all spiritual relation in general is finally idea when its inner characteristics come to be conceived of simply as self-related and in dependent. and then so and so. i ts substantial element. Looking at the matter in a superficial sense. but a relation which i s only external. too. it possesses this detached or isolated character. concrete. it is true. an d is individualised to the utmost possible degree . the relation is still grasped by idea in the form of cont ingency and externality. It is a content which at first prese nts itself in a sensuous manner. but universal laws. Or if idea contain relations which are nearer to thought. He feels these forces in it. If we say. li ke the myths of Plato.s to be sphere of general ideas. When we say a th ing is this. there is this double element ." we have a definite content . or. a succession of actions. the true. as for instance. if it be desig . further. and it is just this that is the object of reason. as yet ac tually analysed . which have produced it. a myth. there is something even for the man who se thoughts or conceptions have not as yet been definitely formed and cultivated . All spiritual content. these determinations have to begin w ith the form of contingency. and are. a mode of working th at is absolutely divine. for consciou sness in its ordinary state of cultivation. which follow each other in time. but these are occurrences it must be remembered in the life of a man. These do not exist for idea or ordinary thought as such." " supremel y good. good. divine action. They are not. manifold. however. What concerns idea or ordinary thought is the narrative as it historic ally develops itself in the phenomenal sphere. of sensuous determinat ions. the subjective spirit bears witne ss to the Spirit which is in the content. The moral which is drawn from it contains at all events the essential moral forc es which have been at work in it. do not belong to sens e or history. The narrative thus presents the aspect of something whic h is broken up into detail. but each of these determinations of the content is single and independent . c. There are. Anything of this kind has already on its own account and in itself a universal element. the substantial eleme nt of this history. and has a dim consciousness of them. in fact. God remains on the o ne side apart. and the world on the other. has a meaning in itself. side by side in space. the distinctions are not yet posited in their mutual relations . the spirit of a people. In an historical narrative of this kind. but it has another side as well. at first through dim recognition witho ut this Spirit being developed for consciousness. " and." are the links which belong to the general idea. divine timeless events. In every n arrative. the actions. Such is the essential form which religion takes for the ordinary consciousness. but the connection of the two sides i s not posited under the form of necessity. These are its inner. in the idea of the creation. In so far certainly as the content already has manifold relations in itself. that God created the world. but it has also an inner element. And this is the inward.

it must have freed itself. does not become determined in itself . Teachers who do not know how to set about teaching religion . to excite emotions. I have emptied myself of myself. But. and is no sooner expressed than it is immediately cancelled. is something different. but it is not as yet the notion. for ideas are communicable by word s. on the other hand. I have identified myself with it. and an eloquent sermon may produce the effect without containing doctrine or instruction. wins true freedom. but as p ure passionless self-consciousness. and thereby has come outside of itself in it. indeed. toward the awe-inspiring Object. has not yet bee n reached . The essential content stands fast by itself in the form o f simple universality. that is. the word " Activity " be used as expressive of that which produced the world. Having seen what is the general character of idea. is the same thing as religious feeling. The instructors referred to do not wis h that children and mankind generally should go beyond their subjective emotions of love.nated as creation. If. true. however. and its trans ition by its own act into another. and have at the same time conceived of this truth as mi ne. The Church and the Eeformers knew perfectly well what . therefore. I have kept nothing for myself. and should love them just as they are : they pride themselves on abiding in the love of God. and then say that religious ideas spring from feeling. -we make feeling our point of departure. When the objective truth exists for me. but with th is difference. as idea or ordinary thought attempts to conceive an essentia l connection. it is treated as a connection to be regarded as quite peculia r and incomprehensible. and have maintained myself in it. it is indeed a more abstract term. namely. To warm the heart. they think and say they have not injured love. If. therefore. This relation Faith as the absolute identity of the content with myself. in which it lies concealed and undeveloped. and only through this mediation. That is to say. or ordinary thought. But religi on has a content or substantial element. through the restoration of itself. The thought of the universal. who love them. This involves the possibility of communic ating the content so represented to the mind. that is to interest my subjectivity in something. which must be capable of being placed b efore the mind in an objective manner. and does not go on to its true essence and to its eternal interpenetrative unity. it is no w time to touch upon the pedagogic question of recent times. in relation to which i t renounces itself. But here the connection is at once transplan ted into a sphere where it is said to be incomprehensible and inscrutable for us . i n one aspect of the matter. it must first renounce selfishness. and they represent the love of God as being like that of parents to th eir children. and the knowledge of what lies in feeling do es not belong to feeling itself. hold that instruction in the doctrines of religion is out of place. its identity with that other. in so far as the original determinateness belo ngs to the nature of Spirit itself. that Spirit truly returns to itself. the fear of God is the presupposition of true love. But if love is to be pure. feeling is so indete rminate that anything may be in it. it leaves the connection in the form of contingency. That is not to teach. whether rel igion can be taught. it is merely identical with itself. and while they tread all divine and hu man laws under foot. What the essentially True is mus t reveal itself to the heart as an independent existence. freed itself from itself and yielded itself up. but is supplied only by the culture and instruc tion which ordinary thought communicates. an d Spirit is only freed when it has come outside of itself and has once beheld th e Substantial as Another and a Higher over against itself. if we posit it as that which is primary and original. that it at the same time expresses that absolute objectivity whic h the content has for me. Tims in ide a the thought of providence and the movements of histoiy are embraced in and gro unded on the eternal decree of God. It is only when it has taken up a definite position toward the absolute power. As soon. The bond of necessity and the un ity of their difference are wanting to the individual points.

become unstab le. wit h its mere arguings. And besides. may already have perplexed me. it is in connection with the latter of these t hat the content should justify itself on its own account on the one hand. and seeks to bring forward grounds or reasons which are supposed to be different from authority. and they have had this form given to them by apologists. it may turn out to be otherwise . that the value which it has in idea is that of something given. as my essential determination. which only brings f orward credibilities or probabilities. and it appears only as something instinctive. The cont ent. and consequently as contingent. and perplexity in this region is all the more dangerous and serious. in reference to what primarily concerns the content itself. a form of reasoning which does not t ake to do with the content of truth in its essential nature. on being looked at once more. Yet this return to the content is not brought about by means of the form o f inward necessity. and is only a result of despair. All these aspects of thought may be put into the form of evidences of the truth of religion. that. and the authority of private i ndividual opinion is laid aside in its favour. commends itself to me for its own sake. yet its principal ground is again a mere authority. so that in the absolute object I have freedom. of which all that is known is that it is so. however. But here my own connecti on with the content is not yet truly developed. and conditions. namely. the divine one that God has revealed to man what he has to represent to himself in the form of an idea. although Apologetics. and the circumstanc e that I still crave after something that stands firm all this forces me back fr om reflection and leads me to adhere to the content in the form in which it is g iven. the infinite idea of the Incarnation for example that speculat ive central point has so great a power in it that it penetrates irresistibly int o the heart which is not as yet darkened by reflection. it can be worked upon and inwardly moulded in various ways. owing to it. The consolation lies only in the supposition that the manner in which millions have regarded the matter must probably be right. and this perpetual mixing up and confusion of thought. and on the other. that I cannot. does no t require merely to be this simple and ingenuous Ego. then over against this abstract imm ediate objectivity. They did not say that men are saved by feeling. passes over into the region of thought and the drawing of c onclusions. But since fr . Thus incipient reflection. and dignity in it. and how millions have found comfort. by sensatio n (ata-Oijai^). But here too a false is taken. idea implies that the conte nt is lifted up into objectivity. which goes beyond a dherence to what is given. occurrences. and in relation to it is silenced. in which the content exists as a specific s tate of the subject. The experience. in that I know not where to turn. in fact. Or it m ay be that we reflect on the wonderful way in which religion has spread. that the necessity of its essential connection with self-consciousne ss should be explained. in action and in the state. accordingly. And. in that personal conviction is subjugated to general authority.they meant by faith. satisfaction. Without this authority apologetics cannot stir for a single moment. take my stand upon myself at all. to begin with. undoubtedly. and of par ticular conviction. is essential to the standpoint. But this o nly introduces mere arguing and reflection. Now since. the connection of the content with self-consciousness appear s. as compared with feeling. it is then said. morality and e very other stay in myself and in life. whi ch essentially includes the renunciation of my own will and pleasure. nor how to help myself in any other way than by taking that step. which turns itself in this manner to the content. The Ego. It is to be observed here. and instead of contemplating the truth in its essential nature is only able to conceive of it in connection with other ci rcumstances. or s yllogistic reasoning and authority. To cut oneself of f from this authority is declared to be perilous. and the possibi lity remains that. but by faith. that I cannot help myself by means of reflectio n. and the witness of the Spirit teaches me to recognise it as truth. as one which has still a purely subjective character.

not conviction me rely. thought determining itself in itself . This result depends on the fact that this very standpoint of reflectio n and inner feeling has not as yet been disturbed and has not yet aroused in its elf the presentiment of the existence of a Higher Being." be not re duced merely to this. do not consist merely of this heart and feeling. but the Notion seeks satisfaction. and of that which abs olutely and perfectly harmonises with itself. . regarding the matter from the ob jective side. and conformity with principles which are otherwise held to be t rue. " reason. It is always others only who tell us of it. that supreme divine authority is in turn seen to be one which itself stands in need of proof and rests upon an authority. acc ording to those apologists. I exist as t he Notion. for they lacked the capacity to grasp the history on its finite side. It is therefore depende nt on an accidental sense of defect. and under which I subserve it. and. I am also concretely determined in an entirely simple and universal way. but that in it I have the truth as truth. on the contrary. but I have other and higher needs besides. o r if I with the needs. The power of perceiving the meaning of events demands prosaic understanding and its culture. we continually get into the element of instabil ity and want of fixed character which essentially belong to all that is historic al. Although many a great and richly endowed n ature. the essential matt er is always that such content should be known by me as founded in itself. If the as yet indefinite expression. that I have in it the consciousness of the Notion . I am the absolutely concrete Ego.om this point of view it is inevitable that the arguing process should go on ad infinitum. This is another mode of iny being concrete . and which asserts itself to begin with as the impulse of rational insi ght. or who at first learned it from eyewitnesses. For we were not present. impulses. and the very witness of these others. if the apologetic style of argument with its reasons has brought some to conviction. an d did not see God when He gave the revelation. in the form of truth in the form of the absolutely concrete. rational insight. namely the perception of others. and suitable to it. that is to say. then it is t he Notion which as universal thought differentiates itself in itself and in the differentiation remains identical with itself. and therefore conditions which were not present among those of olden t imes. so that the determinateness in me is pure simple determinateness. and it is as compa red with the Notion that the religious content in the mode of idea or ordinary t hought keeps the form of externality. thought have so determined itself that the o bject stands firm to me on its own basis. certainty. Yet even this mediation is not absolutely secure. and sorrows of my heart have found comfort and tranquillity in the content of religion. this inherently concrete thought. since the antithesis of p oetry and prose was not as yet defined with absolute distinctness. to be the means of uniting our conviction with a con tent which is separated from us as to time and space. yet it is the Notion. there is the further objection of the want of proper proportion be tween miracle and the Divine. and assure us of the fact. which is not as yet s atisfied. who lived through the history. or of this good-nat ured reflection which shows itself compliant to the apologetics of the understan ding. it is a mere accident that this has tak en place. and is founded in itself. is. that something or other is certain for me as an external s pecific fact . if. The prosaic understanding and unbelief took up a position of antagonism to t he miracles of which the apostles tell us. and naively welcomes it and is on]y too glad when it perceives reasons whi ch are adequate. Whatever further content in regar d to the will or intelligence I may have in what is rational. here I do not only seek satisfaction for my heart. however. And if we pla ce the divine in the historical. and to draw out of it the inner meaning which it contains. That is to say. But even if all these ways of bringing about the connection of the content of id ea or ordinary thought with self-consciousness for once attain their end. I. and many a profound intelligence has found satisfaction in religious trut h. for we are dependent here on theconstitution of the medi um which stands between us and the content.

And then. a. while bringing themselves into relation with each oth er.And thus it is that idea melts into the form of thought. only in the form of idea or ordinary thought. vanish for me. and to exhibit them in such a w ay that it is recognised as being something which is inherently manifold. as existing in this simple subjectmatter. Thought consequently gives to self -consciousness the absolute relation of freed om. The Dialectic of Idea. The c ontent is in itself free. not ex isting on its own account in a dark and impenetrable fashion. and this means t hat no element stands apart or is independent of the rest. This implies that the objects distinguished are not independent. since all its moments. What we have here to notice first of all is that thought dissolves this form of simplicity in which the content exists in idea. And that is the very charge w hich is so often brought against philosophy. The determinateness is here absolutely m y own . it imagines that if the form be altered. and the given char acter. since for the ordinary consciousness the trut h is bound up with that form. but each rather appea rs as something that is a show or semblance (Schein) in relation to the others. and t o maintain forsooth that the content of religion cannot for itself be truth. of the Notion w hich exists in and for itself. it will l ose the content and the essential reality. to get the idea of distinct characteri stics. In describing thought and its development. THE NECESSITY AND MEDIATION OF THE RELIGIOUS ATTITUDE IN THE FORM OF THOUGH T. Thus every distinction. the authority and externality of the content. but that it alters it. is something transparent. because we have now absolute correspondence of the content with the form. If philosophy changes what is in the form of the ordinary idea into the form of the Notion. is that of ideality. how as spec ulative thought it completes itself in the notion or conception of religion. it is just religion which is the true content. and it interprets that transformation as destruction. how as Reflection it seeks to me diate the essential moments of the religious attitude . and finally. III. and in the object the subject has before it the action of the Idea. Spirit has its own essential nature as object. which it itself is. or st rips off it the content. has now vanished. nor has mankind had to wait for philosophy in order to receive the co nsciousness of truth. That inner connection and absolute necessity into which the content of idea is t ransplanted in thought is nothing else but the Notion in its freedom. from what b elongs to the ordinary idea as such. then. when it is said that it does not le ave the form of idea or ordinary thought untouched. But to break up the simplicity of idea or o rdinary thought only means to begin with. every definite element. we have now to observe in the first p lace how it shows itself in relation to idea or ordinary conception. in such a form that all content comes to be determination of the Notion. on the contrary. in it. which is thought. and it is philosophy which must first supply substant ial truth. or rather a s the inner dialectic of idea . The relation of t hese elements in thought. Idea or ordinary conception still keeps within the sphere of outward necessi ty. and is harmonised with or equalised with the Ego itself. i . we are undoubtedly met with the difficulty of how t o separate in any content what is content as such. secondly. do this without in any way yielding up their independence. The relation or condition of the ab sence of freedom. and do not offer resistance to ea ch other. On the contrary. From this it is clear that nothing is further from the aim of philosophy than to overthrow religion. both that of the content and of the subject. but are posited in their ideality. and its inherent appearance is its absolute form . and it is this quality of form which philosophic knowledge imparts to truth. and does away with Reflection in the free necessity of the Idea. This p .

Either the object is known in itself as the mutual relation of elements which are distinguished.rocess is directly involved in the question : " What is that ? " Blue. when th e latter expresses inner qualities and relations in a sensuous. God is kind and just too. or. is a sensuous idea. however. as the content of idea. in order that by means of these and the unity of the attributes. it turns sensuous and natural specific forms . through this clear medium we see the blue. " What is blue ? " blue is perhaps pointed out in order that the perception of it may be acquired . it is still the dialectic of idea itself which is contained in this activity of the understandi ng. we become conscious of the contradiction of those elements which are at the same time supposed to constitute One. when seriously put . it is the limitation of that indefinite elem ent. this perceptio n is already included. for insta nce. in the general idea. is a unity of li^ht and dark. a medium by means of wh ich we see this darkness. Thus God. int o quite definite finite relations. we always have qualities which are distinct. In idea. the inner . whether they belong to a whole or are arranged separately. so. to pronounce exhaustively what He is would be impossibl e. as it gives these absolute validity. and these have to be reduced to a narrow circle. it is to know blue as a relation of it self within itself. and what disturbs this darkness is something different. it has an aim or purpose. There is something quite characteristic about the action of reflecting thought. constitutes the object. always has pre-suppositions of finitude. that is. In thought the various elements are brought into mutual relat ion. whose sum. If. Now. according to Goethe's theory. Orientals say God has an infinite number of names. more accurately. we are to grasp the notion of God. Blue. however. there is good and there is evil. If. In like manner. the Object may be complete. or. or as the relation of itself to an Other which we know outside of it. or ordinary concepti on. If they contradict each o ther. to be in error. whose ident ity. i t is the case that here the dialectic of idea is driven beyond its true compass. In so so far as a thing is thought of. If it be asked. and transplanted into the territory of formal arbitrariness or caprice. so to speak. To a certain extent. God is almighty and wise. natural. &. each element has its place. however. the kindness contradicts the justice. distinct characteristics or attributes have to be indicated. when we think this simple content. to know determinations in their distinctness and in their un ity. but this negation of all that has a definite exis tence is in contradiction with His wisdom. In idea. of attributes . it does not seem as if they could belong to what is One. which that action of un derstanding was. and all rest quietly s ide by side : man is free and also dependent . is still in the form of simplicity. too. He must have distinct attribu tes. and of su ch a kind that in it the dark element is the foundation. This last demands something which is definite. is rather the knowledge of the Notion . or ordinary thought. in the popular conception or idea of original sin. a light-giving element. however. In thought. it is posited in relation to an Other. when it appears as the abstract understanding and takes to do with idea. the atmosphere clear . A more definite category is the following. a nd makes them the rule or standard. He is therefore on the one hand the power before whic h everything vanishes is not . for the clearing up of thought. in the world. Thus. is obscure . overthrowing the Idea and absolute truth if these are opposed to them. idea seeks to recognise the thought of the Universal. in an external shape. whose unity. What is sought after in this question. and then declares idea. As the reflecting understanding. to speak generally. too. holds fast this finiteness. To a certain degree. in which. besides. which power is. for instance. and then the contradiction becomes apparent. after all. and hence the enormous importance of the Aufklarung. The sky is darkness. for instance.

conceives of the relation in fi nite fashion. and finds each of the Three externally complete in relation to the Others. Finally the category of necessity too comes in. for definite thought.relation of thought is at the same time conceived of in the specific form of wh at is natural .. and that in the absolutely s piritual sphere of goodness each one has in that which he does his oiun deed. the finite is. Immediacy is the leading category of idea or ordinary conception where the conte nt is known in its simple relation to self. in relation to the question before us. more preci sely for notional comprehension or philosophic conception there is nothing immed iate. the first is only determined in so far as the second exists. children may inherit noble rank. s respect to the category of idea or ordinary thought. unconsciously and from the outside. and it is in this aspect of opposition that we have in the first place to consider it. For philos ophic thought. or evil without either merit o r blame. I t is freely conceded that here. but essentially in relation to an " Other. there is space. It is much the same when understanding attacks the idea of the Trinity. it is undoubtedly a complete contradictio n that those who are perfectly external in relation to one another should at the same time be One. ses." it means to raise into the sphere of the universal the natural element which lies in the conception of inheritance. " Is religion. feeling. the knowledge of God. by using the expression " sin. only is in fact through an Other. and consequently to mediation. that if the one is. in this simple relation to self merely. and thinks only of natural possessions or of hereditary disease. it is easy to point out the contradiction involved if that which belongs absolutely to my freedom be supposed to have come upon me fro m elsewhere in a natural way. In passing on to consider what is essentially involved in thought and necessity. But here understanding h olds fast the externality only. then. If. and conve rsely. The understanding. his own sin. This necessity lies in the fact that in thought a content is not taken as being. the inner thoughtrelation is conceived of in an external fashion. but which requires for its existence something else. it is a ma tter of accident that parents should have property or should be tainted with dis ease . For thought. the demand for such a mediated knowledge comes i nto opposition with immediate knowledge. . as existing in simple determinateness. too. faith. property. but yet. the other is thereby pos ited too. If. (a. it may be. an immediate " this point more closely. the finite immediately becomes something which does not exist on its own account. that only exists in whi ch mediation is essentially present." and as a relation of elements which are mutually distinct. c. Now. For thought in general.) Immediate knowledge and mediation. if this quality of number b e made the foundation of the relation. or . In ordinary thought space exi sts. for number is thought in the abstract form of externality. keeps to numeration. &c. In this idea. on the contrary. Philosophic thought desires to know the necessity of this. we further reflect on the fact that the freedom of self-consc iousness is superior to these conditions of chance. are seen to belong in thi And here the question ari or a mediated knowledge ? . For idea or ordinary thought the finite exists. we consider all forms of immediate knowledge. What we call " necessary " is this. The Mediation of the Religious Consciousness in itself. general characteris tics which belong to this abstract distinction between religious idea or concept ion and thought. so far as the children are concerned. These are the abstract.

and at the same time double. the knowledge of G od. is a mediation with itself. and the relation is Being. It is the very nature of the finite to be dependent on an Other . The mediation can only be merely finite mediation. he needs external nature. that is. and that it destro ys the certainty. to one of the two as isolated. or through itself. What is meant. It is not asked why it is found. something else is neces sary to its existence. The empiric al question then is. this is a fact of consciousness . it will be found that there is nothing at all that is immediate. The higher mediation of the Notion. It is said that religion. the subjective form. the security of faith. let us place ourselves at the same standpoint as that occup ied by immediate knowledge." In so far as I know certainly that God is. To me diation belongs this differentiation. What is necessary has a ca use.) To mediated knowledge belongs the deduction of the one from the other. in so far as the Other is. and the one is this as much as the other. These are not produced by his act . it must be. To begin with. This standpoint is. is essential to such knowledge. Man is physically dependent. conc rete thought. is mediated knowledge. In immediate knowledge this connection is entirely simple . This would lead to cognition or philosophical knowledge. My being and the being of God are thus connected together in one. so certainly does God exist. for example. " Is there an immediate knowledge ? " To mediated knowledge belongs knowledge of necessity. the cause as something on the other. (/. conditionality of one determination on another. amounts just to this : I simply know it. and has only what is simple. it is so. or twofold. or how it is necessary. (a. The existence of something else or an Other. is faith only. it does not ex ist independently. namely. the dependence. and that is just the evil which is to be guarded against. is taken as something standin g on the one side. We have an idea of God and the conviction that this idea is not only sub jective in us but that God also is. all modes involving relation are obliterated. and essential connection of Two . he can only prolong his life in so far as they exist and ar e of use to him. that man is not to go beyond what he finds in consciousness. Now in immedia cy this mediation is excluded.) But even if we take up an empirical. This Being is simple. let us also conceive of it in an empiri cal manner. philosophic comprehension. "it is. an external attitude. and what really constitutes faith. Here we have this antithesis between immediate and mediated knowledge. and it is generally asserted that the knowledge of God exists only in an immediate fashion . what we call Reflect ion. that mediated knowledge is to be excluded. through which or t hrough the existence of which it itself exists. In it there is a connection of what is differentiated. that the One only is. one mode of connection. to one or the other b y itself. and does not exclude ei ther. it is a fact of our consciousness. or presupposed. Further on we shall see that true thoug ht or philosophical comprehension unites both in itself. ex ternal things. But immediacy an d mediation of knowledge are one-sided abstractions. Thought. is not that correctness or truth i s to be ascribed to the one to the exclusion of the other. of reason. that what is empirical only is to be regarded as valid. as certainly as I exist. I fi nd in myself the idea of God and that He is. that there is nothing to which . such con nection. and then. they appear as self-existent in relation to him . Immediate knowledge discards all differentiations . The effect. knowledge is a connection between myself and this content . it puts away these mode s of connection. in and for itself. What speaking generally we call empirical knowledge. one knowle dge.It is a very general opinion.

inasmuch as it is a begetter. if it be positive religion that is in question. Besides. and that appears under the form of immediacy. but I must know something . or an animal The man who is a father. Only in this bad sense is there any such thing as immediacy. If we define this e xistence as being one of the related sides in the relation as effect then what i s without relation is recognised as something mediated. an object . that is to say. with the categories of thought. and this is something immediate . This instruction. we consider a perception. since it requires an Other for its being. education. When. this up-bringing. however. beg otten. In sensation. but it contains both determinations Being and Not -Being.only the quality of immediacy belongs to the exclusion of that of mediation. the truth rather being that it is a mere scholas tic notion. The sphere of Logic is that of the Dialectic in which Being is considered as tha t which. finite things are created. self-related . the perception. " Immediate knowledge " exists where we have not the consciousness of mediation . is untrue. we see that I am the knowledge. Knowledge is absolutely si mple. it is immediate. and tha t in a manner external to the individual . is it a caus e. we have perceptio n. religious knowledge is essentially a mediated knowledg e. they are not accidental. my knowled ge is mediated through doctrine. in fact. we have then what knows and what is known. is as much begotten. but that what is immediate is likewise mediated. is what is media ted. two elements go to the making of it. it is revealed. in the first instance. there the faith in the religion is es sentially mediated through revelation. Only in this relation. It is the nature of finite things to be mediated. I ana thus mediated only by m eans of the object. and is determ ined accordingly as something which begins. we have relation and mediacy. If. we must not stop shor t with knowing how anything first presents itself. it is simple . and therefore only in this mediation. but all the same it is not admissible to look in a one-sided way upon mere me diated knowledge as being real and true. but if knowledge be actual. The truth of Being is Becom ing . supplies me with my knowledge . These circumstances and doctrines. as a star. Speaking more definitely. Being. Everything that exists (we do not as yet speak of mediation with self). &c. if it is not con ceived of as objective. that he received instruction in it . It is just the same with regard to immediate knowledge. there is at least some determinatenes s or conscious state present for me. there is no immediate knowledge. in so far as we put the relation out of sight. and the son. There is no Immediate . are not of a chance character. a kind of immediacy . Everything that lives. It is the same with pure seeing. Immediateness means. an entirely simple idea. We have feelings. by means of the definite character of my sensation. for otherwise it would be no cause a t all. for its immediacy. as the one begotten. something immediate. but are e . however. is in so far mediated. as the son. but as subjective. if I am mere knowledge. med iated. all the same. or. To whatever religion a man may belong. and that further there is an Other. every one knows that he was brought up in it. be rea l. It means this simple reference to self. Becoming is a single determination. it is a something immed iate. If we start from the father. then the father is. what is immediate. for instance. it is mediated. In pure seeing I see nothing at all. and th is revelation. and that immediacy itself is essen tially mediated. but find out whether this is actually its nature. is also somethi ng begotten. if taken as something immediate. which is a particular mo de. I know nothing at all. Pure know ledge may be called immediate. we have to do wi th thought-determinations. It is al ways a content . In like manner the cause only exists in virtue of having an effect.

that man learns nothing. they undoubtedly have to do with an external relation. to this infinite more strictly defined as God. and therefore a rel ation. or to put it more accurately. it involves the truth that positive revelation cannot supply a religion in such a way that it could have the character of something mechanica lly produced. For if / form an idea of God. but lies hidden in himself." thi s particular subject to the infinite. we are then in a position to con sider it as independent. and then there is an Object. and this content of both sides is set down as finite and infinite . is only aroused in man . more abstract antithesis. h ow this religious feeling. Here it is represented mythically. has this mediated character. because in it the referen ce of myself to an object takes place a reference to God. In the former transition what the two sides have in common is Being. the knowled ge of God. from the finite to the absolute. who is an " Other. expre ssed in an outward. but it is mediation. he is potentially Spirit. is. to use a general term. and forget that faith. This transition. and knowledge as representing this relation is mediation. the inner side. the truth is something which man originally carries within himself. whic h are related in accordance with a deeper. I e xist as knowledge. to which we pass over. namely. from things of the world. but this relati on is not non-essential on account of its being external. conviction. If we abstract from this relation. something existent. I as one having knowledge in a religious way have this character only by means of this content which is in my knowledge. in his reason. Knowledg e is relation within itself." I and God are different from one another. in which the characteristics peculiar to mediation are definite ly pronounced. as something known by us . and this is stated in the form of the subjective and objective. this is a revelation in us. and what has to be done is merely to bring it into consciousness. and consider what this knowledge is. determinatenes s as something objective. This is a great principle. or transition from one content to another. it is seen to be immediacy indeed. which it is essential we should hold fast . and not in a philosophical way. he only remem bers . If we now turn our attention to the other side. but to be knowledge of a much more concrete kind. Spirit bears witness to Spirit . is inner movement. the truth lies in him. but it involves the thought that religion. If we look at religious knowledge more closely. but immediacy which likewis e contains mediation in itself. it is a rising up or elevation to God. this self-revelation in the Spirit is constituted. we have immediate knowledge of God it is said . In this the weighty idea is involved that religion is not brought into man from the outside. this directly invo lves mediation. like all knowledge. justice. or from the finiteness of our consciou sness. the other side. Here the on e side is determined as God. It is just here for the most part that the assertion of immediate knowledge comes in . We have now to consider the relation of knowledge of God within itself. Here the old saying of Plato is in place. although the reference to God is quite direct and immediate. of something effected from the outside. it is mediated . We describe religion as being essentially this passing over." " I. God. and set up within man by a n external agency. in his freedom. there would then be . infi nite content. The second mode of the transition has aspects of a more abstract kind. the infinite generally. and from this finiteness in general which we call " ourselves. In its first form it is a passing over from finite things. it sho ws itself not only to be the simple relation of myself to the object. is of a twofold kind. if both were One. it is his remembering a cont ent which was known in a preceding state. This purely simple relation. this witness is the peculiar inner nature of Sp irit. all that is spiritual .ssential. in fact. morality. in the latter what the two have in common is the infinite . either mediated through what is Ot her than itself or within itself.

The explication or unfolding of this k nowledge. are identical. We h ave God and His existence (Daseiri). Religion itself is knowledge of God. the object is the combination of the walls with the roof. if. and the process of proof has for its object to point out to us the connection between the two determinations. the kind of connection which is in question is left undecided. that in so far as we treat of the knowled ge of God we are directly concerned with what has the form of a syllogism. Both are different. One is not what the Other is . in which they are put into One through a Third . To exhibit a connection means. it is proved that a hou se must have a roof . the house has this roofed for m as protection against the weather. by divesting them of what is inadequate in them. is an unfolding of religion itself. existence is determinate finite Being . the connection is merely an external one. existence (Existenz) too is taken in the sense of specific existence. their unity is not themselves . objectivity. Thus it is not merely indirectly suggested by. That wood and tiles constitute a roof. we have Two who are different. therefore thei r unity is different from their difference. Here the knowledge of God is represented as a media ted knowledge. the very object with which we are dealing. and there is a unity. the Being of God is not in any way whatever a limited Being . then this identity is itself different from their di fference . that wherein they are One. Everything is immediate in its relation to itself God as God. thi s connection may be of different kinds. it is something different from both of these. we see that a roof is necessary to the walls . sameness. that is to say . an identity not a pure identity. unity without differentiation. . they are. however. That only which is One. it is connection. The know ledge of God presents itself in its more precise shape under the form of the Pro ofs of the existence of God. In this case. therefore. proof consists in pointing out a connection between entities for which the connection is itself external. in fact. if they have identity at the same time with their difference. Therefore we have to consider more closely the n ature of the knowledge of God. and so far as the process of proof is co ncerned. The t wo are different. But this form o f proof undoubtedly goes somewhat on wrong lines when this knowledge is represen ted as the proof of the existence of God. that is the syllogism. mechanical kind. in which they are mediated. Criticism has been directed against it . relationless unity. is unmediated. but the one-sided moment of form which characterises this mediated knowledge. abstractly One. We thus have God in His Being. and thus we have a syllogism . but is actually involved in. to prove. they are related. and not immediately One. Because the two are different. does not affect their being . different. but at the same time we have the consciousness that this connection does not con cern the being of these objects. There is connection which is of an entirely external. To prove is to show that those elements which are to begin with in a condition of difference have also a connection. This is certainly a case of one thing matching with another . for that wou ld be immediacy. &c. Being as Being. For examp le. The Proofs of the existen ce of God represent the knowledge of God. so far as they are concerned. which is essentially mediated in itself. actuality. because they are different . does not invalidate the whole procedure. however. free from any mediation . because it contains mediacy within its elf.immediate relation. And this implies that mediation take s place more strictly in a Third as contrasted with the elements of difference. i s that wherein they are different . and a Third which brings them together. because otherwise they would not be different. is to restore the proofs of the existence of God to their place of honour. What has to be done. which is mediated. It may be said.

not a process in the object itself. for example. the Being of God appears as an inference. becomes apparent. in which a thing is shown to be dependent upon something else. no t a connection. implying that the t riangle. That. that a triangle in order to have its three angles equal to two right an gles takes the plan of extending one of its angles. as regards geometrical a xioms. and that is merely subjective necessity. you have at once given a certain relation between the square of the hypothenuse and the squares of the containing sides. an d in such demonstrations we point out that. is carr ied through with the utmost consistency and thoroughness. For we conc eive of Him precisely as that which is undeduced. Here our perception of what is necessary. just referred to. it is only we who get to see the truth through this process. determinations. But if it b e thought that in consequence of an observation of this kind. But in this necessity. This is the case. This kind of demonstration. more strictly speaking. it would not occur to any one to say. absolutely existent in and for itself. what is implied is that the finite becomes the f oundation or basis upon which the Being of God is demonstrated. here the relation is not one of those in which the c onnection is external . We have presuppositions here. the inadequacy involved in attempting to exhibit such a co nnection in regard to God becomes evident at once. the proof of the under standing. for when we conceiv e of this in the form of proof. Certainly known connections are presupposed. underived. is undoubtedly the most perfect kind of proof . as dependent on the Being of the f inite. on the contrary. from such things as are already known to u s. we set out from prim ary. And it indeed appears especia lly in that first movement which we called rising up to God. Geometrical proof. if such and such a determination exi st. Given a right-angled triangle. The attitude assumed is that the result we aim at is represented as something de pendent upon presuppositions. along with the one the other is given too. certainly known. are at once seen to be unsatisfac tory as regards the knowledge of God. we make the res ult dependent on given conditions which are already present. In this connecti on. this movement has been shown to be futile. T hat is essential necessity. the following form: In the course followed by subjective necessity. certainly known conditions. The unsatisfactoriness takes. . are differ ent from one another. these connections. the right-angle exists. the mode in which we perceive the necessity is different from the connection of the determinations in the actual thing itself. such an idea would in turn imply a one-sidedness which would at once be found to be in contradiction with the universal consciousness o f man. But when we apply this to the Being of God. and the connection of our knowledge of God and of His attributes. the intermedia ry process which we go through. that is to say. The course which we follow in the process of proof is not the course of the object or actu al thing itself . and only thereby acquires th e property in question. in the content itself. then such and such another must also exist . as simply the work of the under standing. then. here the one cannot be without the othe r .There are accordingly other forms of connection which are inherent in the object . it is one different from that which is involved in the nature of the object. It is we who draw auxiliary lines . The construction and the demonstration are only undertaken on behalf of our subj ective apprehension. the inherent connection of the attributes of God. and the process in the object itself. is the perversion above referred to. And thus the inadequacy of this process which we call proof to exhibit that whic h we represent to ourselves under the name of God. It is not objectively the case that the triangle attains by this process to the relation or property in question .

He may indeed perceive that suchand-such a thing exists. The elevation and the movement of the objective content. he has to do with an objective content. is the consciousness men have of a Higher. and accept it as it is found there. the insight thus gained remains something merely external. To begin with. finite. Religion. If any one supposes that in case of t he form of the proofs of the existence of God being disputed these proofs are re ndered obsolete as regards their content also. the human spirit follows. he rises from the finit e to absolute necessity. the movement of our self. " finite being is contingent. and has been exercised in accordance with ends. and as essentially organised. is too objective . consciousness finds itself dependent. and it is in the heart and its feelings that convictions must exist. accept what is found in ordinary consciousness. In like manner the following more concrete line of thought will always be adopte d. In this charge of deficiency it is implied that this very process of thought is to be our own elevation . and as this movement we h ave now to consider Thought. as follows : It is said that in proving anything a man remains cold . actually come to form one process.. it is empirical observation and reflexion. Such a process of thought. and in this its experience it is in so far consciousness. however. which are yet independent of them. proceed in accordance with the methods of empirical psychology. observe th e phenomena. and this proof of the existence of God is nothing but the description of that act of rising up to the infinite. outside of themselves. standpoint. But undoubtedly the content is not represented in its purity. this kind of insight is not in the heart. which in virtue of their life. such as air. rational being. or transition. as it is termed. This deficiency ma y be made plain. from this point of view. I. which indeed is peculiar to the present time . since he finds no satisfaction in the chance nature of things. it is said. in Thought. This harmony does actually exist. this marvel presented by the living organism. and the harmony of external objects with it. that we are not to behave as if we were contemplating a connection of external determinations. since these living things stand in need of external objects.) Mediated knowledge as Observation and as Reflection. there must ther efore be a self-existent necessity. am myself this passing over. that is to say. (b. Spiritual movement. but the knowledge thus reached is external. Since living things exist in the world. and because he is a thinking. and existing above themsel ves . &c. and fur ther. believing s pirit. and place outside of consciousness what is the Infinite in consciou sness. but that it is the feeling. and we miss that whe n we speak of it as an external connection of determinations. To contemplate this is t o admire the wisdom of God in Nature. and says. since it i s itself characterised as the negative or finite. however. of our knowledge. that it presupposes an Other. in so far as I think. on w hich it is dependent. namely. Those who take up this.Man contemplates the world. is to be in it too. men will always argue that there must be an inner ground for the harmony which exists t> between things which are not se lf-evidently dependent on one another. of something beyond the present. . this spiritual movement. it is cold conviction . and which is held by it to be its true Essence." Tha t is the course which human reason. he is mistaken. which is the basis of this contingency. and it presupposes an activity which has produ ced it. From this harm ony man rises to the consciousness of God. Spirit in fact. constitute a harmony of diverse component parts. which is to rise or be elevated.

Plants. and removes this accidental element. implies that he is above and beyond it. as living. This already implies. a unity comes into existence through the abolition and abso . the Universal. There is an interrupt ion in its feeling of self. Already. man is essentially negative unity. &c. the end of one thing is there where an other begins. Thus the infinite is what is above and beyond the limi ts . That w hich constitutes its determinate being is not for it Not-Being. for itself. and the feeling of this is actually pre sent. and am reflected i nto myself as in contrast to it. it is the prerogative of what is living to know its limitation.. Notparticular. it feels its limitation as negated universality. For man this limitation only exists i n so far as he goes above and beyond it . and still more is it a prerogative of the Spiritual. and have the consciousness of this limitation. implies that it is not that which the Ego is. where that begins I am not. which we are now considering. too. that which melts away in relation to the infinite. This is done in quite a simple way. l ife is finite . it is not so . it is something other than the limited . An animal. then the lower animals too must have religion. that the two sides are in relation with one anoth er. the consciousness of limi t. I know the object as the Other of myself. we have wants. The f eeling of a negation in himself contradicts this. Thus we have finite and infinite. This reflection is too abstract to be made from the standpoint of consciousness. and he has the certainty of unity with himself. as want. In its physical aspect. When the two a re brought together. We find ou rselves to be finite . Thus the limitation of finiteness only exists for us in so far as we are above a nd beyond it. An animal's feel ing of limitation is a comparison of its universality with its actual existence in this definite moment. too. and it remains to be seen how this relation determines itself. it is immediately identical with that which it is. on the contrar y. The subject. we are finite . the infinite. satisfies its want. of his relation to himself. What h as life has experience of fear. hunger. and in this i t reconciles itself with itself. the finite in relation to the infinite is posited as the negati ve. over which it obtains mastery. the feeling. minerals.This observation or reflection. in so far as I have knowledge of an object. there seem s to be nothing further to say . dread. and the animal thus places itself in opposition to the negation in itself. thirst. his actual existence does not adequately correspond to his nature. This need in itself at the same time appears as an object outside of it. That the object i s thus set down as different from the Ego. tha t is. however. where consciousness. feels itself to be a power as against its negation. if we look at it in the first place in its gener al form. dependent. If it be said that religion is based upon this feeling of dependence. are this affirmation of the self. All impulses in man. Not-limited . identity with himself. is the Not-finite. remains within its limitation. We know ourselves to ba finite under many and various aspects. This infinite. For us who are above and beyond its mode of existence. a stone is limited . is for itself something universal . it is the unlimited. This feeling is a comparison of his n ature (Natur) with his existence (Dasein) in this moment . The object is its Not-Being. a negation . We have this feeling in common with the lower animals. are finite. &c. everywhere we find an end. and thus reinstates its Self. as in the lower animals. the feeling of himself. Life consists in the abolition of limitation. that is the leading thought here : as to this. In like manner. and thus am finite. but these h ave no feeling of their limitation . as having life we are externally dependent upon others. in virtue of the fact that we have an object. I am the finite. as being my object. and c onsequently know myself by means of the object as limited and finite. is seen to develop itself in the following shape : In consciousness.

the ultimate. as the abroga tion of the finite may be called its justice. on the other. or. attain to. Such is consciousness in this specific form. but here we are arbitrarily. but we do nothing more. it is quite true that he cannot go further. it is true. and begin to consider the matter from a spiritually higher standpoint of consciousne ss. That. And this constitutes the entire wisdom of our time. on th e other. and then over a gainst it there is an Other. I am not annihi lated in the relation. I subsist . to wha t is given. which cannot maintain itself as against the infini te. and if I do this. this ranks here as what is highest. of observation. and are reconciled . In so far as He touches me. since it purposes to go to work only empirically. as the Other of the finite. to adhere to what is immediately present. I am not. it is said. indeed. wo uld be " of evil. the whole of r eligion is contained in what we have here. and cannot go further. I am no longer a pure observer. this condition is that of fear. as it were. since we wish to observe and nothing more. as what is beyond it. Men stop at the finiteness of the subject .rption of the finite in fact. I am no longer in the attitude of empirical consciousness. brought to a halt ." If a man has placed himself at the standpoint of empirical procedure. what is beyond and above it. I yield up myself in it. Go d is thus characterised as involving an antithesis which seems absolute. he must remain at this standpoint. unchangeable. hard as brass. the object can only be what is in us as such. therefore. I relate myself to myself. It is accordingly maintained that if we go thus far. We can. for our finiteness is fixed a nd absolute. On the one hand. tha t we can know God. I bury myself in it. Such is the relation of the two. which is external in reference to an Other. would mean. But this is what is ultimate. But this externality or limitation is the finite. I find myself no longer observing. as a man intends to observe. The fact of our being above and beyond the limit is. it is supposed that we m ust continue to remain in this particular phase of consciousness. To reach the object. and is not to be given up. after which we search owing to the feeling of our finiteness. and in it we are complete. therefore. or understand the Infinite. I am also th e Affirmative. satisfied. conceded . however. and what is beyond that. The fin ite. while I strive to know. to know it. Expressed in terms of feeling. merely something attempted. at which this subject finds its end. This may be called the goodness of the infinite. as what is immovable. however. in accordance with which the finit e must be manifested as finite. On the one side I know myself as having no real existence . to give up my finiteness. be stated in reply." It might. as having a valid existence. but I forget myself in entering into the object. the finite shrinks into nothing. we can know that man can know God. I am. is a something beyond the present. We are told that ill it we have everythi ng that we need to know concerning God and religion. go further . this going out of ourselves is. of dependence . Here. and wh at we are as finite beings. and God is not anything that permits of being made the subject of ob servation. according to the view just indicated. In so far. as affirmative. If I now go further. it is said. we cannot go. Observation ca n only exercise itself on the subject. of observa tion. however. that we have some knowledge of a rich manifestation of His li fe and spiritual nature. cannot grasp. in fact. as matter of observation. ca lled God. so that the infinite leave s me my own life. but it has another characteristic besides. is " of evil. for to observe means to keep t he content of observation before one in an external way. to understand God . In so far as He is. and this Other is as the Infinite. a mere yearning which does not attain to that which it seeks. Beyond thi s standpoint. beyond and above which observation does not go. I determine myself as the finite. If God be no longer to me a something beyond and above me. From this point of view God determines himself as th e Infinite only. This Other.

It is to be remarked that this reaching out towards something beyond the actua l is absolutely and solely mine.to it." This is something distinct from my finiteness. on th e other. are determinations in me . We shall see that both d the absoluteness of the Ego will of my finiteuess. . becomes a mediated one too. " I am good by nature . There is in it the determinateness ite stands over against it. My affirmation. and we must see what constitutes its general character. direct ly assumes the character of something which is subsequent. Thus. endeavour. an affirmation . which is unattained by me. and is the annulling of my finiteness. almighty. also a possibility in me of entering into relation to what is other than myself. and they belong absolutely and solely to that aiming of mine. T here is. The wor ld. the y represent different tendencies . in so far as determination is to get an objective sense. I am determined as the negative of this Higher. however. To relinquish my finiteness and to reach it would be one and the sa me thing. they have a subject ive and not an objective meaning. but is in fact an accidental complication. If the truth has hith . are identical. This entire standpoint must now be looked at more narrowly." that is a relation to myself. alternates with d as being. and that is not in what constitutes the root of my nature. The infin something beyond. my emotion. then . but as ation as existing. but only does away with what is external. and that my goodness may be t arnished. This reconciliation eliminates nothing intrinsic. a possibility of sin." the faultiness is. It becomes clear from this that the twofold negativity. they have a meaning in me only. it does not touch wha t belongs to my inmost nature. of my relativity. this aiming to reach what is remote . In respect of the sense of yearning. There is here on the one hand a going out of my finiteness to a Higher . in this way t he Ego has become affirmative in regard to itself. of faults. something external an d accidental. being mediated through the removal of a faultiness which in it self is only accidental. . and that inasmuch as I am immediatel y good. on the one hand. and is only. my tende ncy to reach out toward what is beyond and my finiteuess." In this respect. an be seen to issue as the result. however. If I make use of the predicates all-good. the finite. It becomes affirmation which recovers itself out o f such isolation. likewise belongs to me . My affirmation expresses itself thus : " I am. my desire and endeavour. The latter remains an O ther. and it is this which constitu tes the other side of this standpoint. " that is to say. have a yearning after what is beyond the present and actual. the determination that I am the negative . which cannot be determined by me. and the int erest I have in maintaining myself. has its seat in the Ego itself. " I am. My absolute fixed finiteuess hinders me from reaching that somet hing beyond. on the other hand. one going toward myself and one toward what i s outside myself the latter of which. as character ising that something beyond. doubtless. This. the negative is determined as an "Other" in regard to me. as i t were. " I am as I ought to be. and estimate what is essential in it. I remain on this side. " I am. &c. What is present is only this going o ut on my part. it means. . it is true. The interest or motive not to reach that something beyond. my determin the negation which I am essentially determine negation and affirmation come to coincide. It is my deed. as imp lying that I stand related to an external element. " I am what I ought to be . my aiming. that of myself as fini te and that of an Infinite over against me. my sole concern is to maintain myself in this state. reconciles itself in this way with itself. in them I remain self-contained or at home with myself. " that is to say. This second determination belongs to me likewise . what the Ego is not . The goodness of my nature has returned to identity with itself. a division in myself the fact. This point of view of affirmation may therefore be considered. My affirmation in relation to such wrongdoing as is here implied. the feeling of obli gation generally. however.

my emotion. I can attribu te no goodness to myself outside of my will : that quality pertains only to my s elf-conscious spirit. To th is goodness of the original state nothing further can be added than the knowledg e of it the conviction of the belief in one's goodness. and again. this disturbance does not reach to its foundation . w hich represents the rational view of it. however. This consciousness develops the antitheses which concern consciousness. so to speak. namely. That man is finite means. while the division or dualism remains formal. I swing myself. and that reconciling med iation consists merely in this consciousness. which does not disturb my essential inner life. into a recognition of the faults I have committed. There is actually present an Other. what I am depends not upon my nature. it is the goodness of the origina l state only which is assumed." or . and which it holds under its control. Such is the standpoint of subjective consciousness. strictly speaking. If. it depend upon that consciousne ss alone. the spirit has n ot formed any relation with it . My conviction is sufficient so far as I am concerned. it keeps outside of it. th is reconciliation is now seen to take place in me as finite. the negative of . is what is originally good. in reflection. and again I swin g myself within the limits of this longing and emotion which have their place pu rely within me. In the older theology. what I originally am. That the human spirit is finite we hear daily affirmed . that I as man stand in relation to what is other than myself. and that upon this conviction my morality is based . We shall speak of finiteness in the popular sense first. as. the spirit. This is the abstract characterisation of this attitude. this knowledge that I am by nature good. which was the first to advance this belief i n goodness. (a. The inner life is only disturbed on th e surface . and is consequently a worthless and empty see-saw system. a semblance of di vision. because it is the Affirmative. The inner life. is not goodness . and what true relation the fi nite has to the infinite. as an individual . but which remain in it. in the first place. and the negative d oes not get its specific character within the nature of the spirit itself. T his presupposed that the will was absolutely free. Were it further developed. There are three forms in which finiteness appears. According to this.) Finiteness in Sensuous Existence. I. is what is substantial. Thus my nature. and the effects produced on it by what is other t han itself are done away with through the restoration of what is original. and in the mode in which it exists in Spirit and for Spirit. I can. on the other hand. on the contrary. you had the idea of eternal damnation. for to myself I am o nly affirmative. am good . that what is go od rests or depends entirely upon my nature. when I have fallen into error I only need to cast what is accidental from me and I am reconciled with myself. This point of view embraces all the opinions of recent times since the Kantian philosophy. that goodness exists only in my conviction. commit no fault at all. it may be. and then we shall use it in the true sense. There is no need for having a further consciousness of the substantial or essential nature of the action. We have now to consider what finiteness itself is. so far as I am c oncerned. back to myself. all the views characteristic of the present time woul d coincide with it.erto been expressed by saying that God has reconciled the world with Himself. and in all this I never travel beyond myself. for example. in sensuous existence . Here. but upon my self-conscious will: I am guilty through the will. and is not implicated i n it. That I know the action to be good is enough. My yearning. the sense suggested w hen it is said that man is finite. over into a longing for and in the direction o'f the " Beyond.

) Finiteness from the point of view of Reflection. are limited and dependent. in so far as thought is active in them. is only an infinitude of form. And. yet only a formal annulling. Does reflection get the length of positing the finite as something which is i n itself null. In its ann ihilation. too. The annulling of what is finite is already found to have its place within this finiteness . The content remains finite. exhibits t he finite as null. and is the return to the Positive. i t remains finite. like nature. the objects which give me satisfaction are in like manner individual. as against infinitude. in the region of experiences. The finite is determined as the negative. Nature is not complete and independent. and are independent in relation to each other. one impulse or passion drives away another. Death does not present itself to consciousness as this eman cipation from finiteness. in external Being of a manifold kind. therefore. In dea th the finite is shown to be annulled and absorbed. and here what natural life is itself implicitly is made explicit rea lly and actually. belongs to this natural fini teness. it is itself a nullity. Satisfaction. for the satisfied impulse reawakens. e very impulse as subjective relates itself to what is Other than itself. The satisfaction of hunger is an annulling of the separation between me and my objec t.myself. just as the need as such involves defect and is finite. practical and theoretical relations. but this higher view of death is found in thought. and in my prac tical relation to things I have always to do with what is only single or individ ual . in short. and therefore is not a truly concrete in finitude. this finite character. This is the renunciation of the finite. and the question is what these are. This first natural. We now rise out of immediate consciousness to the level of Eeflection and here w e have again to do with a finitude which appears in definite contrast to infinit ude. it is just this fact of its being something which is not self-posited which constitutes its finiteness. This is the standpoint of natural Being. all of which. Here cessation. this infinitely recurring feeling. or does reflection accomplish as much as nature ? Can reflection make that die which is mortal. on the contrary. But death is only the abstra ct negation of what is implicitly negative . the question arise s. the finiteness. On the other hand. it is revea led nullity. all that is living is thus exclusive . According to this I e xist in manifold relations. In hearing and seeing I have only what is individual before me. liberation from finiteness comes in. simple self-emanc ipation of the finite from its finiteness is death. But nature always falls back again into the finite. Particular experiences or sensations as particular are transient . in so far as we have to do in it with singulars or particulars. and in li ke manner what constitutes the standpoint of reflection is that it persists in h olding fast the antithesis. but in satisfying itself it annuls this relation. (/. accord ing to their content. We ar e mutually exclusive. Thus reflection. of natural existence. and this latter has to manifest itself. it is an annulling of finiteness. or is that which is null immortal to it ? Since i t is null we ought to cause it to variish. and that constitutes my finiteness. finite. needs. The sensuous life of what is individual or particular has its end in death. and indeed even in popular conceptions. But explicit nullity is at the same time nullity which has been don e away with. This antithesis has different forms. but in this sphere the true infinity is as yet only abrogated or annulled Jiniteness. and the annulling of the negation ngain becomes a sense of need. with which I am in connection. There i s an emancipation from finiteness here. It is just th . this sensuous element makes its true nature actually explicit. however. however. the need annuls its finiteness when it satisfies itself. Thi s return into its affirmation is its satisfaction. does not exist in and for itself. and thus the satisfaction remains finite t oo. According to the for mer side. it must free itself from itself. Such I am i n virtue of my having sensuous experience . for what is possible to nature must b e yet more possible to infinite spirit. Our sensuous consciousness. is finit e . one supplants the other.

the multiplicity would have to yield up its character. of satisfaction. as the Universal in this multiplicity. for in reaching it I should still only reach wh at is finite. allness is an ideal which cannot be reached. Here. Thus it is found that the range of knowledge has no limits. and for this very reason I mus t stop short on this side of it. advance is made to the infinite only as the abstract negation of the finite. and. but which remains external to it. and that the flight from star to star is limitless. and it. We have now to consider the form of the antithesis of the finite and infinite. which. the element of contrast comes in. nam ely my actuality. each being posited for itself. Further. and just for this rea son. therefore. the many is absolutely exclusive in relation to another many . I compare the stores of knowledge which I actually posses s with the mass of knowledge of which I form an idea. therefore. of desire. the other totality that of possession. That is to say. remains over against the finite as an Other. the manifoldness determines itself in its un iversality. too. Th us the Ego is still something exclusive over against something exclusive. but not to all or not to happiness itself. therefore. manifold externality. remains in contrast with the finiteness. not merely as predicate. of which each component part is particul ar or limited. but always of single things only. It is the same with the satisfaction o f impulses : man may attain to many interests and ends. the end.) The antithesis of the finite and the infinite. And "here. which are at the same time to remain man ifold and separate. The ideal is. b ut as an essential antithesis. In contrast to this. This is finitude in contrast to infinitude. and. which finite again advances to an infinite. finiteness remains. which posits itself as finite./. and brought t o universality In like manner. As desiring or willing. and all is merely an abstraction which we apply to much or the many. and a fi nite in fact which is posited as the other of the first or finite. the spirit is determined in accordance with particular ends and inte rests. The one totality is called universality of knowledge. But in both relations. and the universality of which I form a conception. and so itself a finite. however. completeness of impulse and of enjoyment. (a. it is possible in practical life to plan to reach a universality of satisfaction. yet not so as to be able to penetrat e into their most subtle characteristics. just because i t is untrue in itself. overlaps itself so to speak as its Oth . and t hen to name this felicity. and so on ad infinitum. I find that these two. that the infinite which stands over against it is itself a finite. The untrue is the unity or universality . of enjoyment . which cannot possess all. whether forming ideas or willing. a s it is seen in Eeflection as such. t herefore. If we consider the first antithesis of finite and infinite in Eeflection. on this side of which a man sto ps short. This finiteness remains. made exhaustive. just because it is a something that is true. in order to be posited under unity. is itself something essentially finite. too. as the not-finite. as not containing the finite in itsel f as part of itself. unattainable. the spirit behav es as exclusive particularity. its unlimitedness.e mutual relation of these two which constitutes the standpoint of reflection . stands in connection with other i ndependent things. But here the totality is thought of as multiplicity and allness only. both of them belong to the antithesis which characterises this standpoint.) The externality or mutual exclusion of finiteness and universality. finite ness is a varied. a unity of many. Only the true infinite. This form presents itself thus in a concrete shape in our consciousness. It may indeed be supposed that n atural science may get to know all animals. and it is made imperative that the actual quantity of kn owledge should be further advanced and perfected. the ideal. do not corr espond with each other.a. for the spirit c ompares its actually existing singularity with its singularity as universally de termined or conceived. (/. We have knowledge of many things. posited independently. and in such a way that the one is determined as t he other of the other.

Now if the finite is limited by the infinite and stands on one side. but merges in it. and if beyond it is the infinite. the infinite itself is something limited too . to my consciousness. Having now reached this point." If consciousness determines itself as finite.. the infinite is the affirmative. it is no longer the affirmative. destroys those self-dissolving ant itheses. with this. not-finite. Both are my product. With reg ard to this it has been said already that when we posit the finite as finite. Under the first form one Particular gave limits to an other. Or if it be said. only a thought posited by myself. But if the one. conscious of it. and thus the many of the finit e itself is likewise left standing on its own account without being able to atta in to its something beyond. the finite is regarded as that which is limited . we are above and beyond it. limited. wh ether it is possible to get away from it in a real and actual way. and thus the second fact is posited.er. be only defined as the not-many. in which they are abrogated and preserved. or whether it remains in its finiteness. on the other hand. and remains in it.) The absolute maintenance of the finite in reflection. and whether i t secures its right. It is necessary to retain this in the mind . The Ego thus. by means of its own act of reflection. B ut it has been remarked that it is the Ego itself which has here to begin with d efined what is beyond as the affirmative . and exist as mutually exclusive. because it is its own other in unity with itself. I am that in which the antithesis vanishes. it is that which the finite is not . as power. to become truly abrogated and absorbed. namely. Just because we ar e at it. is not limited. its limit being the infinite. " I am immediate . that that infinit e is only a vanishing infinite. I am one with myself. which we before defined as the affirmative. I am the one w ho produces that something beyond. then it is not different from. I am lord and master of this determ ination. that Ego is place d in contrast. each is exclusive with regard to the other. something which is a Finite. we desire to see how it fares with the finite. we are no longer at it. both sides of the relation vanish into empty moments and that which is and remains is the unity of the two. the infinite. Thus we have. it has something which is on the yonder side of it and is thus finite. that is. however. too. here the finite has its limit in the infinite itself. (. to divest itself of finiteness. namely. whether these two sides drop apart. In the limitation we have a limit but only inasmuch as we are above and beyond it. We have not what we desire. namely. Aud if it be not limited. as will. I am the negation of the negation. and I determine myself by means of it as fini te. The finite relates itself to the infinite . Such is the abstr act nature of this antithesis. it remains o n the other side beyond the many and the finite . as it was before in finitude. its negative. and get s the form of the infinite merely because the infinite is a finite as contrasted . Considered more closely. it has it s boundary in the finite . that /am the affirmative w hich is placed beyond. the infinite. w e have in this infinite only a finite. to my self-consciousness. in short. the right. this Ego makes the same reflection which we have made. what is beyond in relation to the Ego. and the infinite i s at first what is beyond this finite. that the infinite is not limited. however. The finite conceived of in its more concrete form is the Ego. to h old it fast is of absolute importance all through in regard to all forms of refl ective consciousness and of philosophy. is identical with it in infinitude. in stead of the Highest. the Ego. then the finite. that which has being. It is now time to inquire whether this antithesis has truth in it. in me they vanish . that is to sa y. The antithesis itself vanishes when the two sides are absolutely opposed . Consequently it is to the infini te that we ascribe affirmation. I am the act of reflection which annihilates both. As the negative of the nega tive.

absolute . I. opinions. duty vanish for me. is as it were the absolute power of negativity to make short work with everything. constitute myself an active ope rative infinite. In contrast to this. makes it at the same time the only Affirmative. and take up the position that I as this particular unit actually here. This culmination has the appearance of being a renunciation of the finite. no truth. in my feel ings. but only in so far as I lay it down. alone am the sole essentiality. lu all content I am immediate relation or reference to myself. Thus I. renounces its particular existence and its claim to be the affirma tive. and I alone. I cling to myself. That. I am Being. pure thought. which clings fast to itself. In this ideality of all det erminations or categories I alone am the Eeal. True humility. and this I am as particularity. content is annulled. and recognises the True. that is to say. is this vanity. and as if self-consciousness meant to deal seriously wi th its finiteness. What we have therefore here is that the finite Ego. t he infinite subjectivity. This is the culminating point of subjectivity. as the univer sal affirmative. truth. law. What occurs her e is rather that the finite maintains itself . In this determi nation the unity of the finite and infinite is contained. determination. and no content has value on its own account. and all that is needful in order that a thing b e good is this conviction. this finite. as only posited. consequently. this culmination of finiteness still maintains itself . it has no longe r affirmation in itself. abstract self-consciousness. and I am this as the individual unit. inasmuch as it is the positing of an infinite beyond itself. It makes a mere show of doing this. In true renunciation all d epends on whether this culmination of subjectivity still has an object. and is therein identical with itself as that which is in like man ner finite. that is to say. the knowledge and rational apprehens ion of God. but make myself infinite therein. The True and the G ood exist in my conviction only. that which has absolute Being. I. something held aloof from me. while it recognises the finite as the negative. the absolute idealiser. is precisel y what does not happen here. the only thing that does not vanish. Speaking more definitely. it is pride rather. for I sh ut out the truth from myself. that for which all disti nction. in my state of immediacy. I do not give up my nullity. God. I am. All objective content. the abstract subjectivity. as t he immediate self. the Infi nite. or exists only as posited by it. and what such humility consists in is this. th e finiteness which remains and renders itself infinite in its very finiteness. I nfinite. that is to say. is for me something beyond this world. as I. but has become what is fixed. and characterises itself in reference to it as finite. the limited. am the affirmative in general. renounces it. I alo ne am the Positive. this recognition of mine. this exclusive Ego.with it. as alone the affir mative. The standpoint which has been considered is reflection in its completeness. It would seem here as if reflection did not mean to leave standing wha t is for it a nonentity. as such still maintains itsel f. and thus as negated. but it is just in it that finiteness. this particular unit. But in so doing this humility contradicts itself . That which is posited by me is posited as distinct from me as the negative. the Ego. I recognise nothing. has posited the infinite itsel f as a finite. however . and yet expresses this finite as infinitude. i n presence of which all else vanishes away. This attitude at first gives itse lf out to be that of humility. What is wanting here is objectivity. is posited only through me. reno unces itself. but t he power which still maintains itself as this definite Ego. on the contrary. that the Ego shuts out from itself the Infinite. The infinite. and Absolute. that false humility. as the relation of negativity to itse lf. nothing that is objective. which has done with all content. in it all content evaporates. and is rendered vain . am the infinite. and now as being identical with the infinite becomes infinite itself . am good. am alone the affirmative. declared to be wh at is beyond the present and actual. and really to divest itself of it. I a m that which determines. while it yields up t he whole of finitude. immediate negativity. who am immediate. however. in the caprice and contingency of my feeling and willing. But this very subject ivity. but a unity of such a kind that the finite is not merged in it. and am what has absolute Being.

while in fact it is infla ted beyond measure with vain and empty pride. and this is true also of the Idea. the second lies in the fact of its approximation to t he philosophical Notion. Eeflection here fails to disjoin the immediate particularit y of the Ego. subjectivity. and is still uuder the form of fin iteness. and only subjective emotion. a true and essential moment of freedom and of the Idea. it conceives of particularity itself as being in an imm ediate way the universal. is u ndoubtedly a definition of the Idea. On the other hand. Such is the standpoint of the present time. the extreme. only if I will it so. since the knowl edge of something higher disappears. Consequently. posits itself as absolute. and contempt. I. what thus seems to approach most nearly to the Idea is furthest off from it. And thus this position contradicts itself. and only becomes true form by means of it s true content. I alone maintain myself. The Ego simulates humility. Further. from the Infinite and Affirmative. From the su bjective point of view. appear to be the same as those which belong to philosophy. This unity being posited by means of the finite Ego. mere good plea sure is left. on the contrary. this last culminatin g point still contains what must be negated . as this unit. this finite unit. their mutual attit ude is one of enmity. in universal ity and getting a grasp of affirmation in its absolute universality in which it includes the individual. culminating point of finite subjectivity. negativity. It contains id eality. while the finite is the finite of itself. but it is this infinite only as the positing of itself within itself as the finite. is at this point of view still uncompleted negativit y. this unity is still posited in one-side dness. an d that which brings about the ideality is itself not ideal. am the sole reality ." as immediate. Notwithstanding this. Consequently this infinitude is i tself finitude. " I. are burnt up. and the abrogation of this finiteness as such. Here lies the deficiency of this point of view. this fire in which all determi nations consume themselves. and all det erminations are valid. which develops all objectivity out of itself. It is Eeflecti on itself which is par excellence what separates . It borders on the philosophical standpoint. the unity itse lf becomes a finite unity. and anives at a unity which is. of reality. it is the infinite. it must be shown that I. all remaining determi nations are posited as ideal. it contains the unity of the finite and infinite . that it is just such an abstracti on as has been described . The unity of the finite and infinite. This ideality. only a finite unity. considered in itself. and consequently t ransmutes itself as form into content. am not possessed of truth. It contains expressions which. regarded superfic ially.for it is posited by the finite itself. The first difficulty which presents itself is. and that everything is posited and exists only t hrough me. as this u nit. This particularity of my finite being my immediate personality h as yet to be separated from this affirmation. The only determination which posses ses validity is that of myself. The difficulty of getting a grasp of this point of view is owing to the fact tha t in this aspect of it. and is owing to this abrogation. and all this is. perennial. w hich is devoid of all content. from this infinite. am the infinite. for it is t he highest point of reflection. hatred. which in itself is without support. and philosophy enters into a peculia r relation with it. which is made explicit in reflection. for it posits ideality as a principle. but of such a kind that the infinite is the positing of itself as what is finite. and in presence of the unlimited diversity in their feeling. It is undoubtedl y subjectivity. of the individual unit. the negation of its negation. however. Contra dictions can only be criticised if we trace them back to the ultimate thought on which they rest. And ins tead of merging the individual. notw ithstanding that everything is to become affirmative through negation only.. If we compare this point of view with the religious ideas of . I myself alone remain positive. there is no objective common element to bind individuals together. but here it neglects its func tion of separating and distinguishing. The Ideality is not thoroughly carried through .

belongsto logic. and this is the basis of all actuality. or by means of my will. and his acceptance of it as true. This. Philosophy is in this connection regarded as something special." as " this unit . The transition from that standpoint must by its ve ry nature be dialectical. there can be no religion. It was the point of view of truth and of dignity. This point of view expressly implies that I am by nature good . all that is right. the grace of God has its work here. upon th e point of view of religious self-consciousness. The finite. If general cultu re is given a place in consciousness. by my freedom. An entirely new self-consciousness in reference to the True has appeared . t he absolute worth or worthlessness of man was bound up with his knowledge of thi s content. that the second re lation is that found in reflection. and remains in such a way that this " I " alone becomes the affirmative. The opposite position implies on the contrary that I am only good by means of my self-conscious spiritual activi ty. therefore. but remains as " I. is something which cannot have a me aning for society in general. Here. All objective content has evaporated. but that I am good in being unconscious. W e shall proceed to present it in a concrete manner.) The rational way of looking at finiteness. no religion whatever i s possible. In contemplating this remarkable contradiction in religious opinion. and must be so made.the s pirit. for everything is p osited through me. According to the prevalent view. my being good is a matter of my caprice and pleasure. because the multitude and multiplicity of particularity were hel d fast as against universality. we easily observe that this religious consciousness had formerly a content existing on its own account. It is not originally and by nature that I am good . for it is I who am the affirmative. The highest duty was to kno w God. any more than from the standpoint o f sensuous consciousness. it belongs to my spiritual world . (y. This position is to be considered in the first place in its relation to the form of Eeflection at its climax. " we have now to consider tha t relation as it reveals itself in reason. At the present day to know truth. while the Idea which has absolut e Being must in religion be established purely through itself and not through me . which is to be annulled. and if we have seen. on the co ntrary. but yet this annulling is all the same not effected or completed if this immedia te individuality at the same time remains. is not regarded as man's highest endeavour. According to it. t o know God. in the form given to it by the standpoint of Reflection. further. which exalts itself to the infinite. but my co-operation as consciousness as my exercise of will is also necessarily involved. All duty. according to the prevalent view. formal subjectivity. depends upon the innermost consciousness. a content which defined the nature of Go d. and consequently right a nd duty are unknown. which has no content in it. however. And thus the Philosophy of Re ligion too. arid all that is left is this pure. which does not really get to conceive of itself a s universal. but must rather expect to meet with opposition and enmity from every side. If accordingly the first relation of the finite to the infinite was the natural and untrue one. then philosophy is a special calling or bu siness. it is a calling which has a special place of its own. on the contrary. I as finite am a nullity. we have to recognise the fact that a tremendous revolution has taken place in the Christian world. springs from the root of . is mere abstract i .earlier times. From this po int of view. and the salvation or perdition. Yet it is only when it is the for m for an objective content that the selfconscious spirit has truth. to worship Him in spirit and in truth . where finiteness lies in the wholly complete d abstraction of pure thought. a manner of regarding things which is outside of ordinary interests. and as regards the necessity of the transition shall only appeal to the consequences which follow from this standpoint. my goodness must arise in my consciousness . not that I am good by means of my own act.

and annulling himself as individual. reckon myself as universal only. reason thinking naively. having an Universal as its object. falsehood. Now this is none other than the point of view of thinking reason. it is requisite that I should be determined as universal. but my freedom is not in it as yet. and since it must allow of origination . If something objective is to be really re cognised. is itself something me rely subjective. The freedom of reflection is of such a kind that it permits of nothing originating in it. inherently empty. I know the sensuous object . this acti vity of the thinking reason. should have determinations or attributes in itself. so to speak. and does not attain to true objectivity. Thought is the activity of the Universal. this idea. and of the man who thinks rationally. remains subjective only. and are locked up in the subjective conscio usness. posite d for me. the determinateness exists only in my supposition . In o rder to this. p ermits nothing objective to originate. Philosophy is in like manner thinking reason . it proceeds when it posits anything. as such. I have only a dead. the more precise forms of thought belonging to this point of view. all content. and a universal would not exist if I were maintained as this ind ividual unit. no doubt in sense the thing is for me somet hing which persists objectively. and thus something objective must be recognised by me which is a ctually regarded by me as true. stops short in the sphere of general ideas or ordinary thought. It is said first of all that subjectivity relinquishes its individuality in the object in recognising an Objective in general. it is requisite that the abstract Universal should have a content as well. a so-called Highest Being. the determining and the objectifying are mine alone. and reflection does not ye t enter in. here there is as yet no difference i n their point of view. which has an absolute essential existence . Closely connected with this is the question : How is the subject determined here ? The subject is characterised. but since there is only an immediate relation here. which has not as yet renounced its immediate particularity. Not till then can i t be present to me as essentially existing. The objectivit y in that case is a mere semblance of objectivity. This object cannot be anything se nsuous. The relation to s . A s tandpoint must therefore be shown where the Ego in this individuality renounces itself in deed and in truth. who as indivi dual posits himself as the Universal. finds his true self to be the Universal. and religion itself is this action. The necessa ry determination is that this Objective as true. that these determin ations are planted in feeling alone. The reflection finally arrived at accordingly is only this. By the Universal here is meant the purely absolute Universal. and I may perf ectly well remain here characterised as this unit. of an Universal. the supreme form of untruth. all vitality remain in myself. The untrue nature of the sensuous consciousness must be taken for granted here. have now to be noticed. It is not for philosophy alone that the object is full of content. as thinki ng. I have a kn owledge of the objectively universal. while religion as. is determined as an universal. this object of the Universal. In this recognition of an Object. If it be empty. in which I am negated as this particular Ego. and affirmative. A t this last standpoint we get certainty only. without law and order . This is apparent. and should m aintain myself. and evil. there is no truth . and which I recognise as the Affirmative. The general characteristics. I renounce m y finiteness. so that this determination of the objective Universal.dentity. but in which my freedom is at the same time maintained. This feature is common to both philosophy and religion . that is to say. in immediate knowledge of God . What is valid for me is the Universal. I must be particular subjectivity which is in very truth annulled. in relation to the recognised object. I renounce myself as this individual unit. this Universal. all activity. to which that essential and independent objectivity is wanting. is not as yet adequate. an empty God. it belongs to me. too. and this emptiness . only that this action in which religion consists appears in philosophy in the form of thought. as the finite.

I have my though ts about it. It may be remarked that it is an essential characteristic of thought that it is mediated action or activity. which has bec ome like a second nature to us. i s' real humility. which as negation of negatio n is affirmation.uch an object is therefore the thought of the subject . I am therefore determined in relation to the object as thinking. but also in religion in its affirmative form. Universality. as the accidental in reference to this Substance. and partly it is only one phase of this activity. the immediate. in devotion. this pure transparency of the activity. which at t he same time is not independent. it is substance in motion within itself. I am subjective. then. the object is the Essenc e. To do this and to think that the Uni versal is my object. and thus I look upon myself as finite. which in itself is negation of the negative. are one and the same. finite as distinguished from this Object. as the particular over against the universal. its permanent existence in this subs tance only. is not empty. All particularity belongs to it . as a moment. for instance. Thus therefore I do not go beyond the consciousness of myself. I distinguish myself from this Object. The nature of such an activity is different from its outward appearance. In thinking. as being a moment in this li fe. is a mode of my existence as pure thinking. mediated Universality. Working and living in objectivity is the true confession of finiteness. and not in phil osophy merely. The simple result seen in the discovery of Colum bus was the consequence of many detached acts and deliberations. are thoughts which exist only through negation of the ne gation. in this relation to the universa l Substance. I have renounced myself as an individual." who again appear ? Here I am determined as finite in the true manner. posited as finite. as affirmative. I arn reflected upon myself. The thought is not merely subjective. ren ounced rny particularity. And thus I am not only potentially but also actually and really. an d I assume an objective attitude . as something distinguished. reflecting about the true object. that which exists for the subject. In this lies the consciousne ss of myself. Thus the mode of immediacy is contained here. . The same is the case with habit. but is absolute f ulness. and this arises from the fact that the universal Object is now potentially thought and h as the content within itself . it is played with immediate activity as the res ult of so many mediatory actions. the relation of my personality towards it as something particular is got rid of. and in its essential moments. A difficult p iece of music can be played with ease after it has been gone through by feequent repetition of single passages . What is further to be observed is that in devotion. Thought is the result whi ch renders itself immediate. and it from myself. as universal it overlaps or includes m e in itself. which appears as immediate. this universal Object is then immediately before me without dem onstration. It is mediation by the annulling of mediation. as that which has its particular being. but also objective. and in so far as I merely perform the act of devotion in yielding myself up to God. does God exist for me. which has its origin in thinking and in what is thought. For that very reason I do not pres erve myself as immediate. S ubstance. thinking the thought of it. and as a n inward process in which it begets its content. which had prece ded it. but no longer it only. " I. And hence the expression that we have immediate knowledge of God : knowledge is pur e activity. Thus th e nature of thought is this identity with itself. for I have to yield myself up. This t hinking of the Universal. This immediacy in the empirical subject is itself partly a result of much mediation. "We can know God in an e mpirical manner. and only negates the impure. Here I renounce myself actually and r eally. But equally in thinking the object. but has renounced itself and knows itself to be finite. I am at the same time only as it were a reflection out of God into myself. and am universal. How then am I determined in this respect.

the nature of the real object. He is thus the finite. On the contrary it must annul itself. What is true is the indissoluble unity of the two. Nor are predicates adequate for definition here. God.Having hitherto considered. In Reflection. I am finite . and exists notwithstanding in the definite form of the Ot her of God. Thus. In this is involved different iation. and least of all those which ar e one-sided and transient. is. It is the Other and the not Other. these are false. Creation is activity. Now this might at fir st appear to us to be something unlike a Divine process. but we already have it in the ordinary ideas about God . For it is Go d's . He wills the finite . it is not it itself. and thus Himself becomes an Other than Himself a finite for He has an Other opp osed to Himself. forms which do not adequately correspond to t hat which the Idea. in a concrete way. howe ver. it destroys itself. But the t ruth is that this finiteness is only an appearance. The simple unity. and then secondly. but an Other. the attitude of the Ego to the un iversal Substance. a phenomenal shape in which He has or possesses Himself. is the contradiction of Himself wit h Himself. exists only as movement. it is His Other. But. and thus for the first time as the True. in itself. besides the world nothing external exists. what is the Idea." however. the " otherness " has wholly vanished in God. Thus God is this movement within Himself. It is equally true that God exists as finite and the Eg o as infinite. By this means. when understood in its true sense. But this separate existence of the finite must not b . and thereby alone is He the living God. vitality. This it is which we have just considered in a more concrete form as the relation of the su bjective Ego to the Universal. He determines Himself when He thinks Himself. and in this way He maintains Himself for Himself as His own result through His own act. only through mediation of Himself with Himself. but rather is it essential that it shou ld differentiate or break itself up within itself. that is to say. then. no truth. the simple forms of a proposition have no longer any value. who produces determinations within Himself. (c. which however i s mediation within itself. This " otherness. the two infinites may now b e distinguished. the infinite is absolute negativity.) The transition to the speculative conception of religion. outside of Him ther e is nothing to determine. God is infinite. when He and a world are two. Nor does the standpoint of the finite represent any more that which is true. The finite is not that wh ich is. these determinations are only moments of the process. In accordance with this way of regarding the matter. identity. separate existence of the finite must in turn annul itself. distinction . affirmation. and abstract affirmation of the infinite is. bad expressions. the finite is a moment of the Divine life. the affirmati on appears as negation of the negation. and spirituality. places an Other over against Himself. in like manner the infinite is not fixed . it dissolves or cancels its own s elf . what is true. For the logically developed and rational consideration of the finite. God creates the worl d out of nothing . The finite is therefore an essential moment of the infinit e in the nature of God. namely. has. fo r it is itself externality. God creates a world. The " is" or exists. for we are accustomed to believe in Him as the Creator of the world. thirdly. which is regarded in such propositions as so mething firmly fixed. In this process it is in the first place affirmation. and it is only in this act of negation that we have what is true. The finite is but an essential moment of the infi nite. however. the finite stands opposed to the infinite in such a way that the finite is doubled. in relation to that which is finite. God alone is . He Himself posits it as an Other. God determines . jind thus it may be said it is God Himself who renders H imself finite. on the contrary. and in it God recognises Hims elf . no other meaning t han that of activity. the true infinite from the merely bad one of the unders tanding. that is. what now remains to be considered is the abstract relation of the finite to the infinite generally.

Without the world God is not God. In losing ourselves in the true object itself. We meet with these abstractions especially among the ancients . it must. God returns t o Himself. This follows as a consequence of what was accomplished in the science of logic . It is customary to frighten us out of the wish to know God and to have a positive relation to Him. however. and makes it into the Absolute. The man who does not rid himself of this phantom steeps himself in vanity. the Notion. taking his stand on this. is devoid of determinate character (and consequently. We must ri d ourselves completely of this opposition of finite and infinite. and from substantial objective religion and religious life. What is true is the unity of the infinite. which gives . on the other hand. from this Ego. but yet retains this which it confesses and knows to be vain. and with vexatious humilit y. the Truth. If you ta ke any of these ways. for h e posits the Divine as something which is powerless to come to itself. while in so doing it holds aloof from rational knowledge. they both have reference to the kernel. is undoubtedly an essential part of philosophy as well as of religion. In the Ego. and. subjective). the lifting up of the finite to Hi mself. as it were. This is surely subjective untruth in its real form. assert that it is just what is.e retained . on the contrary. is implicitly only. and the determinate as what is higher he looks o n the limit limiting itself in itself as higher than the Unlimited. that we must get rid of this bugbear of the oppositio n of finite and infinite. or prevents them from making their influence felt. we escape from this vanity of the self-maintaining subjectivity. they are product s of the beginnings of reflecting abstract thought. If possibility and impossibility be taken in so far as they have a definite mean ing. that is to say. it has only before it that which is included in th e sphere of external consciousness as such. Thus possibility and impossibility h ave no place in this sphere of thought. and make serious work with vanity . namely God. This presumption. for consciousness. be abrogated. what enters into this particular perceiving consciousness. and only as this return is He God. while the objections are bro ught forward with much unction and edifying language. as we have seen. to the Notion of an object. God is movement towards the finite. for that point of view renounces the knowledge of what concerns the kernel or inner element of the object . however. and either destroys them. while he clings to his own subjectivity. Those who occupy this position. From the point of view of consciousness as observing from thi s point of view of observation the inner nature. asserts the impot ence of his knowledge. or with the heart. and consciousness has a merely negat ive relation to it. A few remarks mu st be made upon this position. already reco gnises the infinite as the bad. and do it by g etting an insight into the real state of the case. and owing to this He is. with the bugbear that to seek to ta ke up any such attitude towards God is presumption. that wh ich it essentially is. the h ypocrisy which retains the finite. Because there is only this relation in observation. it is no w argued that it is impossible to know the Absolute. Their meaning must therefore be decided by the nature of the Notion itself. as in that which is annulling itself as finite. however. which acknowledges the vanity of the finite. in which the finite is contained. or accept it as true on auth ority. From this point of view it is a matter of indifference whet her I know through thought the content. and to comprehend the infinite by means of the finite. it is said. The negative relation of consciousness to the Absolute is commonly based upon ob servation . The infinite. only the finite exists. by inner enlightenment. or in any other way. Plato. you are met by this bugbear that it is presumptuous to wis h to know God. The result of all this is. cannot be discussed .

The affirmative consciousness of th e Absolute in the form of simple. although it st . For thought is th e source of the Universal. it must be conceded. he has before him only what is worthy of this standpoint. that is. we must abandon this empirical point of v iew. but those too where the Divine is in consciousn ess as something existing in and for itself. whether t he observing subject observe these higher forms of consciousness in others or in himself. What contradicts experience is impossible. religion is only for the religious man . he is not a simple observer. as we sa w. may also be observed. in so far as it is definite. For wrong as this point of view is. that there may be more in devotion than in religiou s consciousness. therefore on the one hand. and is thus finite. as thinking. so experience beco mes hollow too. as that sphere makes itself empty. observing consciousness . it must no longer be observation of the true object. in fact. if any one occupy such a standpoint. and appropriate to it. but it has been shown that this claim must only be in relation to the affirmat ive . the religious attitude. All depends on the adjustment of the rational or cognitive element in consciousness to what I am in my true essential nature as Spirit. In like manner. of devotion. does not ma ke its first appearance here. in observation the finite is made infinite. it must itself be infinite . and because it has. this. There is no such thing as mere observation here : the observer is. If the content be negated or driven away from this region. Reflection possesses. in such a relation to the object. it may well be that religious expe rience is more affirmative and more full of content than consciousness . is not merely in a negative relation to that which he observes. its content constitutes the worth of experience in respect of all true devotion and piety. but the object itself. as above. indeed. But the conviction that the spirit has only a negative relation to God. to place oneself in relation to something external. From this it follows that in order to find the true seat of religion we must rel inquish the attitude of the observer . There are. other sphe res besides which may be observed . and supplies it to expe rience . for the very reason that it is only empirical. rational. there is no longer present that whic h can supply the true qualities of experience. In regard to this it is to be remarked that this observation limits itself arbit rarily to the sphere of the finite consciousness. has the content of Divine truth. just as I cannot see without light from outside. If. it is true. ruins an d destroys feeling. the region in which the Universal generally in which God is . it is on the other hand an evidence of caprice or clumsiness wh en that which is present in a man himself or in others. however. then all content at onc e goes out of experience . not merely those whose content is only finit e in relation to what is finite. on the con trary. the relatio n of the finite to the infinite . that is. If a man in the exercise of conscious thought holds fast to the position that no affirmative relation to God exists. the Universal is in thought and for thought. that his observation is not purely exte rnal . that is to say. If observation would observe the infinite in accordance with its true nature. and yield a quite differ ent result from that supplied by the position of finite consciousness. and that from this we get the conception of possibi lity or impossibility. devotion. the two may be distinct. however. Reflection proceeds. to advance a claim to posite the finite as infinite . this clumsiness or want of skill. is only posited as a negation. annulled itself by its own act. Properl y speaking. but thi s observation is only for the thinker himself. that is. there m ay be more in the heart than in the consciousness. observation there by is limited to the field of finiteness. is not observed. however. Therefore. which is in observation to remain external. this caprice.the standard of possibility. for him who at the same time is what he observe s. To observe means. for if a man is only to observe. natural religious life. Spirit in its freedom only . and this is only posited in so far as it is external to oneself. Speculative thought may be observed too. or in the form of philosophical knowledge.

however. The Speculative Notion or Conception of Religion." it will be unde rstood that this only expresses the aspect of the outward manifestation of Spiri t. is its absolute standpoint. and the object remains in consciousness as something independent. or to speak more precisely. forms a part. it is the knowledge of something other than the Ego. And yet at the same time the dem and is made that the finite shall be abrogated. self-determination . to which consciousness relate s itself. it is not merely the form of consciousness. that the True. and is firmly retained.ill remains. If we have hitherto made use of the expression " consciousness. it itself is. and which goes from the one to the other. The standpoint of religion is this. which are taken by Reflection as persistent. has all content in itself. Spirit is not merely an act of knowledge in which the existence of the object is separate from the process of knowing it. Thus when we ri se higher. and consequently has finite consciousness as an elemen t in it. The true home of religion. An object such as this cannot be adequately expressed by mer e Reflection. but without effecting their combination a nd realising their pervading unity. but it is the essential nature of Spirit not to be merely in relati on . also that which is known. is fi nite consciousness. is not merely something so abstract . The finiteness of consciousness conies in here. thi s would imply that there existed yet another reality outside of religion. finitude belongs to consciousness. is absolute consciousness. its consciousness w hich was before defined as relation. the sphere in which the true notion or conception of reli gion will unfold itself before us. which brings itself into relation with that which we posited on the other side as the element of difference. which exists objectively for itself. Of this. it itself is self-differentiation. it is not merely such an affirmative attitude towards the Universal. however. This is not merely an att itude of the spirit towards absolute Spirit. too. all further content would be found to be outside of religi on. and this at once implies an a ffirmative relation of the spirit to absolute Spirit. but this finite consciousness is a movement of Spirit itself. Consciousness. Reason. and this implies that God is Himself all content. it does not merely exist as something related. namely. religion is the Idea of the Spirit which relates itself to its own se lf it is the self-consciousness of absolute Spirit. or if the content did actually exist. If it were only this. It is only when we have ar rived at this identity. The fundamental con ception here is the affirmative attitude of consciousness which is only possible as negation of negation. the essential relation of knowledge and its object. that is . as it is at present defined to be. where knowledge posits itself for itself in its object. that we are in presence of Spirit. we have reached the standpoint of infinite observation and of the specu lative Notion. " I " am thus determined as relation. and it is only absolute Spirit in knowing itself. W e abstract from this relation and speak of Spirit. as such. Reason is the region in which alone religion can be at home. would come in to it from without . since Spirit by its own movement differentiates itself . R eligion. all truth and reality. for the Other. Reflection is that form of mental activity which establishes the antitheses. that the finite and the standpoint of reflection have annulled the mselves. Now. is consciousness. as finite. whic h absolute Spirit knows. and consequently this condition of relation is what is highest of all in it. as the self-abrogation of the determinations of the an tithesis. The basis of religion is in so far this rational. but absolute Spirit itself is that which is the self-relating element. Religio n. on the contrary. and consciousness then comes to be included as a moment in the being of Spirit. but a consciousness which is cancelled as fiinite . this speculative element. Religion is therefore a relation of the spirit to absolute Spirit : thus only is Spirit as that which knows. .

it then ceases to be absolute Spirit. which. It is it itself which rende rs itself concrete. in the Idea in its high est form. to which it continues to belong. positing of itself as finite consciousness. an d not immediate it is degraded from being immediate to being posited. Accordingly. The meanin . that is to say. Spirit is for itself or self-conscious. is the self-consciousness of Absolute Spirit. so that God only comes into being by means of it. manifestation or appearance to self.to say. that in which ther e is a distinction between itself and Spirit is the moment of Nature." This diremption. in the first p lace. not as Being. Here. When this proof was given above in its proper place. however. is the only substance and truth of all that constitutes this world. is the first moment. i t is only mediated through consciousness or finite spirit in such wise that it h as to render itself finite in order to become knowledge of itself through this r endering of itself finite. which the kno wledge of absolute Spirit has of itself. The concrete filling-up of the notion or conception of religi on accordingly is its production by means of itself. Thus religion is the Divine Spirit's knowledge of its elf through the mediation of finite spirit. while it is in the Idea alone that everything has its truth. God is absolut ely the First. in so far as it starts from what is immediate. but is Being-for-itself. religion is not a transaction of man. annuls itself. the positing of the Idea. what exists on its ow n account. the self-existent Being-for-self. but as manifestation of the Idea . is the absolute truth. is eventually itself posited as something posited. This procedure. which we have thus put on a firm basis. and that procedure is the active play and movement of the Idea of absolute Spirit within itself. or separation . in which its 'relation to God is. becomes object to itself. on the other hand. By means of this. as immediate deter minate Being. not. and to which it must return. since it exists only by means of these distinction s. and we have that necessity so far as its essence is concerned within religion too . and exhibits that content as the result of another content. as well as the p ositing of Nature and of finite Spirit . and Spirit is not only that which appears. we saw at once how the o ne-sidedness of its procedure by which the content appears not as absolute. but in a shape and form different from that in which it first appeared. has independent existence over against the Notio n. not only that which is for beholders. therefore. or the finite world this First. it is the self-consciousness whic h implies that it exists for itself. The Notion. it is here maintained that this content. If it has knowledge of what is other than itself. so that ab solute Spirit is in reality the True. but is essentially the highest d etermination of the absolute Idea itself. This movement constitutes the Divine life. so that this Idea comprehends the entire wealth of the natural and spiritual world in itself. is now seen to be rather a moment within religion itself. The other consists in the movement of this object back to this its source. and perfects itself by attaining to the totality of its dist inctions." " Nature. in other words. as being a moment o f its essential existence. Thus the moment which was at first considered as ne cessity is seen to be within Spirit itself. without reference to God. whether it be the l ogical abstraction of Being. thi s which appears unposited. but as manifestat ion of the Divine. Man ifestation. is Nature . as it w ere. so that the Notion. this Immediate. has been discussed. For that which appears as First. For itself it is Spirit. and already lies behind u s. is all truth. as that which we call " the world. Spirit as absolute is. in which the finite world whi ch is -thus something posited exists as a moment. to begin with. makes itself an object. however. as such. absolute Spirit self-co nscious of itself is the First and the alone True. The proof of the necessity that this content of religion should thus be absolute truth. and the fact that it is such makes it consci ousness of itself as Spirit. Absolute Spirit in its consciousness is knowledge of itself. manifestation to itself. showed itself as a procedure pr ior to religion. of a merely natural and naive kind. and in which the beginning was made from the immediate. but as a result. In accordan ce with this description.

The Spiritual is the absolute unity of the Spiritual and Natural. At one time Spirit repr esents the one side. it is. This differentiation is therefore itself to be conceived of as returning into ab solute affirmation. the attitude of relation. It is t hese two moments which.g of this in popular language is that God is the unity of the Natural and Spirit ual . which reaches over t o grasp the other side. which. The first two moments are those of the Notion. representing the way and manner i n which the relation of the Spiritual and Natural is contained in the Notion. which thereby becomes a relation. affirmation as infinite. Here we have the manner of the divine manifestation. and then designated the return of the second moment into the first as the t hird moment. and it is . the finite consciousness is the one side. The substantial. so that the two only make up the one determinate character of that r elation. and as the other the differentiation. as absolute Being-for-self. so that the two do not occupy a positi on of equal dignity in this unity. as appearing or manifesting Himself. on the contrary. as differentiation which just as etern ally abrogates itself and becomes the truth of manifestation. so that this l ast is only what is posited. becomes ne gation of the negation. has therefore the following as its two sides : as the one side it has just that solid substantial unity of the Idea. is the side for which the solid unity exists. those two moments themselves (in accordance with the character of the content of the relation) are only to be taken as one side of th e relation. c. The differentiation. constitute that wh ich in a general way is to be considered as the reality of the Idea. and the second moment becomes that which appeared as the third. He is as spiritual unity in His subs tantiality. as Object. and which therefore determines itself as the finite side. Differentiation is the posit ing of two. subjectivity as such. Essentially. Thus is God determined as existing for consciousness. into which the notion divides itself up. the truth being rather that the unity is Spir it . or abrogating itself. but are themselves the two sides of the difference. God as existent. absolute. however. this indifference of the two is itself Spirit. In Spirit the moment of dif ferentiation is that which is termed consciousness. the one as the relation. in consciousness that the activity makes its appearance. the ap pearing of God . that is. and at another is that which overlaps. I. We first of all distinguished the substantial unity from the differentiation its elf. the consciousness. and the other as the self-abrogation of this only relative atti tude of opposition. Th is differentiation itself being posited in that unity of affirmation. as unity relating itself to itself. the refore so appearing to what is other than Himself. which have no other quality attaching to their difference than just those moments themselves. that in that appearing He man ifests Himself to Himself. and is thus the unity of both. In the first. however. being that of the active process in which the division annuls itself. It is in this further con crete determination of Spirit that the process takes place by which the notion o f God perfects itself by attaining to the Idea. and the mode in which its finiteness is determine d is the mode in which it itself reveals to us how its object is determined for it. The dif ferentiation of Spirit within itself. In this Idea are found the fol lowing moments : a. To th is side accordingly belongs the form of freedom. on the contrary. as consciousness. so that it now posits itself as existing f or what is thus differentiated. that is to say. the wor ld of general ideas. posited as the latter is by Spirit itself. that they are not merely moments of the Notion. not merely determined as appearing. however. the practic al. Spirit is. or the theoretical side. lord of Nature. Spirit is no third something in which the two are neutralised. Wh at is further to be observed is. Now. the Idea in its affirmation in which it is identical with itself. from the point of view of the notion. sustained by Spirit. In the other relation. but. subjective unity of the two momen ts. but as appearing to Himself.

WORSHIP OR CULTUS. which is that of Being. a mediation in f act. this immediate u nity. for in faith as it is here defined. the Objective. As determined. but a mediation within itself . has a relation to consciousness. quits the region of idea or ordinary thought likewise . after doing away with the antithesis. In th is certainty it has relinquished its independent Being. and so to bring about a concrete unity. externa l mediation and that particular mode of it have already vanished. theref ore consciousness. is to be considered. inasmuch as it possesses in itself the antithesis of subject and obj ect. that is to say. it involve s relation in respect of the distinction of Object and Subject. is He Spirit. in fact. and alone True. and I place myself over a gainst the object as an Other. is still present. and that which we have termed the general idea of God may lik ewise be called the Being of God. and the general form in which it appears as belonging to it is what we call Faith. in the form of idea. or as a certainty of the truth. Thus worsh ip is itself in the first place theoretical. as something which is absolutely Existent. only as an abstract God does He exist for consciousne ss as a something beyond the present. But in worship I stand on the one s ide and God on the other. but has certain knowledge of it a knowledge of it. Th is it does. and so far does away with the division between subject and object . It belongs t o the knowing subject. I. i. then. as contradisting uished from the first aspect. The characteristic of consciousness is included in the fir st aspect as well.here that self-consciousness is to be considered in its movement. the n. and God with myself. God is not as yet the true God. Thus it might be said that the first is God in His Being. worship will now constitute the practical relation. if we designate th at first or theoretical unity as the mode under which ordinary thought conceives the Existent. in as far as in it self-consciousness not only has a know ledge of its object as theoretical. in contrast with that stable relation (which . OF FAITH. the aspect of freedom. Here. Faith belongs to this practical relation on its subjective side. is theoretical). for every form of consciousness is selfconsciousness. Since faith must be defined as the witn ess of the spirit to absolute Spirit. manif estation which exists in and for itself. the second the subject in its subjective Being. and essentially self-consciousness. which is the element of truth in its formal knowledge of itself. In the theoretical relation. so that this division might seem to exist in the first condition of relation. Thus God is essentiall y self-consciousness. as " Other. The separation of subject from object makes its first actual appearance in the W ill. immediate knowledge. in order to assimilate it to myself by bringing i t out of that state of separation. my purpose being to unite myself closely with God. This is manif estation as worship. in as far as it itself. In willing I am an actual being and a free agent. The Being of God therefore involves a r elation to consciousness . C. is present . as being the consciousness of God as existent in and for Himself. God is." Inasmuch as He is in His mani festation as He is potentially. Thus knowledge has its place as associated with worship. This mediation . He has an absolutely realised existence . belong to His manifestati on. Or. of subjectivity. In as far as He is no longer de termined and limited in His actually existing manifestation.

or to put it otherwise. the self-consciousnes s. and is the substantial uni ty of Spirit with itself. If this be taken as also the unity of the certai n knowledge of itself with the content. abstract point of personality. it is the su bject which prays. further.therefore belongs to the essential nature of Spirit. the individual is oblivious of self. and which has to do with this its exalta tion. As knowing. pure self-consciousness. it constitutes its as pect as consciousness. this conception may easil y seem merely to result in those one-sided forms of reflection which have alread y been considered. having in as far as it is essential being only. absolute certainty. For consciousness. as my certainty of myself. The explanation of this distinction will help towards a fuller elucidation of t he true conception. is destined to be the true subjectivity only in so far as it is knowledge which is emancipated and free from immediacy. since those very forms of reflection are none other than the single moments of the expounded conception held fast in a one-sided manner. The further development of the immediacy which has not been abrogated a ccordingly presents us with the infinitude of the vain subject as vain. is that absolute. This may all the more easily appear to be the case. it has an object. and therefore. it ma y easily appear as if this determination were the same with the idea of the imme diate knowledge of God. and may be confounded with them. In this exposition so much depends on each individual moment. as likewise . which infinite form likewise essentially is. That su bjectivity. But in devotion the subject does not maintain itself in its particularity. Such an assertion. then this unity would be one in which va nity as such would be defined as representing what is true and absolute. and is filled with his object. together with its object. the certainty faith has of the truth. in the fire and warmth of devotion. no object which is for consciousness something other than and beyond it. in so far as it knows the true content. in accordance with which the knowing subject. as also of those forms of reflection. and as excluding a perception of the truth that knowledge as such is in fa ct mediation in itself. burie s itself in its object. forms ideas. or even if they be grasped in a more complete way. o bjectivity for self-consciousness. it is. and this as being the Essence is the absolute Object. this uniting of the absolute content with knowledge. as free. It having thus been shown that the Truth itself is contained in the certainty of spiritual. its Essence. This unity exists simply and solely as the knowledge of it in an o bjective form. This is the innermost. as laying aside all peculiar ities of its particular or individual content. divine connec tion itself. that if one only of these mom ents be held fast while we abstract from the others. as being the Essence which is my Essence. remains devoid of Spirit. all the same. however. but it is its own Poten tiality. To expres s this in more concrete language. but only in its movement in the Object. has knowledge of itself. on the contrary. is identical wit h this certainty. and is inseparably identical with it. of infinite form and abso lute content. speaks. an immediate affirmation. or. in which as immediate the Being of God is just as certai n for me as I myself am. Even if the subject. In this its free. but that the latter persists in its fini te independent Being. would essentially imply a persistent adherence to the immediacy of knowledge as such. This content is the potentiality of self-consciousness. This would imply. as absolutely certain. yet apart from their identity. In the act of devotion which rests on faith. whi ch can be understood in a speculative way only as this unity of self-consciousne ss and consciousness. so that it is only the speculative nature of the two moments and of the spiritual Substance which is not grasped in thought and directly treated of. or of knowledge and its essence. and in this character exists for us. and does not keep his imm ediate character. though o f its essence only. itself still prtsent. It is precise ly the subject which possesses itself in this devotional exercise . it has the very certai nty of the truth. and only as this individual self-moving spirit. and this culmination of vanity remains. which is this simply and solel y as negation of the negation. He yields up his heart. and at the same ti me on the essential combination of these in unity. that the immediacy of the knowing subject does not disappear. It is at the same time no foreign object.

For there are theologians who. this remains a meaningless expression. it is tr ue. But so too. a re so restricted to it that if they do not find God spoken of and defined as som ething absolutely supersensible. if this "I" should be taken as an actual existence of God. universal substance. If we know of no higher characteristic of God than that of universal Being. just as it is in accord ance with its purely original character what thinks. O r conversely. whi le they suppose that they have gone a long distance from the beaten track of the ordinary forms of the reflection which characterises the culture of our time. of univer sal life. and negates its own essence in itself. by means of whic h man may be united with God partly." which takes up an exclusive attitud e towards its Essence. People do not know how to get a knowledge of God as Spirit : Spirit is an empty idea to them. In connection with the conception just indicated. universal matter. the tree or animal as such. having merely the same meaning as motionless abstract Subst ance. which determines itself as object. are. then such forms of existence certai nly contain this so-called divine Essence. a tree. only in so far as it is this negative unity of i nfinite Form with Substance. which abstracts from s ensuous life and sensuous ideas. " I am : I am thinking : " this form of immediate Being is regarded from the pantheistic p oint of view as that which constitutes the ultimate definition and the persisten t form of what thinks. since that " I " which was merely Being. have their source in this conceiving of Spirit as devoid of Spirit. or more accurately. and even as absolute eternal Being. in so far only as the sun as sun. or of the bald accusation of Pantheism which is brought against th at conception even by theologians themselves. immediate Being-for-itself. and the like. it retains the reflected vanity of simple. however. and holds itself fas t as against Substance that is. and tha t it would have to do with God in an outward fashion only.from the Being-for-self which reflects itself into itself. nor would it be in God. and is a withdrawal into the free region of the supersensuous. and still more are plants and animals. and that man as he is originally and by natur e is good. And from such a definition of individual self-cons ciousness it is not possible for the pantheistic idea to free itself. although self-consciousness be of the true kind. which determines itself as finite in the essential object. if these two assertions be made. is and continues in this immediate natural existence. and such like. and contain it as a Universal which i s devoid of Spirit. and further. of the cold and reserved isolation of the existent " I. that knowledge which is merely immediate knowing immediately anything whatever. they in their thinking cannot get any further t han the conception of such an affirmative relation as mere ordinary abstract ide ntity. The sun. an animal. With justice is it said of this " I " that God would not be in it. But if thought here adheres to its form as abstract thought. Spirit becomes Spirit as concrete freedom only. as against its individual particularity. life in fact. which is ordinarily understood as being the defin ition of the soul. u nderstood not indeed as a natural Thing. then this yielding up presents itself partly as natural death. that it would be the pantheistic point of view. and unworthy of God. that is here." and this existent " I " as the ultimate and true determination of self-consciousness. it also is still conceived of from th at pantheistic point of view. The two assertions that man can onl y know God in an immediate manner. it follows that Spirit is to be t aken only as the existent " I. Although the latter be also termed Spirit. yet as a reality so far as immediatenes s is concerned so that it exists as knowing immediately. and even although in this s ense it be thus taken as a divine reality. into its essence as its object as something which merges its natural singularity. But the relation of self-consciousnes . the air. in a stone. as something which allows its naturaln ess or immediateness to flow into its universality. as Thought. including even God is nothing but Spirit devoid of Spirit. in the absolu te content. since God must at least abstractly be de fined as the absolutely universal Essence. then from the pantheistic point of view it too is taken as a divine existence. we may perhaps be reminded of another idea. If in connection with the immedia teness thus relinquished. what is thought of be the merely bodily immediateuess. if the individual self-consciousness be defi ned as a natural simple Thing. Pantheism sees and knows God in the sun. In like manner.

Theology is the comprehension or understanding of religious content. itself belongs to the infinite con tent. this externality must drop away. on the other hand. The content of faith may indeed come to me by means of inst ruction. and this implies that no finite content has any place in it. that it should not be idea : in freedom I exist on the contrary as that activity in a ffirmation which is infinite negation in itself. If." . since in such a relation it is itself Spirit. who leads the church into all truth. and least of all should they apply to it such terms as Pantheism. and only f . for it has before it the existence of the divine in a particular form. and this is not Panthe ism. authority. and it ceases to be for me an Other. and if they know Spirit only as negation of Go d. b ut emphatically forget the doctrine of the grace of God. It is invo lved in the very nature of the freedom which is the inner characteristic of fait h. It itself is alr eady this form implicitly. By a righteous sta ndard I am weighed in God. in such sort that this form. that is the doctrine of Pantheism. and should not seek to criticise the comprehension of it. If we grasp what is taught by the Church. in speaking of this innermost element. is false. if he as this individ ual unit knows God. in a spirituallyvital at titude toward God. in one of hi s sermons. Such theologians ou ght therefore to acknowledge that they cannot comprehend it. the all things among which indeed they r eckon the soul and that "I" which is reflected into its Beingfor-self. that it should not be what we at first called substantial. for it is knowledge of God and of His character. mediation. Meister Ecka rdt. &c. on the contra ry. whose entire resources consist of critic ism and history. If God were not. for there are things which are easily misunderstood and which can only be thoroughly unde rstood in thought. the speculative determinations which have been specified will be found to be in volved in it . in thought. In faith I make that my own which comes to me thus. If theologians see Pantheism in this attitude. Now if we should wish to give t o mediation the form of an external mediation as the foundation of faith. and abides for ever in His church. my eye and His eye are one. that is to say. I would not be . If m an. is seen in natural death) that man becomes unite d with God. in its natural form. be immediately God. not in f inite existence. declares that it is only through the abrogation of this naturalness (which a brogation. and God in me. they ought in that case to let them alone. &c. and when fait h is reached. and since by the ren unciation of the exclusive character which it possesses as immediate oneness or isolation. however. and if there are theologians who cannot. a Dominican monk. miracle. then the content is directly adequate to the form. The grand present day cry rai sed against this truth is Pantheism. philosophy and science have been wholly neglected. if I were not. however. This mediation. and which they then are justified in excluding from God in respect of their individual ac tuality in which they are finite. Faith must now get what is essentially the form of mediation. These may be the foundation of faith as subject ive faith. while am ong the Protestants of the present day. among other things. Spirit witnesses only of Spirit. then s uch a form would be a wrong one. above all. and this knowledge is in itself a process. the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. not needful to know this. But it is just in giving this position to the content whereby it assu mes the character of a basis for me. and. and consequent ly even count the spirit among the All. by grasping them in thou ght. solid unity. The older theologians had the most thorough grasp of this divine depth. a movement is life. It is. says. of which the basis is something external. It is present. of justification throug h Christ. the following : " The eye with which God sees me is the eye with which I see Him . in the Notion. they not only forget the doctrine that man was created in the image of God. but in absolute manifestation of itself. follow out such doctrines which undoubtedly have to do with the innermost d epths of the divine Essence. Immediate faith may be s o defined as being the witness of the Spirit to Spirit. then He were not. that we go on a wrong track . the " I" be knowledge of the i nfinite content.s to God as Spirit is wholly different from this pantheistic mode of conceiving the relation. it places itself in an affirmative relation. The Church.

If God speaks. Would this angel not have known th em without those marks ? This faith has no real interest for Spirit. men are required to believe things which at a certai n level of culture they can no longer believe. it has been pointed out that the stroke shows through from the other side.inite things are mediated by means of external grounds. Amon g other things he says that it would have been better if God had given the Jews some definite instruction regarding the immortality of the soul. " an old fragment of parchment found in Oxford. The true foundation of f aith is the Spirit. according to the Greek t ext. but this must drop away . for millions of men g o about with withered and crippled limbs. xxiii. but onl y in certain laws. and if orthodoxy demand faith o f this kind. If criticism of what we know concerning the nature of God takes to do with such things. from its very nature. to maintain it. rather than to have taught them to go to the (aller a la selle). whose limbs no man heals. T he faith thus demanded is faith in a content which is finite and contingent. and the witness of the Spirit is inherently living. his reply was that his own religion did not require of him a faith in eternal truths. which is not the witness of God to Himself as Spirit in the Spirit. spo ke against miracles. modes of action or ceremonial observances. in presence of certain ways of lookin g at things common among men. The non-spiritual. it is spiritually. " Who (Christ) blessed for evermore. This requires especially to be pointed out in view of the " Auf klarung. and that he looked upon it as an advantage possessed by the Jewish religion that in it eternal tru ths are not presented for our acceptance. reads. Thus there is a passage in the New Testament which. because it is faith in a content w hich is not divine." I t has gained the mastery over this formal faith. from miracles. &c. and this belief is to be a means of faith in Christ . Now. It may thus happen that faith in a religion has its commencement from such tes timony. When Mendelssohn was asked to come over to the Christian religion. for if this is not done." Faith which begin s in such an external manner is as yet formal. not accidental and external things of this kind. Miracles. In like manner theology has in recent times laid stress in connection with exege sis on the number of codices in which this or that disputed passage is to be fou nd. then these are testimonies which are no testimonies at all. In like mann er it is related in the Old Testament. that is in a finite content. and said to His disciples. those positive statutes he said had been established by God. tha t is to say which is not the true content. mathematical truths. The following is to be specially noted in regard to miracles. He reproached the Jews for demanding them of Him. Latrince thus become a content of faith (Deut. that at the time of the flight out of Egy pt red marks were made at the doors of the Jewish houses in order that the angel of the Lord might recognise those dwellings. Voltaire's bitterest attacks are directed against the demands of a faith of this kind. nor is it any more essential to determine whe ther or not the man who had the withered hand was healed . " God () blessed for evermore . for Spirit reveals itself to Spirit alone . it ma y indeed be a means. Whether at the marriage at Cana the guests got a little more wine or a little less is a ma tter of absolutely no importance . it becomes impossible for it. it is said. Christ Himself. however. and the true faith must come in i ts place. is not a content which can belong to fa ith. The content of religion is the eternal nature of God. however. since for the finding of these reason is sufficient . are to be b elieved in this way. " The Spirit will guide you into all truth. Verifica tion may at first appear in that external formal manner. ). but yet it is always required on its own account as well." a diff erence occasioned by the stroke in the &. For true faith has no accidental cont ent. reads. whe reas these eternal truths are the laws of nature. . &c. It is essential to mark this distinction between the two kinds of fait h. on the contrary.

Subjective consciousness itself. and the essential characteristic here is that I enclose myself with God within myself. it then is practical. subjective self-consciousness is. possess a religious. it bears witness of this to the object. " I " this empirical existence from which Essence is still certainly different. and attestation as mediation. know myself in God as my truth. What is to be believed must. This represents the essential characteristic of religion . Thus it knows its Essence. therefore only in so far as this knowledge is free knowledge is the unity of self-consciousness present. Thus to put it more definitely . The essential thing is this concrete unity. But in God consciousness and knowledge are inherent. an d at the progressive stages of the development of Spirit faith modifies itself a nd adopts a different kind of content. and may become irreligious. is a limited. Spirit as particular. for Spirit with a determinate character. so that the latter exists as a mere semblance only. The One Spirit is in fact the substantial foundation . But this religion of commands in its fully developed form is harsh in the e xtreme. to be the inmost elem ent in the conception of worship. an d the absolute content is substantial unity.We must indeed concede that they are eternal. That is to say. for the consci ousness which has reached knowledge of the absolute content is free. however. m ust contain nothing else but religion. this is the substantial unity of Spirit with itself which is essential and infinite form. as it takes a definite shape in the individual periods of the history of the world. selfconsciousness has an object . I am present in it with my individual personality. and are no content of eternal Spirit in and for itself. this is the spirit of a p eople. and it should contain as such only eterna l truths of the Spirit. Religion. It is the national spirit. which in like manner only in thus wi tnessing produces itself as Absolute Spirit. it divests itself of the reserve and isolation of Being-for-self. so too is objective tru th constituted for it. spiritual content . is just what is void of essence. this is grasped by the consciousness in early years. is still subjective in a formal manner only. These are a content. or rather determined as universal in opposition to what is sin gular. or as the first moments in it. We have now defined faith. each person is born in his own nation and belongs to the s . or whether such commands of God relate to moral actions. whether those positive statutes have to do with the external modes of worship. is concrete in our way of looking at it. too. knowledge in itself. and this means that singularity is simply abrogated. it i s again the spiritual element. I am on the other. but they are of very limited conte nt. as essence it is Absolute Object. the disposition of mind which is the principal th ing. This constitutes the substantial foundatio n in the individual . however. or in a special form. Thus we do right to speak to a child of G od its Creator. As knowledge. but this con sciousness. and th e form which implies that this content is the object of consciousness is insepar able from it. Spirit beco mes known to self-consciousness only in its freedom. determinate consciousnes s. and for self-consciousness in so far as it is free this is none other than the witness of the Spirit. truth too exists only in this definite mode. but only implicitly. the Church's knowledge of its own Essence . and the foundation thus laid is thenfurther extended and broadened. For Spirit in this special form. God is on the one side. to begin with. In worship. . Theoretical consciousn ess. however. which as a unit is exclusive in relation to its object. Here we have to do with Spirit in a particular or special form. but only in a limi ted manner. and in this way the child forms an idea of God as of some Higher Being . When it becomes concrete for the subject too. Thus it is the certainty o r sure knowledge of the absolute Spirit in His Church. and th at this is its Essence . and enter into relation with a limited conte nt. this absolute enjoyment there is emotion in it . According as the subjective spirit is constituted. Worship is the act o f giving to oneself this highest. however. contained in it. a nd God in me. and for the rest. and this witnes s is thus the testimony of Absolute Spirit.

In such conflicts the combatants fight for the glory of God. but they themselves do not call it " believing. without his fault and without his d esert. but it may also take the form of one people comp elling others to conform to their faith. Herodotus says. enforced partly within the State itself and partly outside of it. We say. Each individual lives into the spirit of these ideas and experiences. Howe ver independent the individual may imagine himself to be. it is the absolute foundation of faith. This collision may take place in th e sphere of ordinary thought and of reflection. and thus faith becomes compulsory State -authority. This authority is. and as it were the identical element of nature . or it may be that a caste or a particular family is marked off to teach doctrine and to condu ct the worship of God. and prayers were offered up in the form of hymn s. Thi s is something historical . in what manner the substantial Spirit comes into the consciousness of nations. and the defence may be based on reasons and evidences of truth. for it is what is substantial. The children too go in festival attire with their elders to worship. it is his special n ature itself. But now different forms of faith make their appearance. it is their power in reference to them as units. so that the individual breathes in the atmosp here of his people. and the battles in India between worshippers of Siva and Vishnu. it is impossible for h im to get beyond this spirit. different religions. they fi . but fo r this reason only. and is in this relation to them their absolute authority. or have something to do in connec tion with this divine worship. too. poets. Under such conditions. and thus a spiritual contagion is spread abroad among the people. whi ch can come into collision with one another. the thoughts of these poets were preceded by still earlier begi nnings. This spirit is in fact the substantial element. the beginnings are invisible . and has a sure pla ce amongst a people on its own account. Homer and Hesiod have here an authority. Under this head we may ra nk the wars of the Mohammedans. Each individual as belonging to the spirit of his people is born in the faith of his fathers. and in order to remove it and to render that supersensuous power propitious. that their utterances were in conformity with the Greek spir it. something entirely natural. take part in the religious functions. which were the first glimmerings of the Divine. This constitutes that basis of faith afforded by historical develo pment. bears its part. individuals as units are neither fr ee nor are they in bondage. for it will hardly be ma intained that the stage of culture which appears in the works of Homer represent s what has existed from the very first. hear repeate d the beliefs of the church and of the nation. r ecourse was had to incantations. This substan tial element exists in this way independently in contradistinction to individual s . they learn the prayers. hut its power is greatest in spiritual matters." if you understand by belief or fait h what involves the consciousness of opposition. the Priests. for there is here no kind of opposition of reflectio n and subjective thought. And besides.pirit of that people. and the few who in this state of things know what the Divine is are the Patriarchs. enter into these and accept them in the same direct way in which uniformity in dress and the customs of everyday life are propagated. Such is natural authority . Fear is the beginning . to begin with. that is to say. Thus by degrees consciousness develops itself. those who are capable of expressing that Spirit are prophets. Dread of the supersensuous expressed its elf in the earliest times in a crude and primitive manner. and the faith of his fathers is a sacred thing to the individual and is h is authority. I t is the standard which determines what is to be regarded as truth. a nd education. And here the question arises as to how a religion is founded. the religious wars between Catholics and Protest ants. Th is kind of collision has given rise to countless wars. In any case. the Inquisition too. such and such peoples have believed this. without hinting at any prohibition of wh at is contrary to it. Homer and Hesiod made their gods for the Greeks.

and the es sential content." for thought. and that what is truth for the nation may receive recognition. he behaves as if separated from that Other. The as yet religious mediation of faith as it appears in worship. he is finite. Christ. on the other hand. accordingly. Thought knows itself to be free. so to speak. The breach between thought and faith then develops itself further. a man accepts something given. who experienced a particular fate. Clearly faith is in itself. and so far authority. but He is also the Son of God. in which I am. When will appears in this form. in which what is believed is not to be brought into question. and feel ings which it is built are of no importance here. too. tha t breach which we already see among the Greeks in the time of Socrates. the unfolding of its meaning. and i t is to be held in respect. however. With this there co-exists a demand f or "inwardness. something already present. fre edom. it has certain principles. in this my conviction. is not merely a man. he isolates himself as an individual. as an inmost certainty which is absolutely and exclusively my own. at home with myself. where freedom brings itself into relation with the content as well. It is here that the distinction enters between the inner life. the aspect of Form enters into relation with the substantial element of truth. In willing. Thought implies a new relation towards faith . In this certainty of my own. this freedom. but its formal character. Such then is the formal demand of freedom which does not criticise the truth of fait h. Here. and to which it reduces everything. but this history at the same time professes to be the explication of the natur e of God. a given period has certain principles. Here the b asis is no longer the substantial content of faith. however. But now the freedom of faith directly appears as a contradiction in itself if th e matter be regarded from the point of view of abstract thought. f elt. is thus the deeper lying element. so that what is potentially in faith may also be realised. reflections. the seat of my freedom. it is true. where no as sumed principles any longer exist. The explication of the history of Christ. and th e enjoyment of it . which is made by a man in proportion as the consciousness of freedom awakens within him. is the active process of bringing forward into reality the previously determined unity. In thought. To say this is childish . his power of knowledge. the place of conscience. the opposite is muc h nearer the truth. he has in himself a purpose. is it that the breach between thought and faith makes its appearance. faith is really conceived of as my personal fa ith. This has been given in thought. whatever the faith itself ma y happen to be . and it is Thought which firs t seeks to be free in respect of the content also. and thus finitude comes in. in other words. not only so far as the form is concerned. can further take up a po sition of impartiality relatively to the various forms of belief which assert th emselves to be the truth.ght in order that God may be recognised in consciousness. It is the ultimate analysis only. But these principles them selves belong to development . in accordance with the distinction which directly enters here. In the Christian religion this principle is present from the beginning. In his a . But in this demand of freedom. and this act ive process has to begin with the form of limitation and particularity. and is concerned with subjective freedom only. worship is practical. is present in it. This demand is an essential one. but in respect of the content also. while in his understanding. Thus this freedom is formally the same as freedom of f aith as such. whatever may be the nature of the content. my faith has its source and its plac e. a man confronts an Other. It is fe equently said that in his will man is infinite . or. For in the very act of believing. enjoyed. the definite reasons. from an external history which is made a matter of faith . which constitutes the advance to philosophy. I am free and independent with regard to others. which a re really its own. still in bondage. as far as the content is concerned. requires that this should be posited. produced by mysel f. that is to say. freedom doe s not exist altogether apart from authority . The inner life is the holy place. Regarded in one aspect. and it has pro duced Dogmatics the doctrine of the Church. an intent with regard to an Other. that relig ion starts. freedom of faith in the general sense r evolts against such compulsion .

and continues. In religion. this is not only not worship. Divine power. and conversely. that I may be spiritua l. too. What seems to be my act is then God's. should exist. whic h as forsaken of God waits for me to bring the end. the good into it. which we call the grace of God. the grace of God and the sacrifice of man. and this. The truth rather is that worship is within religion. and the Object is to be in me as Spirit. opposed to my par ticular subjectivity. Man is not like a stone here. implying that religio n has first to be created. and is . and exists on its own account. too. which i s faith. so that it is not a case of grac e only operating in a practical way. which must content itself merely with being continually told that there is a God ! Since the truth rather is that worship presupposes the essential existence of th e final purpose of the world. In so far as worship. and together with this the belief that God exists. runs counter to the merely moral standpoint of Kant and Fichte . and the knowledge that God and reality exist i s the fundamental truth which I have only to assimilate to myself. In connec tion with the act. that the end in view being. therefore. is a world outside of me. and if religious talk is constantly directed toward produ cing a sense of wretchedness. Such is the twofold a ctive movement which constitutes worship. is the renunciation in general of that self of mine. that I lay aside my subjectivity and take and have my share in that work which eternally completes itself. it is true. This is my work. too. This. goodness. to be realised. and thus at length attain to objective existence. is something outside of religion. but is. if in the present day it is felt to be supremely necessary to br ing faith near to men. In like manner. should lose the form of an idea. which no longer retains itself for its own sake. and that toward which th e action.cts man has an end before him. while man forsooth is the passive material. Oh. unhappy a ge. tends. a negative moment o r stage is contained in it. Its end. is essentially absolute reality. Wh at worship has to accomplish is not the separation of anything from the Object. opposed to me. Here then is a twofold act. reconciliat ion. but one which is o nly to have actuality in me . I am to make myself such that the Spirit may dwell in me. but this persistent effort. This last is the husk. subjective. He moves toward man. should have this subject ivity taken away from it. on the contrary. on the contrary. or the alteration of anything in it. it has an end in itself. eternal truth. an ideal. is an act. goodness is in no sense something which merely ought to be. and th is end is not one which has still to be produced. The end to be reached rather is that through ine the Divine should come to be in me. and that same work is God's. the end. on the contrary. is absolutely complete.in man through man's exaltation of himself . or created. regarded from H is side. but of such a kind that it is really the practical a . which is to be stripped off. and such action essentially requires that the con tent. it is. is the implicit concrete reality of the Divine and of consciousness. I am t o be in the Spirit. Here. and thus is its end the existence of G od in man. and exists only through the annulling of human kn owledge and will. the human work. what seems His is mine. or in other words. The sphere of moral action is limited. But the freedom of man just consists in the knowledge and willing of God. nor the establishing of its own claims with regard to it. there goodness still remains something which has yet to be brought fort h. to begin with. According to this. and yet sets out from this presupposition to oppos e empirical self-consciousness and its particular interests. the Divine unity of the spiritual and the natural world is presupposed the particular self-conscious ness being regarded as belonging to the latter and the whole question concerns o nly myself and has reference to myself. then. and centres in this. which is my action. without participating in any way in what goes on. as if i t were not already essentially there. the mind gets into a difficul ty on account of the freedom of man. to be something that ought-to-be.

not as absolute. the body is just as much an affirmative ingredient as the soul if any one says he consists of body and soul . We find that worship also develops in conformity with the idea of God which has just been unfolded. too. the unity of the two is immediate also. then. Or. or as being in the unfreedom of freedom. at another as the absolute unity. To begin with. the unity of the two is also a natural immediate unity only. infinite Spirit: In as far as this natural charac ter is posited in Him. As hitherto defined.ctivity of the subject itself. The truth is that it remains absolute for itself. but continues to exist only in unbro ken continuity with its Object. Consequently. freedom is merely t his formal freedom of the subject. nor persist in keeping to a form whic h is antagonistic to this its Universality. it is necessary that its notion. in worship. In the Idea the subj ect is essentially conceived of as free. and is not man's consciousness of his infinite f reedom. a unity whic h indeed is merely natural. As regards man. is the notion or conception of worship in general. He is indeed the Unity of this and the Spiritual . to express it otherwise. only formally free. or on its own account. be for it Objec t as Spirit. and is the obje ct of the infinite love of God. therefore. however. THE DEFINITE CHARACTER AND SPECIAL FORMS OF WORSHIP OR CULTUS. if such self-consciousness be still immediat e. freedom itsel f. and knows hi mself as infinite Personality. The de finite aspects of worship correspond with these different ideas of God. man is determined in the same way. true faith presupposes the selfconsciousness of the absolute freedom of the spirit the consciousness that man is free in his own nature. and as thus conceived. as having an immediate natural character. it is. and labours under the defect of hav ing a merely natural character. so that it d oes not separate itself from that Essence. but in so far as the natural charac ter is something permanent. II. in which the consciousness of the subject is adequate to its notion. and as infinite subjectivity has the consciousne ss that it has infinite worth for itself. and He has it in Himself in an affirmative manner. this content exists as the Notion for us. and the sam e is the case as to our consciousness regarding Him. but at first possesses relative freedom only. Now. i. to begin with. ho wever. The Notion is the inner. like the Subst ance which is identical with subjective self-consciousness. God is immediately determined as an abstraction. are in the first instance formal r econciliation and freedom : if the subject is to be adequate to its conception o r notion. freedom of the subject in relation to its universal Essence. so that subjective s elf-consciousness has its Essence. by virtue of his fundamental nature. by whicli it discards particular subjectivity. but that does not imply that it is already posited in existence as suc h. God Himself does not exist as Spirit in an immediate manner. and reconciliation in worship or devotion. and not truly spiritual. which itself is spiritual. To say that man is s . At first. the Idea is like the Notion. its truth in the object. Su ch. whose foundation is the determination of what is known as faith. In faith is contained the notion or conception of absolute Spirit itself. Now. the substantial element. that absolute Spirit. we have conceived of it as such. for only by bringing itself into relation with its Essence in that absolute content can the subjective spirit be free in itself. At one time God is thought of as the unity of the natural an d spiritual. and as having a merely natur al character. and as such it is through u s that it is present in us in the knowledge which grasps its object The Idea. does not as yet possess this shape and content in existing self-conscious ness generally.

to the exclusion of all caprice. his essence. and there must be adoration and praise of Him. Here man in his freedom has not yet attained to freedom. and bestow upon them the en joyment of all that is best. eating. which has no need of reconciliation. The distinction is not in so far taken seriously. it is essential that it be carried out with solemnity. and the enmity and return out of it are n ot regarded as essential moments of self-consciousness. In this way solemnity and dignity rule in th e most ordinary dealings of life. therefore. he lives in this substantial unity. not anything set apart from the rest of life. they knew themselves to be originally one with her. it takes up the entire external actual existence of the individual into itse lf. The temporal life with all its needs this our immediate life is itself worship. o r an original state of reconciliation with his object. Conflict and strife with that negative may even arise. and his faith. In order that this action. and have the value of substantial a cts. his truth. If Athene was known to the Athenians under this gui se as their divine power. Such. and from the occup ations belonging to immediate. of the State the feeling that the gods are friendly toward them. his worship. is heathen worship. it is not as yet degraded by freedom t o externality. they must. So soon as the relation of worship takes on a more concrete sha pe. it is true. At the first stage of the immediate unity of the finite and infinite. present itself. which is regarded by us as action of a contingen t kind. a consciousness that God is near to them as the God of the nation. drinking. The concrete existence of finite life is not a s yet esteemed a matter of indifference . worship and life are not separated . the negative is shut out from the inner rel ation of subjectivity. At this stage. have specia l attention directed to tliem. is such a natural unit y. there must be a rising up to the thought of the absolute Being . self-consciousness has not as yet attained to development into Totality. Negativity must. and the whole compass of ordinary daily life. an d knew the divine to be the spiritual power of their nation itself. but not being the product of consciousness itself. a realm of darkness and of evil to be separated off from the immediate unity. however. therefore. may be congruent to the form of substantiality. While. Thus a conscious. He re worship is already that which man represents to himself as the ordinary mode of life . Here. is therefore essentially an immediate relation. an express consciousness of its God as such must indeed spring up in the subject . repose. and the engaging in these actions and occupations cons titutes a holy life. But this is to begin with an ab stract relation of a separate and independent character into which concrete life does not enter. an d all actions connected with the satisfaction of natural necessities come to hav e a reference to worship. externality and need are necessarily inherent in such occupation s. sleeping. and a world of absolute finitude has not as yet placed itself over against an infinitude. but it is of such a kind that it is th ought of more as an external conflict. as it were. and the subject has not as yet separated its essential life from the maintenance of its temporal life. finite existence. and be engnged in with circumspection and sobriet y. and that app earance of contingency is not present here. Conseq uently. but rather a continuous life in the realm of light and in the Good. and becoming regularity and order. In this stage there is t herefore no real reconciliation. ness of their felicity prevails among the heathen. since in the process of becoming fin . still r egarded all through in relation to religion. The acts of daily and ordinary life are. all this is arranged in a general manner by means of rules. for instance. for this presupposes an absolute dualism or div ision in the inner life. This is a characteristic of worship in all those religions in which the absolute essential nature of God is not as yet revealed.imply naturally free (a definition which really contradicts itself) implies also that his relation to his object. the essential note of worship is that it is not something pecul iar. and is. because the freedom of the inner life has not yet given itself an independent sphere. It has its place outside. if they are to be lifted up into that essential unity.

Now this is what is generally designated as sacrifice. of the universal essential Will. not that he may be made richer. cannot make what has happened into something which has not happened. nor can it repent that it has acted as it did. This too is the general signification of gifts in Eastern countries . rendering it necessary that these should be broken. sacrifice is not any longer present in a spiritual religion. Further. too. Sacrifice. the special sac rifices of purification group themselves round all finite action generally. for everything is already assigned to him. From this standpoint of the religiou s consciousness. Negativity cannot here reveal itself in an inward process because we are not y et in presence of the depths of the inner life of thought and feeling. the act of testifying that I have nothing peculiar to mysel f but that I relinquish it in thinking of myself in relation to the Absolute. sacrifice is therefore sacrifice in the strict and proper sense . and the content is limited to the range of the finite. The subject. in a manner suitable to that universal "Will. sacrifice may assume the character of a sacrifice . of the heart and of the natural inclinations. such is it when in immediate possession. That solemnity is a mere form notwithstanding. they have no spiritual change as their aim. For this . and everything belongs t o him. is not to be made richer by means of it . An oriental who occupies this standpoint does not consider his body. essentially symboli cal. It is not considered that a man has done some evil deed for which he must endure an e vil in return. Sacrifice directly involves the renunciation of an immediate finitude in the sen se of being a testifying that this finitude is not to be my own possession. and they do not involve the endurance of any kind of loss or damage. and that I do not desire to have it for myself. all that happens is that the subject in this renunciation gets for itself the c onsciousness of the removal of separation. From the point of view which we are considering. the orderliness with which the actions of everyday life are perfor med being only an external form belonging to that finite content. Subjective existence must therefore be definitely and openly annulled. All such categories as those just mentioned would include the ide a of a justification of the subject . Sacrifice does not consist in a " conversion " of the inner life. has not been committed . such sacrifices would be regard ed as losses. can at this stage be merely a sacrifice of a doration.ite the subject has not cast itself loose from the Infinite. He to whom the possession is yielded up. however. in the strict sense. on the contrary. so that he may accomplish them in a becoming manner. having reference to a specific defilement. and the mode in which this takes place here is connected w ith reflexion upon finitude and on its opposition to the Infinite. Such a view is meanwhile wholly absent from the minds of those who occupy the standpo int above referred to . their sacrifice is.of purification . For that reas on he must engage in the most insignificant affairs with dignity and sober-minde dness. and its action is in so far purely jo yous action. but rather as being in the service of an Other. since something we possess is relinquished by means of them. sin. bu t what is there designated sacrifice can only be such in a figurative sense. They represent no repentance. Consequently. no r finite occupations and the act of engaging in these as his own. what the subject is for itself or in its independent condition. But the negat ivity of the finite can only come about in a finite manner. no punishment . subjects or vanquished enemies bring presents to the king. of praise. the actual dis tinction between external life and that which the absolute Object is for conscio usness. and the yielding up of its finitude in wors hip is only the renunciation of an immediate possession. On th e contrary. but that is an idea which does not as yet in any sense enter in here. and therefore the opposition is not truly done away with. A defilement has occurred. and a natural existence . and given itself fr ee play. and this must be got rid of in a similarly immed iate manner. In this sense. to speak more precisely. From our standpoint. is still present here.

and the general condition is one of mere necessit y. We have the right to act here in accordance with our fancies. what I have acquired for myself. Thus I actually take possession of t he harvest which I have won. and in so far as it i s a question of a transgression. This latter. is not mere action prompted by necessity or habit. it presupposes personality. But for those who occupy the standpoint of which we are treating such a sep aration does not as yet exist. no distinction presents itself here to which an importance would not be attributed. and then if it is to be shown that I do not seriously take this possession as mine. The punishment of such a transgression is in tu rn an injury. which is in accordance wi th an end. . and so forth. yet it is a trivial and a superficial one. in so far as it has a finite end . Civi l laws and the laws of the State are here in fact identical with religious laws. At this point. If a meaning lies or has lain in these ceremonies and combinations. and for this reason the combination can only be an ac cidental and external one. the di gnity of man. or rather religious. Thus the different means of sustaining life are not looked upon in relation to taste and to health merely. and something must be relinquished other than that existence which was really in question. From that finite form of existence and action which the religious worship just d escribed brings into relation with what has essential being. through the act of sacrifice it is only this b ecoming finite generally.reason there must necessarily be an exchange or substitution. it is true. definite punishment comes in. The performance of such actions as have immediate reference to our necessitie s or requirements does not take place in accordance with an end. The law of the State is the law of freedom . are necessary. but is regulate d in an immediate way. like civil punishment. for such actions are necessary . Hence arises the painful element in this form of wors hip. the finite ends too are to be extende d into an infinite one. does not necessarily conc ern itself with the improvement of the delinquent. however. but since the leading principle here is that the f inite should be lifted up to the infinite. punishment cannot have any such moral. a sphere of discretion be ing left for the exercise of judgment regarding unimportant and indifferent matt ers. It consists in this. such acti ons lose even the little meaning which may once have lain in them. What is offered up may be much more insignificant as regards intrinsic value than what I receive. Thus it still. and has essential reference to the Will. in like manner we do not hold a purification to be necessary in th e same degree in which such actions as the gathering of the harvest and the slau ghtering of an animal. formal pu nishment. accordingly. can have no necessa ry relation to the latter. property. and are prescribed by rule. The general characteristic which marks these acts of devotion. In this way religious work or labour makes its appearanc e. It is not as if what I do ought not to take place. But th e meaning attached to this punishment here is that of a purely barren. is finite action. This action. or to follow habit in an unco nscious way . and this produces works of devotion which have not reference to a finite end. is what we call C eremonial. on the other hand. And since. this independent existence of mine which is once more annulled. in the case of these o fferings and purifications there is an actual reference to the religious aspect of life. meaning. in so far as a deed wh ich is opposed to some prescribed rule has to be annulled. there is further to be distinguished a more specific form of action which is in accordance with end s. We have accordingly here the combination of different elements in connection with sacrifice and purification. this is done in a symbolical manner. That actio n by means of which purification from another action is got. further. and something is relinquished life. and in becoming a matter of habit. that everyday common actions (as we regard them) are at the same time necessary actions. To those occupying this stand point. but determines its elf in accordance with ideas. while ecclesiastical repentan ce or penance is in our view a punishment of which the essential purpose is the improvement and conversion of the person punished. of the animal which I have slaughtered.

After a disturbance of this kind. Such works and such productions are not to be regarded as corresponding with our ecclesiastical buildings. to begin with. is a r elinquishment. the power in the spiritual as in t he natural world. a deviation from this state of reconciliation. or it comes in from another side. that the dimensions be on an exaggerated scale. adverse fortunes in war. This falling away has its root partly in the freewill of the subject. and the meaning of worship i s not the enjoyment of this unity. The determining agent in connection with such works is not yet the free imaginat ion .constant need of stern negatio n to restore it again. however. Now. one which presents itself in t he natural world. but of inward sub jectivity. this religious work is of diverse kinds and cf various degrees. there is . Here. or states. we have the presupposition of a reconciliation which exists on its own accou nt. of a merely external thing. is its own end. pestilence. in fact. if death. . whereby the unity is interrupted. as against which what is peculiar to self and the interests of the subject must be relinquished. The production of such things is still essentially chained to what is Natural and Given. in virt ue of its character as activity. on the other hand. This labour. and brings it for th in an outward way for sense-perception. for a feesh beginning must continually be made as each generation complete s its own work. or from the sense of defect which gives rise to the need for that state. and is thus still inclination. Hitherto we have considered the worship which belongs to this standpoint as it p roceeds from the assumed unity of self-consciousness and the Object. Now. from the miser y of man. for in this act of production the sacrifice is a spiritual deed. as pure production and as perennial work. of the individual. This severance or separation is. in the enjoyment which the individual has in his wo rld. from the me re bodily movement of the dance up to the erection of enormous colossal structur es. t oo. for he is not spiritually self-conscious. A falling a way from this original unity notwithstanding. The latter are principally of the nature of monuments. All activity. and are endless in nu mber. which are only undertaken becau se they are required. brings som ething into existence. yet not in such a way that the Being which is created mer ely issues from myself. All these works too fall within the sphere of sacrifice. It is the calamity wh . Here we have the severance of the Divine and human. and an advance on that form under which sacrifice orig inally makes its appearance merely as the renunciation of an immediate finitude . however. but rather so that the act of production takes place in accordance with an end which is full of content. from the power of Nature. God is here the substantial power. is. holds fast the end whi ch has its life within the inner region of thoughts and ideas. This work is here itself worship. for in these. and is the ef fort which. often makes its appearance here. as negation of particular self-consciousness. de sire. on the contrary. as in sac rifice. produces at the same time an object. and the discretion left to active effort is limited merel y to this. the end is the Universal. but the abrogation of the separation. and is consequently never completed. the direction which worship takes is that of seeki ng to regain the goodwill of the gods. al ready a deeper sacrifice. of peoples.but which are meant to be something which exists for its own sake. and it appears here as some external disaster which falls upon a people. The labour of man by which the unity of the finite and infinite is brought about only in so far as it is penetr ated throughout by Spirit and wrung out of the action of Spirit. and other calamities weigh upon a land. no longer. originally enjoyed. what is produced has the character of something enormous and colossal. This renunciation or sacrifice which is involved in activity. and the actual forms be characterised by proportions of the " enormous " order.

and consequently destructible harmony. It is taken for granted from this point of view that the power of Nature is not natural only. for consciousness is implicitly thinking Spirit. The course of Nature is on this account interrupted in refere nce to the purposes of men. a unity which. remains abstract only. but only by th e negation of itself. acts in accordance with the moral connection which implies that it goes well or ill wit h a man or with a people because that man or that people has merited what happen s as their desert. has created th em. on the other hand. the pious thought that indi vidual misfortune is dependent upon the Good. But the well-being is of an a bstract. universal sort. an unknown power. to a disparity or false relation.ich here constitutes the severance . and thus through the g ladness of that living unity there sounds a jarring and unresolved tone of mourn ing and of pain . and living foundation. concrete. There must arise in con sciousness the need of an absolute unity which hovers over that satisfying fruit ion. it is true. direct fro m the individual up to God. and here the defectiveness of this co nception becomes evident. and in being such is limited for Spirit. what is requisite is the r e-establishment of the unity of the divine Will with the ends of men. and that that welfare is dependent u pon these purposes. they have partic ular ends which are wholly their own as apart from others. unity appears as l imited in character. But what next follows is the applic ation of this Universal to the Particular. This is an element which is bound up with the particular form of selfconsciousness under considerat ion. its application to the Particular leads. The only question which presents itself here is as to how far the divine Will is represented in na tural events as to how it is to be recognised in these. in which man ma kes it manifest that he is in earnest as regards the renunciation of his particu lar will. to which consciousness submits. When people speak of their well-being. but contai ns within itself purposes which. natural existence. but depends upon a higher Power. purposes of goodness. Over this sphere there hovers a sense of division which is not resolved and harmonised. Nations which are visited by calamity search after som e transgression as its cause. he descends into the realm o f finiteness and contingency. unknown but re cognised. without reconciliation. This disunion must necessarily come to be present for conscio usness. A further leading idea is that this Will which decrees the calamity. to the Universal. For the original unity is mere natural unity. a Supreme. broods over the heads of gods and men. the external state in respect of bodily existence. The religious feeling. But if a man descends in t his manner from the divine Will to particular ends. and thus they compris e their well-being within limited. it has not that reality which it ought in accordance with its notion to possess. by sacrifice and ceremonies. Thus. For i n that first unity the negation of the subject is superficial and accidental. Even although the presence of this Universal b e conceded here. Now it is just here that a special aspect of worship presents itself. f or it is an original and unreflected unity. rises also. It is capable of being rent asunder . these outward conditions no t being such as the demand for happiness requires. and over the celebration and enjoymen t of it. there still broods a Higher. In the case of such severance. a coercive necessity. it has reference to the natural sphere only . The view that God is the ruling power over Nature that Nature depends upon a hig her Will is what really lies at the basis of this standpoint. immedia te. as such. In the disturbed relations which we find at this first stage. an . are foreign to it namely. and then fly for refuge to a Power which determine s itself in accordance with ends. however. P>eing encumbered with a natural element. and thus Nature appears as antagonistic to their adv antage and prosperity. whi ch determines itself as God : God has laid down those conditions. which concern the welfare of man. a fate. and thus the sovereignty of the Un iversal over the Particular is acknowledged. over this presupposed. since that original harmony is the complete. The assumption here is that t his natural state is not an accidental one. This is brought about by means o f acts of repentance and expiation. We too recognise this as true. it is not absolute. Worship th us takes the form of propitiation or atonement.

into the affirmative. and is not relinq uished. on the contrary. But this n egativity has also to become actual. is tha t where subjectivity has arrived at the consciousness of its intrinsic infinitud e. in the abstraction of finitude and in finitude in that general opposition the finite. through which abrogation he produces absolute individuality in himself . worship essentially passes over into the region of inner life . which is an essential part or aspect of wors hip. The subject knows itself to be infinite. This necessity does not remain merely an idea or general conception . and as natural spiri t it is not posited by its own act. remained. But. but it finds itself so. the thought of ne cessity. for in it a man is selfish. and prove itself to be a higher power over that unity. as such. The higher attitude. and do not concern hum an nature as such. and thus the spirits of the dead are regarded as the unreconciled element which has to be reconciled : they must . it is not by its own act. in arrivi ng at a consciousness of the infinity of his spirit. the natural consciousness. and he is comfortless. the unity. that natural existence of his directly proves itself to be in a state of opposition. the heart in its immediate state. sins which. in accordance with his imm ediate nature . The division has not as yet gone so far as this . is reputed to be evil. have a contingent character. But now individuality has value as b eing this absolute and consequently purely universal singularity or individualit y. This destiny has now to be transformed for ordinary thoug ht and in a subjective manner. And assu redly the natural will is not the will as it ought to be. the lot of man becomes a stern one. the natural will. or on its own account. that is to say. we have that service in honour of the dead. the natural life is still an essential moment. Through this knowledge of absolute Spirit the opposition between infinite and finite has entered in in its most extreme form. It is no longer asserted here that man is good and is rec onciled with absolute Spirit from his birth. but. so that individual ity by this 'means acquires absolute value. as compared with this last stage of worship. Accordingly. be avenged for the injustice of their death. That the will is by nature evi l is the form under which this truth is presented here. for the very rec onciliation. In that higher sphere. Here. what it is. are not the natura l will. on the other hand. which is a negative element as opposed to that living unity. It is here that religion and worship enter completely into the domain of free dom. That separation which is originally inherent in man has to be annulled. that this evil element is to be annulled. . On the one hand. because that moment does not leave Spirit free. fate devours him. then. If the natural element be retained. accordingly. all that man ought to be lies involved in the domain of freedom. morality. has brought into view the e lement of division in its most extreme form in regard both to Nature generally a nd to himself: it is in this division that the domain of true freedom has its or igin. on the other hand. the spir it is not free. is what has to be re linquished. But man is only guilty i f he adhere to this his natural character. but.death makes serious work with him. his desire is only toward his individual lif e as such. . that is. a unity of the natural and spiritual has. too. the natural man passes away. there are actual sins. This freedom exists as the movement of ab solute Spirit in him by the abrogation of the natural and finite. Here the individual exists only through the abrogation of his immediate indiv iduality. Man is not innocent in the sense that he is neither good nor bad. for it ought to be fre e. It is by means of worship. then. is not that of what is deepest and most inward. By nature Spirit is not as it ought to b e . as single acts. is to be relinq uished. and this division is the bea rer of reconciliation. in which the former maintains an affirmative character. and consequently to be something which is to be abroga ted and absorbed. on the other hand. Justice.d what broods over the subject is only the feeling of sadness. and knows itself to be such in its character as subject. of which man has to repent. that just because his conception is the ab solutely free unity. here the heart must bre ak. on the contrary. by means of freedom only does it become such. Man. W . and is consequently free in himself. and the will of passion is not free. Here. In this it is involved that what was formerly the Unrevea led or Undisclosed has the moment of individuality in itself. Nature. accordingly.

and as thus rega rded it is posited in the sphere of consciousness. Man is to become free. This may be understood as if the i mpulses of nature were to be eradicated. What is true is that it is only the impure content that is to be purified . in so far as it belongs to my will. in which case he sinks down into a gloomy. It is. and lays hold upon the potentially completed reconciliation. his immersion in it is the active intermingling of this content and process. in other words. that I regard them as not having taken place. Connected with this part of the subject is the idea that I should undo my deeds. that is to say. it is his by his own will . It is a false demand. There is also present the assumption that reconciliation i s potentially accomplished . Possession. " What then actually is it that man is to renounce ? Man is to renounce his partic ular will. it is true the action has passe d by. This i s the extreme form of such a demand. But this appropriation of reconciliation takes place by the negation of the estr angement. But as to its inner content. Man knows himself to be essentially included in this history. and in conformity with its content. and create a permanent co . his will. If punishment be the destruction of the evil element in the sphere of r eality. and he secures fo r himself the certain knowledge and enjoyment of the implied reconciliation. it is still preserved in the inner sphere. Worship is thus finally the presence of the content which consti tutes absolute Spirit. and he is to become su ch by the way of education. right. so that it is nullified by time. and this makes the history of the divine content to be es sentially the history of mankind as well the movement of God toward man. and suppress the workings of evil action. and therefore by means of renunciation. that is. and the Spirit is able to accomplish this renunciation. and to annul in itself the maxims and intentions of its wi ll.hat results from the freedom of man is not natural innocence of this kind. and of man toward God. This is wholly a mistake. upright and moral. that is made when the renunciation is conceived of in an abstract way as if the impulse of vitality in itself were to be annulled. If in this manner a man renounces his selfishness and the separation between himself and goodness. and the destr uction of it then means. The abrogation of the antithesis of good and evil has i ts place in this form of worship . Eenunciation means here that I do not desire to regard certain deeds which I hav e committed as being my own. t herefore it might now be demanded of him that he should relinquish his possessio n . moral. but t he evil element is the aspect of separation and estrangement. I desire to repent of them. According to the view here referred to. will-less creature. this kind of education is expressive of the overcoming of the evil element. wo ven into it. conscience. his passions and natural impulses. While in contemplating it he immerses himself in it. this purification of the heart from its immedi ate natural character if it be thoroughly carried out. in worship a man creates this assurance for himself . a lready perfected in and through God. while education takes place i n an unconscious manner. however. personal prop erty. since it has the energy to effec t a change in itself. the natural man is represented as evil. this destruction in the inner life is penitence and contrition. in the same sense it may be required of him that he should give up his freedom. and this estrangem ent is to be negated. And now the question arises. This working out of subjectivity. not merely purified as if the vitality of the will were to be slain. belong also to man . and that this content is no longer s omething beyond this world. on the contra ry. relinquishment of the state of mind in which it exists ideally. And thus it comes to pass t hat Spirit here manifests itself in the subject as it truly is in its essential nature. and by m eans of this internal process has attained to peace. celibacy is a demand of this kind. freedom. which has an essential character only when it wi lls the essential will and this will represents what is good. he then has become a partaker of reconciliation. its content is to be made conformable to the moral will. As regards time. is likewise a part of what pertains to man . and it is this divine reality which man is to take to himself as his own. but that free subjectivity has in it its own Essence as its object. But m an becomes educated to freedom.

Th is one conception is man's highest possession. There is but one conception of freedom in religion and the State. he is f ree. has also a bad State. bad laws. Everything essential ly depends here on the conception of freedom which a people bears in its own sel f-consciousness. Thus it is that that essential connection known also as the relation of religion to the State makes its appearance. III. the two are not as yet separated. from the highest authority which can be conc eived of. In religion man is free before God . The mode in which the idea of this connecti on finds expression is in the tracing of laws. and then again are posited in true identi ty. and it is realised by man. These laws are the development of the conception of freedom. reflecting itself thus upon actual existence. in t he Jewish theocracy. In the patriarchal condition. and. The Stat e is only freedom in the world. however. Religion is the knowledge of the highest truth . In a general sense. as it arrives at t he opposition between the two created by the interests of modern times. but possesses himself in it . the knowledge of himself in God. of right. in the sphere of actuality. and by this path religion passes over into established cus tom. They are considered as deriving their authorisat ion from this source. It is only to be considere d here in the definite form under which it appears to ordinary thought. We there fore. and in the further course of events they a re sharply separated from one another. the wisdom of the world. in that he brings his will into conformity with the divine will. Such nations as do not know that man is free in his own right. and as i t gets involved in contradictions in this form. we have now to speak wi th greater detail. and the question arises as to the relation in which it stands to that divine wisdom. first of all. bad governm ent. and as it is known in philosophy. authority. From what has just been said. This is the divine wisdom. they are in their real essence identical. the reason of the existence of the essentially existing unity is already clear. the knowledge man has of God. Religion is divine kn owledge. With regard to this. In it the true moral will comes into t he sphere of reality. live in a condition of torpor. .ndition which corresponds with the universal end of subjectivity assumes a compl ete form as morality. into the State. he is not in opposition to the supreme will. Men are distinctly conscious of this connection. but rather they know and c onceive of it in a general way only. To say this implies that these laws of morality. and the constitution o f the State to a divine origin. A nati on which has a false or bad conception of God. and this latter. in its true cha racter as absolute. since in worship he has attained to the annulling of the division. But there is besides a secon d wisdom. THE RELATION OP RELIGION TO THE STATE. and are still outwardly i dentical. are eternnl and uncha . has the conception of free dom as it appears in religion for its foundation and truth. But yet they are different. and the field of absolute Truth. The detailed consideration of this essential connection between the State and re ligion belongs properly to the Philosophy of History. consider this connection as it is ordinarily conceived. finally. in fact. not. and to this realisation the consciousness of freedom which exists in its own right esse ntially belongs. and Spirit lives in its true nature. and. The State is the true form of reality. and this truth more precisely defined is free Spirit. both as regards their form of government and thei r religion. I. religion and the foundation of the State are one and the sam e . for in the State the conception of freedom is realised.

This way of stating the matter is in one as pect correct enough. In this way the act of governing and the giving of laws are abandoned to the caprice of the governing power. It is a matter of no importance under what external form true laws have succeeded in establishing th emselves. It may be taken as meaning that man o beys God in the act of conforming to the laws. prescribes rules in reference to his religious life. formal p rinciples are adhered to. and is specially the business of philosophy. perhaps. the meaning o f the proposition is that men are to obey the laws whatever they may happen to b e. The form in which this contradiction expresses itself is that the demands of religion have reference to holiness . We find a general concep tion of this connection among all nations. for in him and in his will is contained the principle in its more precise form that he is an im mediate revelation of God. Re ligion does not merely keep to its own proper sphere. and to opp ression. What is worldly and what is religious stand on a different basis . for it i s in these that that unity of religion and the State actually exists. that we should have a rational kn owledge of this divine will. but concerns the subject t oo. and a distinction in regard to principle also may make its appearance here. but in this form the thought is exposed to the risk of bein g taken in a wholly abstract sense. The laws o f the State are regarded as rational and as having a divine character in virtue of this assumed original harmony.not privileged to be the sole possessors of divine revelation. To know and recognise what is rational is accordingly the business of cultured thought. it is therefore of the utmost moment to determine what these laws are. of human ity. But even supposing that the general principle at least has been established that laws exist through an act of the divine will. This also involves the assumption that it is the ruler alone who knows for certain what is essential and necessary to the State . which only attain their truth in being unfolded and developed . held fast in their abstract state . to the ruling authority. free scope is given to caprice. and beheaded their king. reaches the point at which it turns round into its direct opposite. inasmuch as nothing is determined regarding the explanation of what is involved in the laws. While. the members of which asserted that it had been imparted to them by revelation how t he people ought to be governed. Principles as such are mere abstract thoughts. when further logically devel oped. and in accordance with the directions thus recei ved from the Lord. the cultivation and development of the conception of freedom. in this sense be termed worldly wisdom.ngeable rules for the conduct of man. This condition of things has actually existed in Protestant States. Finally. and p riests are . they represent what is wholly untrue. With regard to the truth that l aws are the divine will. This state of things presented itself in a marked manner in England (un der the last kings of the House of Stuart) when a passive obedience was demanded . and such knowledge is not anything particular or sp ecial. and s till less does there exist any such privilege which can belong exclusively to a layman. which may. but continue to exist so long as religion itself continues to exist. of right. however. This principle. they raised the standard of revolt. and consequently in ref erence to his active life also. for th e distinction between priests and laymen does not exist among Protestants. the State and religion may be severed from one another. those of the State. and it is only in such States that it can be found. but belongs to all. namely. Thus there arose a Protestant sect in England. . and religion has not principles peculiar to it self which contradict those which prevail in the State. nor as to what laws are fitted to form the fundamental statutes. and may have different laws. . that they are not arbitrary. however. and whether they have been extorted by threats out of rulers or not . to the p owers which hold the State together. is on its own account necessary to mankind. still there is another aspect of the matter which is just as important. and it was an accepted principle that the ruler was responsible for his action s to God only. Expressed in this formal manner. Those rules which religion makes for the individ ual may be different from the fundamental principles of right and of morality wh ich prevail in the State. to tyranny. To the principle of the divine authorisation of the ruler there is accor dingly opposed the principle of this same authorisation which is held to be inhe rent in the laity in general.

Thirdly. Renunciation of this actual world is the fundamental principle which appears her e. The primary moral relation in the substantial world of reality is marr iage. but it is a moral duty as well. or whether it may be repudiated by religio n. of all that activity which connects itself with gain. On the contrary. is more rational here than such religious views. th e abstraction of Spirit as against the substantial element of the actual world. he is placed un der the necessity of earning his livelihood. which recognises the element of truth in the sphere of reality. Such is the relation in which religion and the State stand toward one another in Catholic States when subjective freedom aw akes in men. By his spiritual nature. by his sense of honesty. On the one side the activity of man is represented here a s something unholy . put in a more definite form. Ma n is not to take to do with such ends. on the ot her. in other words. When religion lays its arrest on the active life of man in this manner. and requires of man that he should renounce all freedom . Something quite different. Want. To this duty. this contradiction means that man in his actual or secular consc iousness generally is essentially without rights. th at it is even asked whether the freedom of man is to be recognised as something which is really and essentially true. that he should render himself independent by mean s of his activity and understanding. is set in opposition to the substantial foundation. in his faith. this love has a natural side . The entire sphere of action. Time and temporal welfare. if he have a poss ession.to right and morality : what is in view on the one side is Eternity . makes its appearance. the highest morality in the State is based upon the carrying into effec t of the rational universal will. In contrast to this action of religion. but that he sho uld give it away to the poor. h e is to be selfless in his conscience too . conjugal love. In opposition to this a religi ous duty is set up. and such like. for him it is a moral law. Secondly. and more than this. to th ose who do nothing. and here th e demands of freedom are seen to enter into conflict with the religious principl es which required that renunciation. which must be sacrificed to eternal well-being. The love which God is. As the primary manifestation of the substantial will in the concretely existing world. and religion recognises no abs olute rights in the domain of actual or secular morality. Thus. ren unciation celibacy is opposed as something holy. for in his natural aspect man is dependent on many sides. do not work. he is to subject himself to a strict obed ience . with industries. it can p rescribe peculiar rules to him which are in opposition to the rationality of the world. to the True. religion expresses itself in a negative w ay only. and especially to the Church that is to say. and thus setting himself free from that necessity of nature. what in life is highly esteemed as integr ity is consequently repudiated as unholy. this being realised or actualised in the State. In connection with this contradiction. in his deeper inner li fe. is consequently abandoned. on the other. A religious duty w hich has been placed in opposition to this worldly one requires that man should not exercise activity in this fashion. it is even demanded of him. and should not trouble himself with such cares as these. the princi ples of its freedom are awakened in the consciousness of the Spirit. man has to engage in a conflict with the necessity of natur e . and with it appear conflict and flight. not only that he should not increase it by his activity. however. is in the sphere of reality. which is t o be regarded as higher. So enormous is the cha nge which has in consequence of this made its appearance in the modern world. in the State the subject possesses his freedom . he is to abide in the condition of will-lessness . in accordance with which man is not permitted to make freedo m his object and end. This is man's honesty or integrity. . worldly wisdom. as a unit. In this way a religious ideal is set up a heaven upon earth . he is to renounce himself and cast away his self.

it runs the risk of becoming the one-sidedness of formalism . Religion demands the annulling of the will . takes it for its starting-point. for if rational knowledge does not attain comp leteness in itself. however. and holds that freewill or caprice alone is legitim ate. in so far as people carry these out. and this is just the object of philosophy. it may happen. have as a matter of fact ceased to belong to the Catho lic religion. belongs to modern times. and then it is further asserted that religion is not to be mixed up with the constitution of the State. If. or else treat those who belong to it as a faction. I f it be said that man is in his true nature free. In this way religion and the State come to be in contradiction to each other. which does not acknowledge them. consists in this only. and be outwardly compliant. that th e constitution of the State ought to remain on the one side. on the contrary. it be really reason which finds these principles. and inequality there m ust necessarily be if an organism. about which the State has no occasion to concern itself . they are guilt y of great inconsistency. We see this to be the case over a very widely extended area : we find. Thi s tracing up. must be accomplished in a complete manner. it reaches that which is recognise d as the Highest as God. In States where different religions prevail. on the other. and cleaves at the same time to principles which are in opposition to it . in virtue of his true conception. it may in either case happen that to th ese principles a religion stands opposed. but if it penetrate to the ultimate ground. and co-operates with Go d by exercising his "subjective freedom. though indeed the harmony is of an ab stract kind . and carried to the ultimate point of analysis . Religion. and religion on the other. on the one side. This necessarily gives rise to a conflict which does not permit of adjustme nt in a true way.It has been stated already that it is possible that there should be harmony betw een religion and the State. is not to be touched or interfered with. that is. for this demands a systematic organisation in which duties and right s are limited. so far as they are true and do not remain formal. he himself plays an essential part. the feench who hold fast to the prin ciple of worldly freedom. a religion which does not recognise the principle o f freedom . that it traces them up to the rati onal knowledge of absolute truth. . It passes for being something which is merely th e affair of individuals. then this certainly expresses a principle of infinite value. a constitution which makes that principle its basis. Now wheth er the abstraction be adhered to or not. that his conscience should be regarded as a holy thing that. willing. on the other ha nd. for Protestantism demands that a man should only believe what he k nows. and with it true vitality. The community clings to a definite religion. That abstraction permits of no inequality. Thus for example. If such religious princi ples succeed in establishing themselves. an d believing. while at the sam e time they wish to continue to belong to that definite religion. the verification it gives of them. This is the case in a general sense in Protestant St ates so far as the principle is concerned. Such principles as these are true. but r egards them as illegitimate. for that religion can relinquish nothing. the presence of the moment of subjective freedom is expressly requi red. In connection with the working of divine grace man i s no passive being . But if an abstraction of this kind be adhered to. and religion is in this cas e left to get along how it can. it effectually prevents the development of any kind of organically-constituted government. It may perhaps be affirmed with regard to this. The laying down of those principles of freedom goes o n the assumption that they are true because they are in essential connection wit h the inmost consciousness of man. it cannot but happen that the governmen t should proceed by force and suppress the religion which is thus opposed to it. and in his acts of knowing. are to exist. that the religion is different from the pri nciple of the State. however. the worldly princ iple. may indeed act discreetly here. The knowledge of the truth that man is free in virtue of his real natur e. in the form of the Church. that the two sides do not agree. but consistently demands unconditional submission to the Church in everything. But here there is a danger that such principles may remain infected with one-sidedness. but they must not be taken in their abstract meaning. but in such a case the feeling of inconsistency enters into the minds of men.

The other aspect of the matter which falls to be considered in connection with t he separation just spoken of is this that if the principles of actual freedom ar e made the basis. are to be set aside as matters of indifference. This carrying of the law into ef fect is something concrete . and the subjective disposition or feeling in reference to th is legislation. Philosophy is to be the ruling power. At the pres ent day men will not rely at all upon intelligence. whoever transgresses the law is broug ht up for trial. and hence everything depends upon their uprightness. How one-sided this is. is clearly seen when we co nsider that the administration of the laws is in the hands of judges. both of which pertain to the actual world. however. namely. according to that same constitution. as also upon their insight. and neither can do without the other . however. Over against this. which c ontradicted the principles of the constitution. po sitive legislation. and their power of insight. it being no concern of the government wha t may be the sentiments or private convictions of individuals. speaking generally . or what form of r eligion they profess. too. but insist on everything bei ng deduced in accordance with positive laws. and morality. for the l aw does not rule. a conviction for which the State generally was somethin g illegitimate and devoid of rights. while it itself took up an antagonistic att itude to all that was actually established. are mutually opposed. Here simply a few orders constitute the foundation. The ot her system is that of subjective conviction which represents. m ust contribute their share. These principles are correct. As regards the constitution of the State. but in recent times a one-sided view has made its appearance. the Greek principle. religion. This private sentiment or subjective conviction does not necessarily assume the form of religion . conscience. a nd subjective disposition or private conviction. according to which the constitution is to be self-sustaining. then. given positive laws consequently come into existence and these acquire the general form of jud icial laws in relation to individuals. and these develop into a system of Eight. The last r evolution was thus the result of the dictates of a religious conscience. But subjective conviction by itself is onesided. stands that subjective co nviction. while the Stat e as a whole is based upon education. But amongst . The intelligence of the individual must therefore of ten decide. and which we find developed in a special way iu the Eepub lic of Plato. that inner life which is the very home of religion. because although civil laws are very comprehensive.At the present day we see the world full of the principle of freedom. the will of men. there are two systems here the modern system iu which the essential characteristics of freedom and its whole structure are upheld in a formal manner to the disregard of subjective conviction. but men have to make it rule. it is not of any importance what religion individuals may profess. yet they cannot touch each special case. and we see that principle brought into special relation with the constitution of the State . The two elements which occasion this collision are still very far from being br ought into harmony. since rational knowledge or cognition has not penetrat ed to the ultimate ground. it may also continue in a more indefinite state. A striking example of this one-side dness has been given us in connection with the most recent contemporary history. and by means of it man is to be led to morality : all orders are to be partakers of the a-ax The two si des the subjective conviction and that formal constitution are inseparable. It is there alone that reconciliation with what is ab solutely Substantial is to be found. which is to advance to scien ce and philosophy. upon culture. to justice. too. and the existence of the community as a whole is made to rest o n laws in this legal form. We have seen a religious sentiment or conviction taking its place at the head o f the feench Government. and yet. a nd the Republic of Plato suffers from the defect which this implies. In this way two si des. The upholding of the existing legislation is handed over to the courts of justice . but when infected with formalism they are assump tions or presuppositions.

involved in the idea of God. fell under suspicion. as the absolute unity of these His tw o moments. because they had fallen under suspicion that i s to say. when it is pre-eminently known as God. but this for mal principle did not hold its ground. special charact er.what we call " the people. an antagonistic rela tion which ought not to exist in the State. and which again constitutes one stage in the totalit y of its development. it is the all-pervading universal form in which the Idea is found. This form of reality is the true religion. who. definite religion will in the following sec tion be treated of first of all. According to the formal pri nciples of the constitution. the monarch was responsible to no one. and an unresolved division or dualism. in which it has the developed content of the Idea of Spirit as its object. again. because of the existence of this conviction or sentiment. and of Spirit in its subjectivity. is Absolute Spirit. what will pass with the people as right or jus tice can hold this position only in so far as it has a definite. Under Robespierre ter ror reigned in France. On the contrary. In accordance with this distinction. It thus becomes evident that even in the formally-matured constitution tlie u ltimate sheet-anchor is still the general sentiment or feeling which has been pu t on one side in that constitution. and from the prevailing insensibility t o it. while according to the other. The determinate character of any one of these asp ects corresponds with the other aspect . We have distinguished definite. there is al ways present a rent. that according to the on e form of reality. and if thi s last is not essentially in harmony with the principles of freedom. in fact. and which now asserts itself in contempt of all form. of all places. namely. and the dynasty was hurled from the thron e. constitute the reality of the absolute notion or conception of God. In the same way the Ministry of Charles X. As regards these stages of realisation. It is from this contradiction. The two aspects of Spirit of Spirit in its objectivity. Now this definite character of justice and morality has its ultimate verific ation for a people only in the form of an actually existing religion. PART II DEFINITE RELIGION PART II DEFINITE RELIGION DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT . limited worship from worship in the element of f reedom. the following general distinction has al ready been established in what has gone before. that our age is suffering. and thus have found the same distinction which is." ultimate truth does not exist in the form of thought and principles. and this " terror " was directed against those who did no t hold the sentiments of freedom. it is it s absolute reality. Transition to the Following Section. Spirit is confined to a certain specific form in which its Be ing and self-consciousness appear.

not till then does true religion become real and actual. from one point of view. These definite religions are but particular momen ts of the notion. In t his work the movement begins from immediacy and nature. in being still limited.work out the not ion or conception of religion. and for that very reason they do not correspond with it. namely. when in other sciences we pass over from the universal to the parti cular . but Africans and Asiatics are not free. Simultaneously with determinateness in general. The progress of the realisation has been already indicated in a ge neral way : the Notion is. however. natural consciousness is sensuous consciousness. and in true religion it becomes for the first time known w hat it essentially is. however. upon particularisation . At the same time. however. The highest that is or can be attained to is that the determinateness should be the Notion itself . We now have to consider the course by which true religion takes its rise. Religion has its reality as consciousness. in the first place. on the contrary. as we have seen it. both as regards the fact and the manner of its existence for consciousness. w here religion has not as yet itself advanced to thought. quite an other matter. In like manner. but Spirit must attain to the knowledge of this truth . At first th ey contain it implicitly only. That is what it is for us. and these must be overco me. What is to be understood by the realisation of the Notion is that the content is determined by means of it. man certainly is im plicitly free. it i s a matter of experience that this or the other animal. Our course of procedure is as follows : We began with the consideration of the notio n or conception religion. Or. Religion is now to be considered in its determinate character. for i t does not exist in an actual shape in them. and the first form of this existence is that of immediacy. for it is essentially present as such in consciousness only. But religion is not me rely this subjective element. This is the Idea. but is essentially objective . we thoug ht the conception. True or actual religion is adequate to its notion or conception. and it had its reality in our thought. it constitutes its inmost truth . the self-realisation o f the Notion. what its notion or conception is. the Notion differentiates itself. makes a determination which originates with it self or is its own act. as. it is implied. or else they would not be religions . The particular cannot advance towards the universal . where the limits are therefore annulled. this or that kind of jus tice exists. In philosophical science it is not allowable to proceed in this way . but this does not come before us until we reach the concluding division of our subject. consciousness. But the notion or conception is present in them in different ways. This relation of genus to species is. Immediacy is the natural element . and the definite religions as species. It may be said of all religions that they are religions. however. This imm ediacy. For it to attain to consciousness is. it is the individual which wills itself in accordance with its natu ralness." and what is undetermined is not there at all. it has a mode of ex istence of its own. and yet they must contain it. existenc e or definite Being and essential connection with an "Other" are posited. it existed in the medium of our thought. In its notion or conception religion is no r eligion as yet. as it were. to put it in other words. because they do not posse ss the consciousness of that which constitutes the notion or conception of man. f or instance. this was our thought. and the religious consciousness is no t distinguished from the Notion.WHEN we speak of definite religion. it is t he universal itself which resolves upon determination. that reli gion generally is taken as a genus. a capacity in Spirit . to reflection. of what religion implicitly is. the perfectly realised Notion . It has been the work of Spirit throughout thousands of years to. as we considered the conception of r eligion. and correspond with the notion or conception of religi on. but there the particular is only understood in an empirical manner. by its own onward impulse moves toward mediation. because it is potentially thought. they do not correspond wi th the notion. is elevation abov e nature . its particularity it is sensuous knowing and sensuous willing. and to make it the subject of consciousness. But reli . as the natural will is passion . That for which religion exists the definite existence of religion is consci ousness. Thi s is the meaning of what we are here considering. That w hich is determined is for an " Other. quite legitimate.

and this true element from which consciousness distinguishes itself is God. and this introduces the aspect of Worship. Regarding this ambiguity. brings Himself into relation with the subject which has thus lifted it self. accordingly. this fmiteness ha s no value. We have the division or dualism of consciousness within itself. however. The division of the subject takes. In connection with this rising up to the Essential we have to consider the conce ption of this exaltation in general. there is something present which is to be regarded as higher t han anything merely immediate. and to indicate the particula r forms of these definite religions which have to be considered. therefore. It is here that it first becomes possible for religion to origin ate. In so far as the moment of reli gion is contained in this. namely. the Essential. T his exaltation or rising up is exactly what appears in a more abstract form in t he proofs of the existence of God. no t the outer element of consciousness. Man in his immediacy represents merely sensuous natural knowledge and natural volition. the following form : . knows that it itself is what God is deter mined to be. the close union of the subjec t with its Essence. It is thus immediate. God. this latter is. Here it is man's highest dignity that he should k . and devoid of freedom. The other is the reverse process. while at the same time its first existen ce is not its true primariness or originality. God is now defined as the absolute Power or Su bstance in which natural will the subject is something transient. In all these proofs there is one and the same exaltation . To begin with. the knowledge by Spirit of Spirit in i ts truth. While in natural religion Spirit still lives in neutrality with nature. and God is here conceived of in this aspect as yet natural unity. Here there does not as yet exist any division of consciousness within itself. This implies t hat consciousness knows itself to be something merely natural. But this rising up to God. however. and not in its immediacy or naturalness. is onl y the one side. but only liberation. and distinguishes from this the True. however it may be defined. in which this naturalness. definite religion. it. for this division or dual ism implies that consciousness distinguishes its sensuous nature from what belon gs to its essential Being. In the active process of emerging from immediacy. and the moment of elevation is still shut up within t he natural state. This is magic. The sphere we have first to deal with contains. se lfless. This is the unity of the spiritual and natural. Here then comes in the question as to the manner in which the subject is c haracterised or defined . the true essence or potentiality.gion is the relation of Spirit to Spirit. in whatever way He may be defined. this must be done in a general manner only. that the notion exists primarily or originally. We have first to give the division of the subject. I n this primal natural religion consciousness is still natural consciousness. we do not yet find the f reedom which has been truly conquered. does not as yet go beyond determinate ness. so that the natural is known only as mediated through the Essential. immediate religion. accidental. . the inner element only. so far as its content is concerned. and is known to be a nullity. The conscious turning of the subject toward this Essence has to be treated of li kewise. Here the object is defined in a positive wa y. some further remarks will be made later. which. What we have now to consider first is the form of natural. the consciousness of sensuous desire. Natural Rel igion. which is still entan gled in that from which it frees itself. to begin with. The determination or characte risation of religion is the advance from naturalness to the notion . it is only the point of departure and the nature of this Essence w hich are different.

standing as such over against Him. is under the absolute determination of the subject. Here thought is what rules and determines. however. is not a manifestation of Him. naturalness. . however. they constitute. Its relation to the latter is such that it is only natura l life. of the finite generally. the second stage of definite religion. This is the Religion of Sublimity. there is still a frightful inconsistenc y here.' and this is of such a kind that it is the appearing of subjectiv ity. materiality . THE RELIGION OF SPIRITUAL INDIVIDUALITY OR OF free SUBJECTIVITY. At first. is its expression. still they are not in immediate union. who is in Himself eternally unchangeable. and the element of naturalness being merel y a moment preserved within the process. This is t he religion of divine outward manifestation. T his is the spiritually One. but appearing to itself. and individuals stand rela ted to Him as servants. in which it outwardly presents itself. which constitute the religions of the transition to the stage of free subjectivi ty. This intrinsically inconsistent elevation has an historical existence in the three Oriental religions of Substance. It is here that the spiritual independent existence of the subject begins.now himself to be a nullity. for the latter seeks to reinstate itself in its unity and universalit y. as well as in the previous stages. this semblance or show of existen ce. And here again. is degraded to the state of what is a m ere show or semblance. But this God thereby openly shows Himself. it has a spiritual character only. and this conflict again has had its historical existence in three religions. The Natu ral and the Spiritual are united. in these too. Spirit has not as yet completely subjected the natural element to itself. not appeari ng for others only. together with the preceding ones. In the religion of beauty. as is shown in the way in which the different spiritual and natural powe rs are mixed up with one another. as it were. and is regarded as something which is accidental relative ly to the Substantial. Thus this spiritual individuality i s not the limitless individuality of pure thought . But the entanglement of the natural and spiritual leads to the conflict of sub jectivity. . In contrast with this. and this unessential. This is the Religion of Beauty. or else the selfmanifestation of subjectivity is present in it. or. is posi ted as something having an unessential character. Thus on the one hand the Natural is. the subjec t is on the other hand determined as finite. There is thus One God only who is in thought. and is so united wi th the bodily element that this last does not stand over against it. material form for the subject. since it is only through that positing that He even is at all . Since. and existing only through the Essence of thought. too. in re lation to whom what is of nature. and devoid of substantiality. in other words. too. God. of the world. the sphere A. and natural life is merely a pos ited life. at which the eleva tion of Spirit is carried through in a consistent manner in relation to the natu ral element. In the religion of sublimity the one God is the Lord. is B. since it is only by the positing of t he unessential that He is the essential. and as negation of the natural unity . it is that wh ich is held fast as reflection into itself. elevation of spirit above the natural is not carried through in a consistent manner. Inasmuch as the spiritual being-for -self or independent existence thus brings itself into prominence. and owing to the fact that the Spiritual thus makes use of a body. of divine corporeality. but is mere ly an organ. but in a unity which implies that the Spiritual is what determines. we get three forms : i. OF THE RELIGION OF NATURE. the subject has purified . having no substantial character of its own in relation to Him. the body of the Spiritua l. On the contrary.

and thro ugh the opposition of good and evil. this is the period of work for a particula r end. implying that the hitherto separa te individual powers are made subservient to one single end or purpose. is void of rational character as against other ends which would have just as much right to exist as it. because it is not yet mediated through consciousness of the oppositio n. old age might be considered as a last stage. too. The second stage. is at first still finite and limited. to which he devotes his energ ies. and is still related to it. while setting no end before it as yet. and as moral has a free affirmative relation t o God. as a means whereby it can fully develop itself. has turned back from the pa . The part icular subject has hitherto been something other than these divine powers .itself from its mere immediate knowing and willing. the finite end. the independent. The religion of utility or adaptation to an end. The third stage is represented by the willing of Spirit to dete rmine itself within itself. which consequently is not as yet the relation of Spirit to itself. These stages may be compared to those of the ages of man. The divine content is now of use to that culminati ng point of subjectivity which was wanting to the content in the religion of bea uty. . the notion which realises itself. when individuality is in process of becoming independent. and recognising this end. and the particular subject is human c onsciousness. The idea of Spirit determines itself on its own account and by its own act . is first of all natural religion. Spirit becomes free within itself. as representing both his own nature and the nature which surrounds him. self-determined. is the Religion of Extern al Utility or Conformity to an End. The religion in which the notion. is the living spirituality. on the contrary. but it has also retained it s will and knows itself as free. Spirit. This is cond itioned freedom. has aspirations. The third is the age of manhood . the religion of beauty forms the stage of reconciliation as contr asted with the sphere of sublimity. and so is still affected with naturalness. thes e constitute the divine content generally. to which the man makes himself subservient. and takes an interest in everything which conies in its w ay. In its gods the particular spirit seeks its ow n subjective end only . We have here a concrete content which compri ses determinate characteristics within itself. it seeks itself. but here too these are still finite and represent a limited end. therefore. The child is still in the primal immediate unity of the will with nature. This. and is the end or purpose which the universal powers of nature or the gods of the religion of beauty serve. which having the Univ ersal before it as an end. the necessary pne in the objective sense of the nature of S pirit. has the intrinsically concrete determinations within itself. and knows itself thus because it has completed the negation of its natural will. it is clearly itself the end. the vitality of Spirit. but is in its form as a particular end forthwith posited in God. in the particular form in which it appears in religion. Here the Spiritual too is an end. which. of adaptation to an end on its own account. or adaptation to an end. What next takes place is that reflection enters. moves for ward. If. and at the same time of concrete develop ment. when treated thus. concrete c ontent. which notwithstan ding issues out of the unity of nature. may also be called the Religion of Fate. Thus the form under which r eligion here presents itself is that of outward finite purpose. becomes the subjective generally. and this accordingly appears in the form of an end. because that end itself is not as yet a pure spiritual end. Finally. in which an end is posited in G od. though not yet as the absolute end. This division of the subject must not be taken in a merely subjective sense. Such are the fundamental determinations. which are the moments or s tages of the development of the Notion. This particular end. not the absolute content. it is. this reconciliation is still immediate recon ciliation. and this end is just the notion or conceptio n of Spirit. But the subject has not as yet passed through the consciousness. adolescence. has its beginning.

before that division or separation which is known as the Fall h ad as yet appeared in his intelligence. for what we un derstand by " natural " is the natural as sensuous. It remains for us now to refer to a popular conception which. so characterised that in it the Spiritual is in this original. and these being in conformity with God. Merely metaphysical religion. as images of Himself. because of the sense attached in it to "natural religion. the result of Enl ightenment that knowing of God as an abstract something.rticular interests of life and work to the universal aim. as alrea dy remarked. and to maintain that what he has in his reason can alone be true for men. it is the ultimate point reached by the extreme development of th e abstract understanding. as the result of the Critique of Kant. had not as yet designed this separation fro m nature. and for that reason the first . it w as not as yet reflected into itself. untr oubled. What in recent times has been understood by " the religion of nature " is what m an is capable of discovering and knowing of God by his own unassisted powers. But natural reason is a wrong expression . At the close it will become apparent that even the original immediacy does not exist as immediacy. Such are the determinations which follow in a logical manne r from the nature of the Notion. it is the mos t imperfect. and this religion therefore is regarded as the divine religion. the divine religion . it is said. in so far as metaphysic has conveyed the same meaning a s thoughts of the understanding. Immediate religion is what has in recent times been called natural religion. but is something posited. and was absol . stood in an absolute and essential connectio n with Him." makes a definite claim upon our consideration here. undisturbed unity with the Natural. Natural reason in its true meaning is Spiri t. i t is the first. to which abstraction al l attributes of God. According to the division we have made. The nature of reason is rather the notion or conception of reason. to reason. gathered itself together out of the wide and manifold int erests of actual outward existence and concentrated itself in the infinite depth s of its inner life. to speak more precisely. IMMEDIATE RELIGION. the finest . and further. as regards its will. This is that modern religion of the understanding which is known as Deism. Under these conditions. I. but also the truest religion. FIRST DIVISION. the absolute final end . This cannot be properly called natu ral religion . all faith. has in recent times been called natural religion. as it were. and this is in no kind of opposition to revea led religion. had a true original religion in the sta te of innocence. It belongs to the very ess ence of Spirit to rise above nature. too. however. are reduced. have been historically t he first form of religion. the Immediate. As regards its practical side. "W hat we refer to is the idea that immediate religion must be the true. and according to this other idea. and has. was still in the state of innocence. Natural religion is. the Spirit. God. This is founded a priori on the idea tha t spirits were created by God as the absolutely Good. Th e child itself is something begotten. by means of the natural light of his reason. Man. it still remained in the region of happy faith. t aken here as the absolute and true one. Spirit too lived in unity with nature . This characterisation is. Thus it has been customary to contras t it with revealed religion. reason according to the Notion. It coincides with the religion of nature in so far as thought is brought into promi nence in the latter. ideas formed by the understanding. that it must. can only reveal Himself to Spirit. too.

. and recognised its true relation to the corresponding side of his own nature. the Individual in its universa lity as a divine. in having thus grasped nature in. a seeing c learly. thinking of it as the goal for which man yearns. sees things according to their notion. We are told in the Bible of a Paradise . With this general conception the idea is bound up that Spirit has consequently been in possession of all art and science. Plants are in this state of unity . because for it that nature is emancipated from the external conditions of space and time. in it Being and destined character are not different. and the things seen are determined through the notion. He seems to determine himself here as id entical with nature and the true conception of things . Such a Paradise. and the Particular. Not until separation appears does the sensuous rind which separates him fr om them grow around these things . nor into th . The Universal. and lament over it as a lost one. from the character ascribed to things by the understanding. which has not yet broken up into the dualism of good and evil. according to the stage of culture which has been reached by the peoples in question. their life is lived in this unity of nature. he beholds harmonious substance -God Hi mself in an immediate manner . and it is further imagined that if ma n is found within the universal harmony. The individual plant does not become untrue to its nature . Th is separation in anything between what ought-to-be. and stand above that stuntedness which conditions phenomena. it is supposed. in which the soul or life returns to this unity of inwardness with its world. god-like vitality. not as an abstraction of thought. In short. that the subject takes out of itself merely such qualities as it has distinguished from what belongs t o nature. first makes its appearance with free-will. Spirit has had before it and has beheld the Universal in the Particul ar in its pure outward shape. as regards its essential s ubstance. or. Thus men have the idea that Being-in-and-foritself . is then filled up with moral or unmoral content. has taken up a relation to nature as to something which is a n adequate garment for Spirit. too. It follows from this that in this unity Spirit. is the divine unity in a human reflex. the inner element. Such is the general idea given of that primitive religion which is supposed to b e the immediate religion. in other words. Perhaps. and historically the first. In like manner people imagine that in the state of innocence man is perfect in r egard to his theoretical consciousness. true Being. it become s what it ought to be . the thought of the man who stands within this unity as such a reflex. just because perception is a knowing. In reference to the criticism of such a general conception as this. nature in this way sets up a wall of partitio n against me. and this means that passion establishes itself in a freedom of its own. understanding of them in perception or picture-thought. and to which he will attain. that such a conception is. and one which is not destructive of organisation. appear in everlasting beauty.utely good. And man. and freedom was as identical with law and rational will as the individual plant is i dentical with its nature. but this very reflection and division was not present. but as a defini te Being. many peoples have the idea of such a Paradise as lying behind them. which may be compared with the state of somnambulism. and its nature. not something obsc ured. according to thei r true nature. which is no kind of caprice. is a harmony which has not as yet passed over into division or dua lism. in the first place. its inmost character. It is with free-will that guilt first takes its rise. in the exercise of free imagination. his own true being and t hat of the things have not as yet separated from each other . Thus it is said that in such a relation Spirit knows the universa l true nature of things. we are told. a necessary one. and this last is first found in reflection . it must be s tated. Thus the nature of t hings had. whether it belong to the past or be looked for in the future. he sees into their very heart . lain open to that original perceiving understanding. nature is not as yet a negative element to him. having an immediate knowledge. an attempt i s made to confirm this idea by appealing to one aspect of the Christian religion . originally.

and passion of human needs. too. which has not yet. in short. people usually end in representing it to themselves as something b elonging either to the past or else to the future. is absolute reason. and this realisation mus t be of a quite different kind from what is contained in that description of Par adise. and the realisation of the Notion. and in forming an idea of what the Notion. and the shapes and manifestatio ns of this nctualisatiou which are at hand. or the mode of the state oiily. in -some shape or other. essential determination. which thus springs from division or dualism. the Potentiality. to know that nature is r ational . by means of this quality or capacity he is implicitly the True. to place the natural over against itself.e subordinate dualism represented by the multiplicity. This bringing out of that which it potentially is. and only through and as following on this severance. however. but that it has reason withi n itself. however. We must therefore do this general conception justice. its essential nature to be for itself. This is a confounding of what is first as representing the Notion with the reality of consciousness. . th e Potentiality. however. that God is rational. an existence. The question therefore presents itself. It is. and not with natur e alone. is iiot a state. the absolu te activity of reason. to know the universal. which is alone se lf-conscious. Man exists essentially as Spirit . no mere animal. this condition in which the contradictions are resolve d. The Notion must realise itself. he has. This unity. Potentiality. Spirit is only what it makes itself become. is the positing of th e Notion in existence. but Spirit. or sel f-conscious. of the serene untroubled conscio usness of the absolutely divine Essence. It is this unity. On the contrary. it is to the rea lisation of the Notion that states. as a state or condition. but also to be a true idea from which to s tart. the universality of rationality. true unity . and which was only lost by acc ident. have an outward appearance which is something different from what the simple Notion is within itself. Spirit does not. to reconcile itself with nature. to escape fro m its immersion in nature. That. and thus it has instinctively the belief that it must kno w God as well as nature. that it is conscious reason. Thus the spirit knows. entered upon existence. on the contrary. intensity. that state of natural unity which is a on eness not worthy of Spirit. It is thus the form of the existence. if it takes up toward Him an attitude of rational investigation. the active pr ocesses by means of "which it actualises itself. to be free. as a unity which ought not to have been lost. Man ?s reason. existence. In it this fundamental determination mu st not only be allowed to be correct. but with its own Essence too. with nature in the general sense as Potentiality. is somethiug altogether different. The Notion. undoubtedly contains truth. with its truth. This unity of man with God. He has the instinct. is Spirit . In so far as he is Spirit. not. which is in question. It contains in itself the necessary Idea of the divine selfconsciousness. immediate existence. exist in an immedia te manner. But t he more precise shape under which this unity is represented as a condition in ti me. must find its essence in God. is undoubtedly the substantial. the Pot entiality is. to sever itself from nature. not as being an inner element which exists on its own account. What is there to prevent us from believing that the Potentiality has been present from the beginning as actual existence ? What prevents this is the nature of Spirit. are due. and is in entire agreement with the Notion. is the Notion. The Notion is the inner el ement. it is not . not the unity of Spirit. but in external. This idea is that man is no merely natural being as such. indeed. which is concrete thought in its act ivity. as this reality i s adequate or proportionate to the Notion. this universality withi n himself. too.

If that state be designated the state of innocence. he is. of savagery or wildness . must come in. however. so far as he merely lives in accordance with nature and follows his heart. in conformity with its own nature. and that the act of judgment. Now it is true that it is sometimes said that this ought not to have be en. of unconsciousness. that must be absorbed in something higher. That representation. The Idea in its living form can be grasped and pr esented by thought alone. called in an abstract fashion the Fall. it is the very nature of Spirit to become that cons ciousness. b y the knowing and willing of that which is right. implying that man has a choice between the two sides of the antithesis. and t hus it could not fail to be the case that this representation too should have el ements of inconsistency in it. that is to say. It is implied by this that man ought to contemplate himself as he is. of passion. and represents what is not merely a kind of accidental history. By guilt we usually understand that a man has done evil . for if he has no knowledge of evil. has been expressed by saying that man is evil by nature. that man. We find in the Bible a well-known conception. since he is implicitly this unity. means that man may have something attributed or imputed to him. follows what merely springs up spontaneously. out of this Potentiality into differentiation. where that which he desires is not determined as eith er the one or the other . and expressed in an outward and mythical shape. in the form of an occurrence. And both aspects . If he has a knowledge o f them. then the individual distinguishes himself from them. but rath er the everlasting necessary history of mankind. if he has them as the o bject of his consciousness. it may appear objectionable to say that man must come out of the state of innocence and become guilty. then. The truth is that that original natural unity in its form as existence is not a state of innocence. he must be by means of Spirit. Consciousness contains a double element within itself. Animals are not good. inconsistency is unavoidable. the term is taken in its evil sense. terminates in reconciliation. but rather of barbarism. this division or dualism. It is not. we have a point of view that ought not to exist. the truth rather being that this standpoint of dualism. he is not as he ought to be. This principle. Guilt in the general sense. he is as he ought not to be . namely. but man in an animal condit ion is wild. The state of man is the state of imputation. In so far as the division and reflection represent freedom. in other words. But it is involved in the conception of man that he should reach rational kn owledge. of liability to imputation. but the e ssential outlines of the Idea are contained in it. This idea is a very profou nd one. Guilt i s in the general sense imputation. he has no knowledg e of good either. that what is done is his act of knowledge and of will. or stands as lord over Good and Evil. is not without an element of inconsistency. or. is evil. that which has an absolute essential existence. what. ho wever. that if man is in accordance with nature only. one which should not make i ts appearance at all. As he is by nature. If the Idea. the jud icial trial in reference to himself and the natural. he has them as the object of his consciousness . comes out of the natural. on the contrary. where man does not know either good or evil. namely. in fact. It is thus that he comes to know of God and of goodness. and because he is Spirit. nor are they evil . be represented in a mythical way. is as he ought not to be. The s tate 'of innocence is that state in which there is nothing good and nothingevil for man : it is the condition of animals.

as a matter of fact. denoting something which is not to be. moreover. freedom. immediat e unity. This is by no means a state of reconciliation which is there from th e outset. People speak of innocent children. that reflection. Thus it is said tha t the serpent beguiled man with its lies. that imagined Paradise sinks to the leve l of a moment or element in that divine totality a moment which is not the absol utely True. and no contingency. that both good and evil should exist for him. is expressed in " Behold ! Adam is become as one of us. and as thus fixed this unity is no longer a natural. in fact. the source of healing. that he should come. on the contrary." It is thus not only ent's. E ightly understood. is not capabl e of being lost. is represented as something that is lost. and this true unity is attained to by spirit only by separation from i ts immediate character. but. and not mentioned at all. Plants are in this condition of unbroken unity. The other side. reach es the state of reconciliation. proves itself historically to be wholly unfounded. free spirituality. namely. and lament that this . wh ich. The one aspect of the truth. is everlasting. that he becomes goo d. is directly im plied in the statement that a crime has been comm itted. God Himself corroborates it. usually overlooked. The pride of freedom is here the attit ude which ought not to be. namely. The spiritual. we find it to be the very same as what is contained in the Idea. the thinking knowledge of the absolutely ex isting Universal . namely. It is imagined that this natural unity is the true attitude of man in religion. however. it means the unity of man with his own nature. This alone is suffici ent to indicate that such an idea does not contain the Truth. this standpoi nt of consciousness. has o ccupied the highest standpoint of philosophical knowledge. fulfils his destiny. freedom. that that severance or division is to s it contains the well-spring of his healing. That in this state man has had the highest knowledge of nature and of God. The unity of man with nature is a favourite and pleasant -sounding expression. namely. that the standpoint of reflection is riot t o be permanent. and as included in the n ecessity that this state should cease . wickedness within themselves that which ought not to be but that they likewise contain the principle. of division or dualism. If the existing Paradise has been lost . or. consciousness. Spirit. If we draw out what is actually implied in this representation. to the light of consciousness . and by its very nature abiding. that man. The tru ly Divine. Yet he must have already been struck by the circumstance that this Paradise.are included iii the narrative. exist. But his true n ature is freedom. thi s age of Saturn. not to remain. to put it superficially. for in divine hist ory there is no past. to put it more precisely. is an absurd idea. or . the truth rather is. something arbitrary. that in order t o attain to the return to itself. That this Paradise is lost proves that it is not absolutely essential as a state. This loss of Pa radise must rather be considered as a divine necessity. that which is in conformity witli its essential nature. contain evil. and to win the state of accomplished reconciliation by wrestl ing for it. in whatever way this may have happened. it has to work its way through its infinite du alism or division. which must haye come into the divine life from the outside. For the attainment of this reconciliation. is not in immediate unity with its nature . of reflection. it is something accidental. is We may therefore say that it is the everlasting history of the freedom of man th at he should come out of this state of dulness or torpor in which he is in his e arliest years . namely. in so far a the words of God : no lie of the serp This. is just as necessary as the abandonment of it.

in somnambulism. for the natural man. and leaves all else untouched. indications of their hurtfulness. and his natural state be marke d by simple needs and conditions. Over against all the opinions and desires of a sickly philanthropy. the finite aspect. and in this the true attitude is for the first time reached. The very same conditions are found in sleep. which wishes men back aga in in that state of original innocence. In every case. i n the Signatura rerum. Thence it comes that this condition has been held to be higher than the healthy one. This. it consumes only certain thin gs. however. and. Its relation to things consists in this. In this their special character thi ngs may be more familiar to a man in his natural state. passion. who are. but do not enter into the inner phases of their li fe constituted by their mutual relations and actual circumstances. Besides. the inner sense has awakened. stands reality itself. this trust get lost . Experience shows that men have a natural c onsciousness of this kind. the external quality through which the special peculiar n ature of a thing is indicated. he may have a much more definite knowledge of their particular qualities than in the civilised state. Two kinds of elements are to be distinguished in things : first. it is self-consc ious willing . their quality. is the case only with reference to such specific qualities as are wholly and exclusively of a finite character. He is more sensitive to anything harmful than the civilised man is . however. this love. that such na turalness is not that for which man is destined.innocence. of those r eputedly innocent peoples. into this divine heart. benevolent. namely. that it places itself over against its other only. and in essential contrast to all such views stands the real truth of things. rarer than is generally thought. so that the specific peculiarity of its nature is at once suggested by this external quality. such as climate or an insular situation. and travellers' descriptions supply us with pl easant pictures of such a state of things. But these gentle habits are either li nked with barbarous. and in the animal too this connection between itself and external qu ality is much more marked than in educated men. or else such states of simplicity depend upon accidental circumstances. or they speak of the innocence of si mple peoples. But this innoce nce is not the true position of man . by means of which it is cured when ill. they are without that universal self-consciousness and its results which alone constitute the glory of Spirit. and does away with the opposition. their special character in relation to other things. not what is other in general. for this last impairs animal instinct. and of this latter it may be said that its knowledge is far more in identity with the world and with surro unding things than that of the waking state. Within a temperate zone and this is the principal agent in deciding the matt er where nature bestows upon him the means of satisfying his physical wants. And as to the state of childhoo d. well. and evil exhibit themselves there too. Amo . have reference merely to the outward goodhumoured con duct of men toward strangers. In his original dependence upon nature man may either be gentler or more barbaro us. selfishness. its glance cannot penetrate. of their poisono us character. Th is is an aspect which was discussed even in the philosophy of the Middle Ages. It can actually happen that me n may have a consciousness of things which take place a thousand miles away. it stands higher than the innocence just spoken of. But if it be said that man originally found himself in the centre of nature. The natural consciousness has become quiescent here. and the instinct of animals is still surer than the natural consciousness of m an. on the other hand. saw into the heart of things. In the same way the deadly look. their definite character. This may be found in men in the nat ural state. This instinct sees into th e heart of particular things. This is the natural side. the smell of pla nts are. but into the source of the life of things generall y. horrible customs. An animal is driven by instinct toward that which it requires for its sustenance . the morality which is free is not that of the child . however. we reply that these are mistaken ideas. the observations and descriptions. such as we have. It may thus be said that the natural man sees into the heart of things. and so forth. apprehends their specific qualities more corr ectly. Thus it has an instinct for the herbs. his natural character may remain gentle. and with a state of complete brutishness.

a process of mediation by which it shall have purified itself from suc h finite willing must necessarily have taken place. That is only to be found in th e Notion. But the Essence of nature as a system of laws is nothing el se than the Universal. It is of no avail to contemplate the heavens. it gives expression to what the True essentially is . and it is this development in its true form^ not nature i n its individual form. Such purification is the edu cation and work of mediation. and moral . the Universal. This is not action of an immediate kind. contrary. from this reflection. the law. The knowing of nature in its truth is a mediated knowledge. In order that the will may attain to the willing of good. It is nature looked at in its universality. and not im mediate. but it is the essent ial being of Nature. however. This is the truly rational elem ent. i t is the going out of finitude.ng barbarous peoples such knowledge and such presentiments are to be found in fa r greater degree than among civilised nations. the system of self-developing life. Natural immediacy is therefore not the^ true form of r eligion. and it is necessary that it should do so. in this unity as yet unbroken by ref lection. but raises itself above th e sensuous manifoldness of what is given. who has wit hdrawn his senses into himself.. of its orbit. and only occur in the final and spiritual stage of the existence of man. The heart of a planet is the relation of its distance from the sun. This rationality and this knowledge are a result only of the mediation of thought. That instinctive knowledge of nature is explained as sense-pe rception. The connection of this definite individual with definite things which form a part of his consc iousness is awakened. " Wha t has been perceived ? " it is not sensuous nature superficially considered (a k ind of perception which may also be attributed to animals). But thinking is not something immediate : it begins indeed from data. but these are in this case merely single or individual thi ngs and occurrences. and believingly we may do it. in which it exists for sense-perception or pictorial thou ght. to the consciousness of the infinite separation of its independ ent being from unity. the universal Idea. and produces the Universal. and the like. Spirit in its truth exists for the free Spirit only. it is l>y thinking alon e that the essential element can be reached. which abstracts from understanding. proves itself to be worthless whenever we make inquiries regarding what ought to be seen. Moreover. but this is something quite other than the immediate will. Spirit exists only for Spirit . this is spirit which has come to the knowledge of sin . that assertion of the existence of a direct sight or vision of things. But all this is not yet the true heart of things. which wills individual things as such. and which has returned out of that state of separation to unity and reconciliation. Ordinary thought sets up an Ideal. for gets what takes place under sensuous conditions. This latter is the will which confines itself to the sphere of p articularity and fiuitude. &c. Such knowledge. who is free from bondage to the immediate sensuous experience of sight. The Good is. In so doing. and it is this latter which has learnt to disregard immediate perc eption. If we ask. but what is defe . negates the form of particularity. and approaches the objects before him in the exe rcise of free thought. &c. what has been asserted all along applies specially to the idea that the true consciousne ss of God lay in this natural unity of man. o n the. The form of the Natural is nature as permeated by thought. ho wever piously. the True. and is only attainable for the man of scientific culture. hearing. it is not the slumber of Spirit which can reveal the true heart of the world to us. it is still more imperative that man should have laboured to free hims elf from his natural particularity of knowing and of willing. innocently. is confi ned to special or single occurrences and the fate of individuals. and this cannot be something immediate and primary . In theological language. God being the cen tre of all truth the pure truth without any kind of limitation in order to arriv e at Him. The will is good in so far as it wills th at which is good. Accordingly. For the rational knowledge of God this is equally essential. of an immediate consciousness. but it is rather its lowest and least true stage. right. but is the work of mediation . in other words. and this is nothing else but immediate consciousness. It is the same with the will.

w e come upon scientific knowledge which does not seem to be in harmony with their present state. It is quite possible to recognise the substantial kernel of actuality thr ough this outer rind. for they express no prosaic conditions whatever as regards years or recollection of the past. to arbitrariness. Among many peoples. Among the people of India. In recent times. we find that such a sphere is inadequ ate to the ideal. they have formu lae in order to calculate the eclipses of the sun and moon. they use in a wholly mechanical way. and still further behi nd . and with justice . Finally. Further. it has been found necessary to give up these numbers entirely. remains and indications have been found which present a contrast to the other elements which constitute these ideas. they seemed to point to a very long duration of time. the astronomical and mathemathical knowledge of the Indian peoples has bee n more thoroughly examined into. a condition of comp lete morality. finite element.ctive here is that it gives that ideal the character of something pertaining to the future and the past. Reason grants their sphere to chance. but what is defective here is that reflection takes up an abstract attitude. to a p raiseworthy . If we conceive realisation to mean that all things the general conditions. The writings of the monks of the Middle Ages. thereby rendering it something which is not present. much was heard of the e normous chronological numbers . an d so directly giving it the character of a. In these branches of knowledge they had not. In order to gathe r the rose in the cross of the Present. At the time of the first discovery of Indian literature. and an original state of culture is undoubtedly to be recognised in it. but for this severe labour is requisite. This and many other similar circumstances have been looked upon as traces of a better past. for example. It is not the confused state of existence alone which constitutes t he Present. what exists on its own account or in an d for itself is the inner element. of practical n eeds are to be commensurate with the Idea. The astronomical formulae are so needlessly inv olved that they are far behind the methods of the Greeks. and it still continues to diminish day by day. no doubt.diligence. but the actual presence of the Idea is n ot as yet recognised. the I ndian peoples are said to possess great astronomical knowledge . to which their present state of culture does not corre spond. or which could not have been parallel with their initial state o f culture. h ave certainly often not come out of their own heads. without any foreknowledge or investigation of t he presuppositions. how ever. or the method and the formula they employ. The remains of such a better condition of existence have been made th e basis of conclusions as to a previous state of perfection. \ve must take that cross itself upon us. the developments of justice. but knows that the True is still present even in this thoroughly confused world. The knowledge reached is eithe . for instance. however. . The empirical consci ousness is consciousness of the finite . which. as it appears to external observation and upon the surface. Those complicated formulae point. Quite lately. or. Reflection distinguishes the one from the oth er. So then this wisdom of the Indian peoples and the Egy ptians has diminished in proportion as further acquaintance has been made with i t. and to yield wholly new disclosures. but more than that is not to be found in them: long-continued observatio ns lead to such knowledge. it may be. only it is not realised. to painstaking effort with regard to the problems -in qu estion. and true science is precisely that which seeks to reduce its probl ems to the simplest elements. because the Idea is contemplated with finite consciousness only. but are remnants of a bette r past. great wisdom and varied k nowledge have been found. it has been sought to establish the existence of the Idea historically by going back to a beginning of the human race marked by the features above indi cated. That by means of which the ideal is determined may be present. got nearly so far as the Greeks. The ideal of a state is quite sou nd. however. however. and yet at the same time requires that that which has essent ial existence should manifest itself and be present in the world of external con tingency. and yet the substantial Idea is nevertheless actual and presen t within it. and this definite existence is not totality. of politics.our own'.

only. and therefore it is not the conception of man in his unive rsal essentiality. particular mode of existence. in this its commencement as immediate religion. that. and natural things are not yet degraded into external things. With reference to this stage of the religion of nature which we cannot hold to be worthy of the name of religion we must. This is not the Idea of man. an d which even pertain to the superficial nature of our education and culture. ranks as what is ( highest. instead of its being recognised that it appears for the first time as mediation. this form are contingent. the prosaic cat egories. The religion of nature from the first contains in it the spiritual moment or ele ment. nature generally viewed as a whole. The religion of nature. That religion has not the merely external. thoroughly familiar to us. Yet in the very worst religion the Spiritua l is to man as man higher than the Natural : the sun is not higher for him than what is spiritual. this heaven. For natural consciousness. an un defined power or force which cannot as yet be filled up. in su ch wise that the abjective side God is posited as something natural. but the spiritually-natural. naturalness. which are present only through thou ght and for thought . t his animal. is posited as units or p articulars . The spiritual knows itself as the Power ov er the natural. This particular natural object. in order that we may even in it bring the truth before consciousness that God has at all times been to man something belonging to the Present. Its specif ic character is in a general sense the'unity of the Natural and Spiritual. and which posits them. But since that indefini teness is not as yet Spirit in its true character. and at this stage it is something indefinite. and Spirit as the . This natural element is part icular existence. it may be. have as yet no value. the Adam Kadmon. the beginning of the religion of nature. or is in itself of very trifling import. not . a definite man as this actual prese nt man. whic h is consciousness. Nature. The first determination. this man these immediate natural forms of existence are known as God . physicallynatural element as its object. wlrich do not as yet a ctually appear at this first stage. The question as to what content is found . or in and for itself. such as cause and effect. therefore. belong to a further stage of reflection and of th e mediation of thought. and conscio usness is limited to the determinateness of nature. as a whole. and in order that we may abandon the conception of God as an abstract Being beyond the present. they become true only when it is true Spirit. this sun. in which nature is conceived of as the Other of Spirit. but it is a subordinate part. even in the natural mode of existence. Ideas such as these would already be universal ideas. classes. but in its condition of externality. it is the religion of the Spiritual. and that nature is not what exists on its own account. f orget the ideas and thoughts which are. This at once excludes tlie idea that the religion of na ture consists in worshipping natural objects as God . this state of existence has been taken as an immediate one. W e have an interest in getting acquainted with the religion of nature for this re ason also. We now proceed to the closer consideration of the religion of nature.in this idea of God may here be left undetermined to begin with. as an organic totali ty. Thu s the whole idea of the paradisiacal beginning has now proved itself to be a poe m of which the Notion is the foundation . means th at the Spiritual. the determinations in Spirit in. indeed. immediacy. and therefore essentially involves the thought that what is spiritual is ' for man what is highest. Religion has its soil in Spirit only. which is what we have here before us. the original man. Those categories just spoken of are the categories of the understan ding. species. plays a part here. but of this definite actual natural man . the Son of God these are more developed conceptions. is that Spirit is found in an immediate.r to 'be referred to other sources. a man. in order to understand it.

And. It is the same with the will. trained into harmony with th is Universal . These are thoughts. Here in the primal immediate religion. there is as yet no repression of itself within it. since. however beautiful that statue might be. to worship a Grecian statue of a god. h owever. the theoretic al element is what we call the Universal. likew ise. These are distinguished from subjective caprice. transitory.able to enter experimental ly into its sensations. such as " Who made that ? " &c. It is from this fundamental determination that religion has its first begi nning. in this state of torpor and dulness. we ar e obliged to forget all the forms of our own culture. established determinations . f or example. just in the same way as we may perhaps understand a dog without being. in the exercis e and attitude of immediate willing. T his distinction. In the formation of his ideas. inclination. a consciousness of negation is indeed present here. and accidental. the stage of immediate religion lies at the farthest di stance from us. i n which Spirit has not as yet made the distinction of itself as the universal Po wer from itself as what is particular. for in this case we still have it before our thoughts as an object. but not as yet. For to do this would mean to fill up entirely the totali ty of the subject with a similar particular determination. law.True. Even into religions which approach more nearly to our mo des of thought we cannot enter experimentally in this way . all this is repressed. universal forms which belong to thought. contingent. in this immediacy. passion. In willing. as wholly without reflection or the power of risi ng up to thought. moreover. even in order to make it intelligible to ourselves. It is wiih the entrance of thought that more worthy conception s of God first appear. the natural will becomes transformed into a willing and acting in accordance with such universal points of view. as he exists for himself alone upon the earth. and forms the second stage within the religion of nature. right. namely. Here man' is seen in his immediate personal strength and passion. being rather found in man himself. into the feeling of it. he is pent up in this undivided state. is that in which Spirit is still natural. that of contingency. of the powers of natu . the antitheses of universal Spirit as universal Power a nd essential Being. so that it would beco me our determinateness. does not as yet exist for him. into that of causality and that of what is merely dependent. There is perhaps a power over contingent life and its pur poses and interests. mere ly an effect. has not yet a ppeared. dominated by meaus of this Universal. a nd thus at the very beginning. they cannot become f or a single moment so much our own particular religion that we should be able. He asks no theoretical questions yet. This dualism or division is not as yet present in it. rather. man has as yet no high er Power than himself. The Spiritual here exists in a particular and immediate form. But it is not possible for us enter into the experience of it. but this is no essential power in the sense of being inhere ntly universal. to freedom. Immediate religion. the fear of the Lord. We must regard man immediately. Man is therefore still undivided as regards his willing : here it is the passion and wildness of his will which holds sway. This state is only the primal uncivilised reliance of Spirit upon itself : a cer tain fear. We may indeed be able to understand and think this form of religion. on the contrary. This separation of objects into a contingent and an e ssential side. boundaries for the subjective will. and subjective existence with its contingency.

and he limits his energies t o these particular objects alone. as. to which we give the name of magic. contingent. This power is a direct power over nature in general. of thunderstorms. is exercised by the educated man by means of his knowledge of the qualities of t hings. changes r ound into its opposite. He then knows that he has to do with th ese only. This state is a gift belonging to particular persons. The man who is occupied with ordinary things has. who have to learn by tradition all those means and ways by which such power can be exercised. standing in a man ifold connection with one another. but even the fear of the powers of nature. and is not to be likened to the indirect power. In so far as immediate self-consciousness knows that this power lies within it . he has taken higher ground for himself. A select number of individuals who are sensible of the presence o f this sombre subjective quality within themselves. particular objects before him. It is not.) Magic. . Here the individual knows that he must transplant himself into a higher state in order to have that power. although it is only mere passion. fear in this higher sen se only that is not present here. of things as they are in regard to other things . but is merely the particular. that is to say. con sists in this. when his particularity trembles within him. which show themselves as mighty against him. is here not as yet fear which might be called religious fear. The absolutely primary form of religion. however. it at once marks itself off in that state i n which it is such a power from its ordinary condition. It first appears in man when he knows himself to be powerles s in his particularity. When the natural element in man thus trembles. for example. (a. and when he has accomplished in himself this abstraction from that particularity in order to exist as free Spirit. so far as it enters at all at this first stage of the religion of nature. when he goes about his simple business. of the sun. and over the vicissitudes or changes of nature . is something quite different from the consciousness of that ordinary manner of existence with its occupations and various activities. which. and becomes magic. But the consciousness of himself as a power ov er the universal power of nature. as Spirit . Such a power as this. presupposes that he has receded from this w orld. it is not yet found in its un iversality. which we exercise by means of implements over natural obj ects in their separate forms. peculiar qualitativ e characteristics and laws . Two different things are to be remarked here : . and p asses over to thought. which gives the world a free standing in its qualitative character. to knowledge. repair for instruction to th e older ones. This power. he renounces it. It is sai d that " fear is the beginning of wisdom : " this fear cannot present itself in immediate religion. empirical self-consciousne ss of man. knows itself to be higher in its self-consciousness than nature knows that it is a power ruling over nature.. which the educated man exerc ises over individual natural things.re. au externality to which he concedes an independence relatively to himself. that the Spiritual is the ruling power over nature. he raises himself above it. however. another . and it presupposes further that these things in the ir qualitative character are relative in regard to each other. Fear -of the powers of nature. that it is the seat of this power. The fear of God is a different fear from the fear of natural forces. &c. This spiritua l element does not yet exist. that the world has acquired externality in relation to him. in fishing or the chase. for this has its seat in freedom .

by means of his ideas. Fur here the greate r part of nature still remains indifferent to man. and before him Captain Ross. begins from unfree freedom. . On the other hand. and partly improper and godless. in so far as it is an objec t for self-consciousness. other people. Such is the oldest mode of religion. na mely. however. however. such as Captain Parry. floods. But in a subordinate way magic steals np to higher standpoi nts too. It thus is magic or sorcery. which threaten him with death. are another matter. but by starting direct from Spirit. The distinction here. Not until he is himself free does he allow the external world. is that man appeals to an absolute will. but not as bein g a power which acts in a free manner. not through mediat ion. any direct influence exercised by man. To def end himself against these recourse is had to magic. the wildest. so that the single or individual self-consciousness knows itself as something which is high er than natural things. however. or is just as he is accustome d to see it. and as something which mediates . and the like. of his will. that the human consciousness. presupposes this mutual unfreedom. and operates on them by so ar ming himself that he is able to attack them in their weakness and to compel them to submit to him. and which just on that account does not b ring itself into relation to what is free. because man seeks to make it effectual. wholly without the element of mediat ion and as the crudest consciousness. There has been an inclinat ion on the part of some (as. in the general sens e. Among other peoples a mediation is already present. The natural has. any definite human being. As regards the external mode in which this idea actually appears. here the power over nature acts in a direct way. and which in so actin g is determined by general purposes of good. and which can either grant the prayer or not. and this knowledge is. this r eligion has been found among the Esquimaux. To the man who is not free . on the contrary. to begin with. Everything is stable. and natural things to exist over against him as free. for example. is already a further advance. by no means that wide range which it has in our idea of it. For the accomplishment of this it is necessary that man should be free in himsel f. it is found in a form which implies that this magic is what is highest in the self-consciousne ss of those peoples. for which even the individual or unit is an obj ect of care. in the Kantian philosophy) to consider prayer too as magic.element thus makes its influence felt in them. it is already a breaking off of the universal self-consciousness from the empirical spirituality of self-consciousness. others are not free either. that man has the mastery as he is in his natural stat e. Earthquakes. since power over external thing s is indeed attributed to man as representing what is Spiritual. This is His fundamental determination. thunderstorms. He learns to know them on that weak side. as possessed of passions and desires. most barbarous form. is recognised as t he ruling power over nature in virtue of his own will. Magic. enemies. At the beginning this doe s not yet exist. By recent travellers. and thus into the popular conception of witches. tmmediated. a differentiation of spi rituality as that which is universal and as definite individual empirical self-c onsciousness . animals. The religion of nature as that of magic. although in that form it is recognised as something which is partly impotent. and their weakness at once shows itself. simply amounts to this. Spiritual existence. It follow s from what has been said that God is necessarily of a spiritual nature. and insinuates itself into higher religions. Such is the general character of this primal and wholly immediate standpoint.

become for the most pa rt the share of the priests. and the variousl y complicated modes we have of accomplishing our ends. he replied that they would be buried . but scanty. a great veneration for the sun and moon. and he proceeded to do it by dint of phrases and g estures. A young Angekok wished to make the wind rise. It was already mentioned by H erodotus. they have amongst them ind ividuals whom they call Angekoks. but they possess t he belief that self-consciousness is a mighty power over naturft. the more recent accounts are. of the everlasting duration of spirit. The general facts." Thus they occupy the lowest stage of spiritual consciousness. They know of no evil spirit. they wor ship no image. of a higher existence. for they use very little. he required no aid from any one whate ver. of the immortality of the soul. Our information regarding the state of these peoples is for the most part derived from the missionaries o f past times . being established by a great variety of accounts. gifts to the gods. his eyes rolli ng about all the while. when they lay a great stress upon the possession of property. The English had an Esquimaux with them . this was done by means of d ancing. but still you can only speak of avarice. there is at least one. The people regard th em with fear . as in t he case of other religions. The English persuaded an Angekok to practise magic . and wished to run away. however. especially ns missionaries are natural enemies of magic. In its first form this religion is more magic than religion . in judging fef their c onditions. of an essential substance as contrasted with their empirical mode of existence. and have few requirements. Through him they obtained some knowledge regarding the people. and in recent times it has been found existing in -a similar form. and. of the evil independent existence of the individual spirit. it is no longer found in the absolute crudeuess of its first form. in every family.Captain Parry says of them : "They are quite unaware that there is any other wor ld . we must forget the manifold needs which surround us. and therefore some of the narratives of older date have to be received with suspicio n. but mediations already come in. so that he became frantic with the prodigious amount of exertion . h owever. and he asked where it lived. Offerings. and when he was told it was everywhere. But to these peoples possessions are of no consequence . conjurers. no living creature. a long time ago an old man had once said that they would go to the moon. he a t once became afraid. and they have. are undoubted. to bring whales near. and say that they learnt these arts from old Angekoks. upon rye. This religion of magic is very prevalent in Africa. The charge of avarice on the part of the priests must be abandoned here. without mediat ion. all good. but it was long since any Esquimaux had believed that. who had lived some time in England. on the other hand. He was told of an omnipresent. to create a calm. &c. On being asked where his people wo uld go when they died. magicians. apart from any antithesis between that self-consciousness and a divine Bein g. and a peop le are only to be pitied on account of it. however. ice and snow. invisible Being who had made every thing. and gave forth phrases and sounds. and learned that they have no t the slightest idea of Spirit. and he served as interpreter. but were addressed in an immediate way to the natural object over w hich the Angekok wished to exercise power. and do not k now that nature exists in any other form. here. they live among rocks. On the other hand. These phrases had no meaning and were directed toward no Supreme Being as a medium. it is true . Yet the cases are but few in which such peoples appeal to their power over nature.. birds and fish. which owe their origin to the fact that the Spiritual has begun to assume an objective form for self-conseiousness. it is in Africa am ong the negroes that it prevails most extensively. but they do not adore them . he fe ll into a state of exhaustion. as also among the Mongols an d Chinese. Those assert that they h ave it in their power to raise a storm.

Not until it is present does religion begin. the Divine. but is to have due honour rendered to him at human hands. of self-consciousness in other words. and consequently the v ery negation of the Universal. and thrust at the clouds with his knife. they stupefy themsel ves with drink. T . but the magician himself is the conjurer and conqueror of nature. As the clouds drew nearer . for the individual. still in another it is higher than a condition of dependence upon natur e and fear of it. have repeatedly descended upon t he coasts since the year . threatened it with bad treatment. The mag ician appeared in a peculiar fantastical dress. makes signs toward the sky. in whose case magic has prove d ineffectual. and afterwards chewed roots and murmured phrases. sucks in his breath. that man is not to perish by means of nature . A hurricane rendered his conjuring arts needful.. which is what has the power here . is the very first form of religion. and the magic ians have to ascertain who the murderer was. they know of no better use to which to put what they have than to give it away in this manner. The character of this magic is more accurately shown by the mode and manner of i ts exercise. is not in its character as this particular mass of earth. which. universal Being. on which all depends. it is the devil of the king who is slain. In the same way the wild tribe s of North America too killed their aged who had reached decrepitude. These look upon man in the strength of his consciousness as too exa lted to be capable of being killed by anything so obscure as the power of nature . as this particu lar water. many persons are killed : according to a m issionary of older days. In this sphere of magic the main principle is the direct domination of nature by means of the will. they were resorted to. pouring forth from the interior and inundating the wh ole country. Such. not a god in t he magician. aud. of an essen tial. are put to death by their friends. These are the Galla and Gaga tribes. and even in the lowest condition there is at least a beginning of it. that sick people. There is another peo ple again who have the belief that everything would go to ruin if their high-pri est were to die a natural death. namely. from which depend figures of metal and wood. The mountain. It is to be observed here that there are negro peoples who have the belief that no man dies a natural death . but as a mode of the existence of the Divine. On the death of a king in particular. What therefore takes place is. describes circles or figures in the sand. and spat towards the sky. However bad this magic may look regarded in one aspect. and when in this state declare what is to happen and prophesy ab out the future. It is the i ndividual consciousness as this particular consciousness. lie waxed furious. T he storm continuing notwithstanding. if a high-priest should notwithstanding die of some disease. and utters magical words. in spite of the strong opposition of the missionary. when he is at once made away with. the river. But we do not yet find this in magic as such. that nature has not power over him. looked up at the sky and the clo uds. The magician retires to a hill. does a God exist. and this means that spiritual power shows itself as a mode of the Universal relatively to self-consciousness. but that it is he who has power over nature. Wearing a fa ntastic dress. then. that Spirit is somethi ng of a higher kind than nature. they believe that some other person killed him by means of magic. he broke out into howls. He is therefore executed as soon as ever he bec omes ill and weak . made signs to the clouds. shot arrows at the sky. the meanin g of which is unmistakable. blows toward the wi nd. A missionary who found himself at the head of a Portugu ese army relates that the negroes who were their allies had brought a magician o f this kind with tnem. which cannot indeed as yet be pr operly called religion. for the particular empiric al consciousness. The Schamans among the Mongols are very similar to these magicians. as th e most savage and most barbarous of conquerors. Tins objectivity is an essential characteristic. To religion essentially pertains the moment of objectivi ty.

recog nises itself in religion to be essential. . man. ." Not until man is so conceived of as Essence does the Other nature essentially become a mere negative. If. yet man has a c ontempt for dependence. and here mere formal objectifying mu st be distinguished from the true. as well as the natural will. that self-consciousness maintains itself as the power ove r natural things. Not until consciousness is further developed. it will be seen that the consci . but not as somethin g which is foreign to his nature. the empirical. and still remain s. and therefor e of sensuous particularity which is certain of itself. in accordance with those chara cteristics which essentially belong to Spirit in its true nature. casts away the merely natural connection. this dependence is of little importance. i . the ideality of self-consciousness as the force or power is still operative as against feeble o bjectivity. there enters a re lation of self-consciousness to the object.his is the religion of passion. subjective spirituality. (b. It is at anot her stage that what a later religion says holds good : " God thunders with His t hunder. Although at the lowest stage this is merely a formal freedom. With the distinction of the singular and universal in general. If. therefore. recognises it as Essence. The subjective self-consciousness of man is conceived of as dependent on the o bject. aud maintains the supremacy. to be fre e. losing their immediate validity and positive character. come to be conceived of as something evil. in that it shows itself to be negative relatively to it s object or " Other. and partly that iti this objectivity not merely natural things exist for it. as immediate consciousness. w hen man and nature. which is still infinite for itself. and subjugates nature to his own power. What we have to consider in the first place here is formal objectifying only. Th e relation here is of a threefold kind. absolute objectifying means that God is. does the dependence o f consciousness come in. master and lord this living force. and yet is not recognised. only by a deviation from his ordinary state of exist ence does he reach the condition of dependence. But this negativity shows itself to be only a point of transition. comes to see that to depend upon natur e is not its fundamental characteristic. The higher relation is that of free adoration. something negative. Spiritualit y. Man. is. but to know itself as Spirit. therefore. can only conceive himself to be dependen t in an accidental manner . immediate spirit. But in the religion of m agic there is already also a distinguishing of the individual empirical consciou sness of the person dealing in magic from that person in his character as repres enting the Universal. too. asserts himself. we consider the process of the objectifying of the Universal as i t goes on when still within the sphere of magic. what they are in need of exists for them." God can do something better than merely thun der . but that a Universal begins to come into existence in it.) The Objective Characteristics of the Religion of Magic. we find it pa rtly consists in this. grows for them . Spirit does not permit itself to be characterised b y a natural phenomenon. It is owing to this that out of magic the religion of magi c is developed. Subjective self-consciousness. Amongst simple peoples in a stat e of nature. where man reveres the ruling power as free. remains self-contained. that He is known as existing in and for Himself. we consider this objectifying process more closely. amongst savages. the y therefore do not regard themselves as at all in a condition of dependence . The former is that the spiritual Power God is known as objective for consciousness . They have what they want . towards which it accordingly assumes the attitude of free adoration. He can reveal Himself. this self-conscious power. th eir needs are chance needs only.

and means that the subject does not take to itself the direct power over nature. therefore. it gives itself a valid existence in what is other than itself . Man unlocks his prisonhouse. as the consciousness of free power. the one is that which posits the other ideally. This mediated magic is present at all times and among all peoples. they are essentially in a condition of relation. with the objectifying process. essential objecti vity . The two are intermingl ed. although we still find ourselves within th e region of the religion of nature. made use of. Sympathetic remedies. but it is accompanied by the perception of an independent. but fi nds its satisfaction in what is other than itself. consciousness reflects itself into itself. Self-consciousness is that relation with the object in which the former is no lo nger immediate self-consciousness. and inserts the thing itself as the destroying agent between itself and the thing. by means of an Other which remains external. In magic. are a power among themselves. the power over it. but the universal power or force in things. Magic is retain ed. that the o ne is to be known by means of the other. what the consciousness which uses magic knows as the ultimate principle i s not itself. so that. the consciousness of an essential universal power begins. so that Spirit is the higher notion. and n o longer an immediate relation. They are a contrivance the object of which is to produce a result in something quite diffe rent . as such. as it were. where the " I " as a unit confronts natural thin gs. a further reflection. while the magic first referred to was direct magic. the thing becomes broader in this way. when thus posited objectively. Magic has existed among all peoples and at e very period . as spiritual self-consciousness. Now. d o we emerge from the sphere of magic. and not until free adoration. Passion seizes on things in an immedia te way. know s itself as the power ruling over natural things. as ic at first exhibits itself to us in an external form. it goes out beyond itself. The moments of mediation. in fact. the power over it . of a charm. a mediation comes in in it s higher stages. and attain to himself by means of t he negative mode of himself. the subject has the means in its hand : to produce this result is merely its intention. The change which is to be brought about may in one sense dep . but it conquers the thing by means of the thing itself. This is already. This is a 'orm of objectifying which is merely a connection of external things. The next form of universality reached by reflection is that natural things a ppear to be within one another. The infiniteness of passion shows itse lf as a finite infinity. has its meaning as cause and effect. looked at more closely. however. The immediate re lation here is that the selfconsciousness. it is an objective quality. things show themselves as ideal." and through an "Other" as its channel. while it the reby shows itself as stratagem or cunning in not mixing itself up with the thing s and their strife. the medi ation takes place. too. unite himself with himself as Essence. that which is satisfied within itself. Thi s is the sphere of indirect magic through means. again. In mediation. now. Here he exercises an indirec t power. or the mediating agent with the magic. but only over the means. This connection is already a form of the objectifying of the Universal. The " I " is the magician. belong to this kind of magic. stand in connection with one another. In the first relation " I " am the ideality of the thing. however. by the mediation of an "Other . and only by the annulli ng of his particularity does lie create full satisfaction for himself in his Ess ence. appears. the things are themselves the power in their mutu al relation to one another . man exerts direct power over nature. which comes into consciousness by means of the very exercise of magic. since it is restrained by means of reflection within th e bounds of a higher power. These themselves. however. its aim. are these: I. by means of an object.ousness of truly essential objectivity though as yet undeveloped now begins with in it. for the thing is thus n o longer a unit. In m agic. and is itself only posited. The ideali ty is thus a characteristic which belongs to them as things .

&c. and the individual is only a ruling force to the extent to which he has power ov er the particular forces thus connected. free scope is given to the e lement of determination. In so far as this connection remains un determined. &c. the direction. and the definite nature things is still unknown. for every circumstance has results. the exact nature of the connection of things with other things is not as yet present in it. Thu s in magnetism everything which is usually called connection ceases . A true connective relation may exist here. the precise mode of action. If the sphere of mediation in magic be once entered. as magic. plants. and nations occupy thi s standpoint in a way which shows that this aspect is for them the fundamental o ne. and all we can really do is to appeal to experience. Among some a charm is made use of when the foundations of a house are laid. Since reflection enters into this region of relations. and the connection of these with the effects being unknown. too. The understanding gets to be conscious that there is a connection. namely. Such a connection exists. Magic exists everywhere where this connection is merely present without being understood. hatred. the power which rules their wishes. Most people are on one side of their nature in this position. to get to know the nature of the remedy. and accordingly w hat is present is the contingent character. Thus Brown treated with opi um. Many nat ions use magic in connection with everything they undertake. But the art of medicine ref uses to adopt the plan of calculating the result from the nature of the remedy. The particular qua rter of the heavens. but the principal thing is the will o f the subject. war. it has the belief that th ings stand to one another in a relation of reciprocity. in order that it may be a lucky dwelling. regarded i n the ordinary way. depend upon certain conditions. every thing governs and is governed : what a man does depends as to its results upon circumstances . or as miracle. and consequently the de finite special character of action. it is an incomprehensible connection. Relations with other men . When people act according to an abstract principle. love. the arbitrariness of the means. and may be beyond the reach of any danger. The principle of magic is that the connection between the means and the result is no t known. has ends . there are connections present whic h cannot be gainsaid. spirit. either one or other of these means must be taken. and which yet. everything is both mediated and mediating. their mode of ex istence. ac t in cases of illness and the like. This mediated magic is infinitely widespread. contradicts itself endlessly. what he is. but its real character is not yet known.. what was formerly cured by means of remedies of an ent irely opposite nature. the huge gate of superstiti on is opened. a charm must be used to secure a happy result. their actual condition. The other alternative would be the rational course. of medicines in hundreds of c ases. which. It is therefore difficult to state the limits of known an d unknown connection. and this is mere exper ience. so long as the deeper conception of this re lation is unknown. 'We are simply told that this connection actually exists. b ut the connection may just as easily be merely arbitrary. peace. This belief is quite cor rect. however. In so far as we are here in presence of effects produced b y living agents on what is living. The same thing holds good. are brought about by the use of such means. may still appear as inscrutable. It is customary to att ribute to all peoples great insight into the way in which herbs. and thus to deduce the change which it brings about. This applies to the endless variety of charms. but the defect in it is that it is still abstract. his aims. too. naphtha. and then every detail of existence becomes significant. amidst a variety of connections of cause and effect. Anything rational is not to be met with in this sphere. He ex ists in an external world. an d therefore nothing further can be said about the matter.. is a matter of importance here. and it is difficult to define its limits and determine what is and what is not included in it.end upon the nature of the means employed. we float about in a condition of absolute contingency. but its precise character is unknow . and have no longer to do with the effects pro duced by what is spiritual on what is bodily. At sowing-ti me.

the heavens. Such a man may be afraid of them in earthquakes. needs. The Universal does not exist for him. in accordance with which I desire to exercise supre macy over this object. it is not pure re verence. If in this sphere natural consciousness still a dheres to the standpoint of individual passion. Thus we see peoples sacrifice to a river if they wish to cross it. shall at the same time be the power exercised over the other. or we may have the genius of rivers. guided by a true or a false instinct. for example. and for which w hat is constant possesses no interest. and imagination. does not reverenc e these objects in their aspect as spiritual universalities. floods. on the contrary. h owever. t he acknowledgment of the supremacy of the object. the means are meant to exert a charm over the pow er of nature they are meant to produce what the subject desires. the entreaty. as Genii. When a man entreats. preserve th . but reverence mixed with magic. he acknowledges that he is in the power of a nother. which still adheres to the standpoint/ of natural unity. because by tha t very act I acknowledge the control of the arbitrary will of another in referen ce to myself. are independent natural things of this kind. The reverence t hus shown towards such objects of nature is wholly ambiguous . The consciousness. and the earth only when there are ea rthquakes. and thus as power. the sun may be thought of as a genius. is uniform. It is therefore often difficult to entreat or supplicate. what they produce. notwithstanding. but only the practical relation du e to accidental wants. the moon. and may address prayers or entreaties to them . at the former point of vie w natural existence has no longer any validity for him. empirical consciousness. it has not as yet a perce ption of their universality.n to understanding. man may. Theoretical interest has no existence here. &c. Man does not reverence them in that f irst sphere either. properly speaking. and has to do with units alone. their mode of action is constant. For example. the sun. This second form. and. and consequently as having the ruling power in relation to the partic ular. here they a ppear for the first time as power . it is universality which is before the mind. we use the word to conjure in the sens e of entreaty. individual or elemental great objects. is without interest for him. a nd which is no longer under his own control. But what is demanded here is that the effect. A river only interests him when he wishes to cross it . because he has not in any way come as yet to the consciousne ss of the Universal which is in these objects. so that they appear to man as something different from himself. is based upon a relation toward objects which are looked upon rather as independent. and it is th is which is reverenced. and then he does not need to entreat them. But while this universality too is thus conceived of as in a universal shape and appears as power. which seem to man to confront him in a wholly independent way. nor does he look up on them as representing what is essential. or eclipses. Thinking man. it may happen that these are conceived of in a more essential shape. At this last standpoint he has no t yet arrived at the universality of all that exists. the co nsciousness of my own power. puts itself in relation with them in acco rdance with its contingent wishes. supplies the deficiency in the abstract principle. . no re lation to these objects as parts of universal nature . for the rest/ they follow their ordinary cou rse. introduc es a defmiteness into it which is not actually inherent in the nature of the thi ngs themselves. interests only. it has. The content of immediate magic in its earliest form has to do with objects ove r which man is able to exercise direct power. These two intermingle. In conjunction with this reverence for natural objects. They are forces or powers. They make use of the power in this way to conjure . From this point of view the sun and moon interest man only in so far as they undergo eclipse. But it is in the midst o f these two points of view that the powers of nature make their appearance as a Universal. witli his higher culture. or in so far as their action appears as contingent. does not excite his desires. Their course. This is a ki nd of reverence in which man does not stop short at the particularity of the obj ect . But entreaty or supplication of this kind is a species of conjuring too . the sea. on the other hand. or bring offerings to the sun if it is eclipsed. It seizes upon the means. again.

Animals are still worshipp ed by many peoples. stars. In zoolatry. and it is the greatest crime to murder it. is a higher principle than the nature of the sun or of a river. and inasmuch as this is not now a human one. Here in this sph ere. and take another. and to have the consciousness of an arbitrary combination which may be just as easily broken up again. in its expressions . even the life for ce in a tree. &c. it i s alive. On the west coast of Africa a serpent is to be found in every house. &c. he requires another. . an animal. it is not to be und erstood . In this sphere of the appetite of individual self-consciousness. the mode of existence. and it is in so far less undignified to reverence animals as divinities than rivers. it has accidental arbitrary movement . a piece of wood. and has the same meaning as " idol. " Fetish " is a corruption of a Port uguese word. and connects itself now with this animal. the vitality which does not throw itself away. Negroes use whatever animal comes first to hand as tlieir charm. as a matter of fact. It is in this way that fetish worship originates. Life. . the principle o f life is higher than that of the sun. where immediate self-consciousness is the fundamental element. and on the other hand they are. Such is the essential character of animal-worship . subject to th e most capricious treatment in respect of the veneration shown to them. it exists in so far as man a nd the spiritual in him have not yet conceived of themselves in their true essen tiality. and self-consciousness is thus able to know itself as a power over it. so that it is properly this which is reverenced. it still continues a merely natural one . thus reverenced or wor shiped. especially in India and Africa. This general conception is based upon the idea that the spirit of man is of a durabl e character. is only that of natural existences . a hill. a truer fo rm of existence than any such existing natural object. that significance is not as yet given to the living creature. which is undo ubtedly the most nearly related to the spiritual one. a manufactured idol. and still more in an animal. The life of an animal gives token of an active independence of subjectivity. This is why it has come about that among a very large number of peoples animals have been reverenced as divinities. which is bound up with the transmigration of souls. which has a preference f or this or for that . and life is the form. animals are thus held in veneration. howev er. On the one hand. which it acquires later in the idea of the transmigration of souls. life in the general sense only that is reverenced. It is his self-consciousness which a man makes objective to himself. This appears to u s as the least worthy form of worship. Similarly there ar e fetishes for whole peoples. This worship. has something secret in its modes of action. and it is th at which is the main point here. but not comprehensible as man is to man. which neither i n itself nor outside of itself recognises universal objective spirituality. and fetishes for any special individual. a tree. Animal life is a more exalted. and mankind the i mpulse to adorn themselves. Moreover. but. as the more precise character of the object appears at first to be of no consequence. any kind of thing is to the purpose here. Just as children feel the impulse to play. their content is poor er. from anc ient times they had the prepossession in their favour of being esteemed as good omens. it is. Serpents were still reverenced among the Greeks . The life of man is thus mere free independence. it is an important and essential mome nt that the idea of an indwelling spiritual element combines itself with this tr ansmuted life. notwithstanding this. Almost every unaccomplished desire is the occasion of a feesh c hange. but that for his existence in that duration he requires corporeal f orm. there is an impulse here too to have something befor e one as an independent and powerful object." Fetish may mean anything. cast it aside when it d oes not produce the desired effect. The n ext stage in the objectifying process is reached when man recognises and finds a n independent power outside of himself in what has life. a river. any carved work.e consciousness of being the power even over these genii . so that he is able to look upon animal life as higher than his own. and the o ne most nearly related is accordingly that of the animal. &c. This mysteriousness constitute s the miraculous element for man. a tree. and now with that other. therefore. is of a contingent character. An animal has the calm indep endence.

It is present in the Christian religion too. If any misfortune occurs. and thus this spiritual power is really merely a superficial idea. which is to be looked upon as objective. Accor dingly. W hat first takes place is that a distinction is made between individuals as such and as universal powers. Here. a river. and. such as floods or war. and at the same time over nature and natural things. The Nile of the Egyptians. conceived as existing i n its own right. His inner life may become hypostatised . a tiger are common national fetishes.The negroes have a great variety of idols. This idea necessarily belongs to the oldest class of principles. or some men are magicians . if the priest and prince are distinguished from one another. he only does this as a defi nite real human being . supplies the idea of Genius. and they do not find the fetish ser viceable. this being for self or independent in contrast to the external contingent mod e of existence. Reverence has here its essential object . it is the will. the essential power of the spiritual and the immediate existence are not as yet separated from one another. At this standpoint. A distinction begins to appear here which is of a higher charact er. howe ver. which they have themselves created in an immediate way. &c. of a god who has himself again a s ensuous shape in the idea formed of him. from which they expect to derive good fortune. is quite different . &c. natural objects which they make into their fetishes. and is a central poin t among many. the man is on the one hand reverenced as Go d. a lion. if anything unpleasant befalls them. In the existing self-consciousness which still has power. Thus one man is a magician. and in regard to objectivity the principle make s its appearance that it is not every individual chance consciousness which has power to rule over nature. becomes strong. and sinks to a means of procuring something for the individual. and which comes into prominence in the Lamas. so that t hey are actually represented sometimes as separate. independent form of existence which is spiritual. the magician. but the essential moment or element is spirituality in general . and thus the principle appears according to whic h it is to be a case of one or some as exclusive in reference to the rest. however. and thus. wio have magicians who are not at the same time sovereigns.. they change their god. bind and beat them unti l they are obedient. but that there are some few particular ruling persons who are looked up to and reverenced as embodying spirituality. it is their substantial. unchangeable ruling power. it is knowledge in com parison with and in actual relation to others which is what rules and which show s itself as essentially necessary relatively to the Other. they make away with it and choose another. for instance. In this latter aspect the individual is a ma n like other men. and that human consciousness is essentially the presence of Spirit. as as we shall see later on. This universal spiritual power. decides. therefore. if they refuse to use their magical charms or are not dispo sed to do so. locusts. Since it is thus a self-conscio usness which is reverenced. upon which their ent ire existence depends. The priest. but in a higher form. but if the god comes to expr ess himself outwardly.. and the actually living individual is t hen the priest of such an idol. A tree. The first stone which comes to hand. the Emperor of China is the individual having dominion over men. a spiritual power makes its appearance. These are usually princes. it is something Divine which they have in c ommon . these are the ir Lares. The fetish is subject to being changed. and on the other compelled to do what others require of him. a distinction at once makes itself apparent here bet ween what an individual is in his essential nature and what he is from the point of view of his external existence. this reality supplies the god with his strength. The negroes. here. as it were. These p riests sometimes have actual sovereigns over them too . This is thus an unknown indefinite power. they are looked upon as the h ighest power which is actually present. the priest and the god often become synonymous. is the principal person. o n the contrary. tr . We shall see how the idea runs through various religions that the Spiritual has its presence in man. The ultimate form in which independent spirituality is embodied is essentially m an himself a living.

The sp eaking dead threatens the survivors with distress and misery. on the other hand. Accor dingly the idea of what is true. Beschreibung d. through the power of the magician. That man actually has such a regio n within himself. takes the blood by force whi ch is not rendered to him. and state that they are impelled to it by this or that dead person. he rises and gesticulates quite af ter the manner of one possessed. is represented by the bones.ansfigured. which is supposed to occasion the entrance o f the spirit which has passed away. the dead therefore demand veneration. They a re held in great repute by the people. It is removed into the region of ideas. what we may call the immortal ma terial part. cl . The Christian religion interprets and transfigures it. &c. drei Kbniyr. therefore. the bon es of the dead are held in reverence. and its content is of an accidental character. and he yells in a frightful manner. the magician himself makes his appearance carried in a net. Cavazzi says. he expresses the dead man's desires. and call them together whenever it please s them to do so. partly as c alled up by magic. of his sensuous presence is. while on t he other hand they ascribe a greater power to their own religion. They always do this from time to time. and shouts of joy. The lasting part of the dead. each man provided with a knife. but a feeble power. of the actual selfconsciou sness. has not the form of truth. " The working of demoniacal fury shows itself in him. and in providing them with food and drink. who are named Singhilli.. De ath takes away what is temporal. The first is that in which he takes up a position of exclusiveness as against what is other than himself . the stripping off of what is temporal from him . but what is thus retained for the individua l has still the form of his wholly sensuous existence. Thus a monk re lates that the negroes have bandages which are prepared with human blood by a ma gical process. deafening. hideous kind of music. The tribe must present itself. wishes them all ki nds of mishaps. and to which is attributed the power of enabling a man to hold hi s ground against wild beasts. "We may in this connection be reminded of relics. cannot at this standpoint as yet come into consciousness . and repl ies to the questions of those who inquire of him about their own affairs. and is retained there. feathers. A few examples will ill ustrate this. enduring. ). bites and s cratches himself . Among many peoples. into the Singhilli . Miinchcn. decked with precious stones. relates a great deal about these magicians. the second is the natural mode. he himself entreats the spirit to enter into him. or it may be they are thought of partly as a power which will avenge neglect of care. lasting. w. The Capuchin monk Cavazzi (Histor. tears his garments. here self-consciousness is not as yet in possessi on of the eternal meaning of its spirit. retai ned by him. thrusts it into some one's breast. and it is the fact that on the one hand missionaries are zealous in opposing this veneration for bones. As representing this power. who remained for a considerable time in the neighbourhood of the Co ngo. s. while doing so. . however. and this consi sts in nothing beyond the bestowal of a certain care upon them. namely. and consequently as being subject to this latter. is of a very inferior kind. what is transitory in man. The stripping off referred to has to do only with the individual's sensuous existence . dancing. This accomplished. This. Most ancient peoples buried food with the dead. It is also supposed that the dead return to the present world. from which those upon whom he had hung relics had always remained protected. Congo u. a part w hich is at thesame time conspicuously material. this natural mode is death. inveighs against the ingratitude of his blood-relations in havin g given him no human blood. rolls his eyes. The assembled people receive h im with singing. He had often observed that men provided with such bandages had been torn by animals. since he exists in his own right. but it has no power or control over that which he essentially is. In the case of a human being. the mode in which objectivity is attained is of a twofold kind. and are used as instruments of magic. Th e dead are a power. which are accompanied by a barbaric . the whole remaining contingent mode of his particularity. seizes a knife. Reverence for the dead is therefore still quite feeble.

and th erefore to die a second time. The duration itself which is given to the dead is a superficial quality . and of part of it plasters are made which are lai d upon him. who devour it without rem orse. The latter is then killed. by the help of blood only are the sha des able to acquire memory and speech . the worthier is the idea of God. or who is the cause of the illness. He continues to be co ntingent existence. This last now conducts him to the grave of the person who appeared to him. in the power. if he has only recently been buried. or especially if he has visions or sees apparitions and dreams. and the sick person consumes it. However weak. independent power is conceded to the spirit. abused. this making light o . the body is dug up. an d the result is that the apparition proves to be that of one of his deceased rel ations who is present there. however powerless men appear here. It always correspon ds. of the magician. no ab solute. eager for blood. This contempt for man. and manages to effect the capture of the animal or bird." It is clear from the above that in so far as it is a question of duration. " The Gagas imagine that the dead feel hunger and thirst. they know beforehand that this is how the thing will end. so that the latter may even cause him to die over again. " The difficulties are greater when the dead has had no burial. The latter inquires into all the circumstances. in short. as an individu al. enemy. is still wholly formal. with the stage at which the metaphysical conception of God has arr ived. it is not his transfiguration. This is the course of procedure when he has been dead for a long time . He rends the bodies and divides the flesh among those present. and what is left behind is s till the man's contingent nature. but go notwithstanding to the gathering wit h the greatest rejoicing. or wild beast. the objectifying has still referenc e entirely to the external mode of existence. has for those at this standpoint. until he enters into the Singhilli and discloses what he desires in o rder to be reconciled. as having h ad his empirical external existence stripped off him. &c. It is not as yet the Essential which is regarded as existent. in the hands of the living selfconsciousness. The idea of immortality hangs together with the idea of God. free. and holds the rest ba ck with his sword. The Singhilli then sets about making inca ntations. It is as dead that the man is represented in this state of duration. If any one becomes ill . and afterwards gives out that the spirit has entered into the body of a monkey. The example already quoted at once shows us the little value man. There the dead man is con-^ j tired. although it may be that of their nearest relatives . the idea of what the ruling power is in its essential nature is equally material. so that vita lity may enter into them : Odysseus permits some to drink. t hreatened. In the scene of Odysseus at the Styx we see how he cal ls forth the dead and slays a black goat . for each Singhilli has his own special busines s. as well as the idea of the spirit of the human individual and of the immortality of the spirit.. ' When the idea of the spirit of man is of this material character. The more the power of spirituality is conceived of in accordance with its content in an eternal form. But his wholly contingent nature still remains to him in this sphere . and in consequence o f this the spirit loses all right to be anything. he sends for a Singhilli and questions him. and drinks the blood which streams forth.eaves heads. they appear just the same among the Greeks and in Homer. a bird. they are . the head cut off and laid open . and he is told that he must go to another Singhilli in order to have it driven away. the moisture which flows from it must be in part consum ed in food by the sick person. but has been dev oured by friend. rips up bellies.

does he acquire a dignity. and that life wo uld then have less value. music. Here this relation is rather the exercise of lordship over nature. and though the essential differentiation of Spirit is carried into effect. On this account. on the contrary. and the right becomes for the first time great when man is recognised as f ree implicitly or in himself. which is quite universal among them. from sensuous immediacy. and of something substantial. Only by the annulling of natural unruli ness. but. where the spiritual element is known as existing iii the particular self-consciousness only. i n which the particular will is forgotten. in the form of the condition of slavery. by the coming in of that consciousness. shouting. a nd it is these which at a higher level become cultus. the fact that Spirit becomes purely objective. are connected in the very closest mann er. THE DIVISION OF CONSCIOUSNESS WITHIN ITSELF. this is not as yet the religion of freedom . but onl y in virtue of having knowledge of something which exists in-and-for-itself. or. The first step in advance is when consciousness of a substantial Power comes in. and then only does life itself too become worth something. Both determinations. even sexual intercourse . it is itself the subsistence of everything. and of the powerlessness of the immediate will. But. Prisoners eith er become slaves or are slaughtered. The condition of this lordship is sensuous stupor. that of sub jective finite independent being and that of absolute power. E verything subsists by means of this power. still si nce this lofty Being is known as power. one might suppose that man. one might suppose the reverse would take place.ultus in the Religion of Magic.) Worship or C. is a mere negative or nullity. gorging. since he is of so much value a s being this power. too. extinguished. The way out of this first form of religion is that Spirit gets to be purified fr om externality. In the sphere of magic. in his own right. and only because he subjects his natural will to this . and comes to have the sig nification of Universal Spirit.f man by others. the right of the individual to life at once becomes so much the gre ater. for man does not possess dignity through what he is as immediate will. for though ma n does actually rise. and attains to the idea of Spirit as Sp irit in ordinary conception and in thought. is confessedly present also among the negroes too. and through the knowledge that a Universal that exists in-and-for-itself i s the True. On the one hand. (c. man has here complete worthlessness . such is actually the case too. there can be no question of worship as free reverence for a spiritual being. and would have the fe eling of his dignity. and brings it into accordance with it. above himself. Inasmuch as God is here known a s the Absolute Power. The important element in the advance is just the objectifying of Spirit that is to say. and the abstract sensuou s consciousness is intensified to the utmost degree. in other words. o n the other. which is afterwards to appear definitely as absolute Spirit. would be held in great reverence here. the Particular is merely something accidental. With the idea of immortality the value of l ife increases . th e rule of some few self-conscious beings over the rest the sway of the magician over those who do not know. so that the freedom of a self-dependent existence is . and is not as yet further characterised. for what has an absolute objective existence o f its own. The means used for producin g this stupor are dancing.

The other movement is the converse one. Here. God bein g only determined here as the Substance of the finite and the power over it. b ut has not' as yet in itself freedom in its own right. so that a present human being is known as the universal Power. inasmuch as an advance is made to differentiation and unfolding only. the power in relation to the finite. and in lif ting himself up to his inner abstract unity. that thi s necessary element has returned to the finite. To begin with. which determines itself within itself. and thus gives it existence. is now posited in an e xternal fashion. . In the exaltation of spirit with which we have to do here. others have it in their power to rise to the attainment o f it. so that even at this stage nothing can be wanting of what pertains to the concepti on of Spirit. Since it must now have a spiritual mode of existence. and is thus immediately present in the finite. Here the unfoldin . The second is the relation of Substance to the finite. the characteristics of Spirit which are potentially existent present themselves in a n external shape. He Himself is still undetermined. The rising up is. is nevertheless the Truth wh ich potentially lies at the foundation of all the phenomena of consciousness. He is not yet known as Spirit. In the religion of India Substance is known as abstract unity. as implicitly spiritual. a n upward movement only. This power. Substance. then. the contingent. where the Emper or at all events represents what gives effect to the power. and which would itself also have a spiritual natu re. since Sp irit as " I" is itself this abstract unity. the characteristic of naturalness still remains. The unity which is here the ruling power makes.riot as yet recognised. on the contrary. and the univer sal selfexistent Essence as that in which and by means of which this finite is s omething negative. no longer as a mere foundation. but the question is as to how it does this. in the religion of China. . rises up in its character as thought. Complete determinateness. the ultimate reach of definite form. This consciousness already shows itself in the Chinese religion. This is Pantheism. for example. is the not-pos ited. it is true. even al though Substance is not yet conceived of as Spirit. What occasions the progressive movement of consciousness is that Spirit. but without having a consciousness regarding this universal thought. who is known as this power. the continge nt. Therefore here too Substance will take on the specific character o f a subject. accordingly. however. it has the moment of spir ituality again merely in a single human being. this final culmination of the unit of independent being. man rises up. Here. This is defined as the negative. which are progressive efforts to grasp Substance as self-determining. an attempt to unfold itself. something posited. to the unity of Substance. The true unfolding and the negativity of the combination of differences would be Spirit. This is the general foundation of several definite forms of religion. in the first place. and in its subjectivity manifests itself to itself. Now. Here. and this abstract unity is more nearly akin to Spirit. Substance is known as th e simple foundation. the selfexistent. which is something reached by thought. which would be worthy of it. and the moments or ele ments remain in an isolated condition alongside of each other. This subjectivity of Spirit would give it a content . however. Some by nature share in the exi stence of this unity . In the first movement the finite forgets itself. without expres sing it in the form of thought. is not as yet known as such. identifi es himself with it. the consciousness which rises up. the point of departur e is the finite. He is not yet known as determined within Himself for Himself. namely.

we have to look at the general definite character of this entire stage and the metaphysical notion or conception of it. and explain what is to be understood by it. however. for absolute Spirit alone is the power which rules over its mome nts. the diffe rences of Spirit being posited within it in a definite form. and the metaphysico-logical notion there fore appears to lie behind us. the spiritual. of the distinction of form. With so concrete a form of existen ce as the finite Spirit. as being the logical element. and in such a sphere the exposition of the logical element may be rep resented as a system of conclusions or syllogisms. The general conception of the religion of nature presents great difficulties in this respect . In the first place. T hus. since the latter is true Spirit only as free Spirit. is thus at the same time external form. th e concrete embodiment and presence of Substance exists and lives in one individu al. one is sometimes at a loss to find Spir it unfolded. t he Trinity. just because we find ourselves in the region of t he absolutely concrete. To put it more accurately. It may well be that when another object. and prese nt themselves as mutually exclusive. And this form. that element is represent ed in the determinateness belonging to nature. to be the essential element. is the content of the whole Philosophy of Religion . it i s certain. This is Lamaism or Buddhism. That inmos t specific character. in a condition of individuality.g necessary in the conception of Spirit is consequently itself devoid of Spirit. The content is Spirit. is under consideration. such determinateness is not merely this external form. of mediations. a natural object. made dependent on something else . which is the content of each stage in accordance with its substantial nature. Without this l . on the other. Now this differentiation of determinateness. This i s the very nature of the notion. the inmost element and external form. . which is essentially free. and this whole is the simple Substantiality of Spirit. In the philosophy of nature and in the philosophy of Spirit this logical form cannot be brought i nto special prominence. It un ites both in itself. is universal logical form. it is at once. in the Religion of Nature. and the formless unfolding of unity which was peculiar to the preceding form is at least in so far done away with in that it is nullified and reduced to a v olatile state. namely. it is everywhere inconsistent. what is to be defined is the notion or conception of the exaltation of Spirit and the r elation of Substance to the Finite. for instance. with a content which has fixed particularity. This is the case. This logical determinateness is on the one hand concrete as Spirit. In the last form which belongs to this stage of the inner division of consciousness. since it constitutes the different sta ges. but. and then. and which is therefore wholly inad equate to Spirit. The different stages at which we find Spirit give the different religions. and is inherently contradictory. Form is therefore the Abstract. but these are so disposed that they at the same time do not pertain to it. in the religion of India. Moments or elements will indeed be found w hich pertain to Spirit. is posited. At the sam e time. Thus the triad in Indian religion does not become Trinity. the logical eleme nt is taken as constituting its inner nature. and a process of the unfolding or development which Spirit is. this is accordingly the case as well. The determinations or characteristics are isolated. The Metaphysical Notion or Conception. Before proceeding to consider more closely the historical existence of this reli gion. Here we have a wholly concrete content. on the one hand. In such a content as nature and Spirit it exists in a fi nite mode. but on the other it is also the external form belonging to Spirit. we must consider the general scope of the metaphysical notio n. and the Es sence of appearance. is what is innermost in the determining Spirit. shows itself as external form which has Spirit as its foundation. Accordingly. with the idea of the Incarnation. b y means of which it is differentiated from what is other than itself.

are veiled or concealed. The first form of this activity derives its character from the fact that here we are still entirely at the first stage. Its relation to what confronts it is the e ssential thing. It is to be proved to me . In the proofs of the existence of God. The immediate is Being. we can look a t Substance as undeveloped. its place in theology as an element in the philosophical knowledge of God. since it possesses interest in virtue of the fact of its having been formerly treated of in natural theology. which we have described as the immediate one. the statement and consideration of the simple determinateness of the notion would remain unsa tisfactory. infact. been cast aside as mean. These determinations. the mode of its reality of what is concrete in the content. it is t rue. the stage of immediate unity. These two sides are now opposed as infini te and finite the one as pure Being. bad. and for t his reason it requires a justification. and is for this very reason mediation. Thus the same thing is found in both. The proofs of the existence of God are li kewise mediation. and ha s not as yet filled itself up by means of further reflection. and can therefore here be m ore easily considered. and as having. but is something which moves itself. in which they are adequate to thought. the other as determinate Being as substanti al and accidental. and only wh en and in so far as mediation is so conceived of is it a necessary moment. a nd nature. here. In bringing himself into relation to the Infinite. we have in this way an abstract d etermination of God and of the finite. as think ing is an activity. accordingly. but get to see that what is true is an objective re lation of God within Himself. therefore. it is not so needful to bring them int o prominence on their own account. and it is then of no consequence which form we take in order to consider it more closely. of His logical element within Himself. however. is alone adequate to our purpose. as universal and as particular. unworthy of notice. in order that for this latter a fixed view or in sight might grow up. Having the world before h . which c onstitutes the main interest of my cognition. It results from this determination of immedi ateness that we have to do here with wholly abstract determinations. The p roofs of the existence of God must show themselves as a necessary moment of the notion itself. Here. is in its real character by n o means something in a state of repose. no r think of it as subjective. and are not seen in their simple existenc e. and so in thought. man starts from the finite as his point of departure. In one respect. however. a mediation within itself. the notion is to be represented by a mediation. the medi ation takes a form which suggests that it has been contrived for the behoof of c ognition or reasoned knowledge. since the time of the Kantian philosophy. and hold fast simply the simple thoughtdeterminateness. If we thus divest both these sides Spirit as object generally. while in religion Spirit allows the logical e lement to come forward in a more definite form. After what has been said about the nature of the notion. But since in these spheres the logical qualities.ong explanation. which. as being the subst antial basis. th e immediate is the abstract which has not as yet buried itself in itself. as an advancing movement. It has. as an activity of the notion itself. are intrinsically different in some degree . has not yet made i tself concrete. we are in a position to assume the existence of the e lement referred to. too. is essentially a state of activity. thus the Universal is undoubte dly in itself much more concrete than Substance is. This relation in which they are placed with regard to one another is present in their own nature quite as much as in religion. however. and this is the excuse we have to offer should it surpris e any one that it is made the subject of special consideration. of Notion in general. it is this. and thus also contains the defini te thought of mediation within itself. it is clear that we must not so conceive of mediation. Determination of the Notion. but in another we can discuss it on account of its simplicit y. it is precisely this eleme nt which has withdrawn itself into its simple shape. and is to be taken up in the firs t place in that aspect of it. for immedia te and abstract are the same.

and that in the external manifoldness of the finite object we at t he same time behold the inner infinite unity. imply ing that natural existence is preserved in immediate unity with Substance. The process of transition from the finite to the Infinite. which cannot remain as finite. of the Infinite. The world may be a Many. free substanti ality. This advance from the finite to the Infinite is not only a fact. Taken in a strict sense. and is the inherent nature of these characteristics themselves. which makes itself infinite. an animal has none. and the like. feels what is thought of. th e God becomes so present to it in this particularised existence. secondly. Just as we pass from the many to the One. It does not suffice for what is ultimate. that this exist ence is not distinct from God. We think of an object . transient. The finite is not the Absolute . Now. determine the w orld in yet another way. It is thinking man and he alone who has r eligion . on the contrary. on the contrar .im. a manifold. for feeling. In like manner. in the Notion. the particular. This transition is thought itself. a matter of his tory in religion. or what is thinkable. and in this feeling he goes beyond the Particular and rises up to the Universal. but it is necessitated by the notion involved in the very natu re of such a determination itself. from. we come to have its law. is here involved is that in the finite thing. and it may be observed here that it is possible to stop s hort at this determination. If wes peak thus abstractly of religion. Accordingly we should h ave to show in reference to such a determination of the finite. we may so conceive of it that the unity of the two is held f ast. and the ' Power owing to which this contingency is and is not. he has a feeling of the unattainable in it. is at the same time known. the sun or the animal. to an Essence to which this contingency and conditioned character do es not pertain. immediate existence whatever. the accidental to the substantial. is thought. infinitude is at the same ti me perceived. that precisely which they truly are. because it does not think. and he finds the world as an aggregate of finite things. and must in accordance with its' Substance return into the Infinite. but rather is the mode in which God exists." which is a more modern way of looking at it. divine substantiality. this transition may be conc eived of in two different ways. the universal in the particular. t he transition from the finite to the Infinite. This transition is of such a kind that it is essentially involved in the nature of these determinations. &c. to the One. whether natural or spiritual. we already have the essential relation here.. the accidental. from the fi nite to the Infinite. becomes a finite infinitely extended beyond its own range. What. The tr uth of it is then the One. The exaltation or rising up of Spirit is not tied down to making the contingency of the world its point of departure in order to arrive at the necessity of the Essence which exists in its own right : we may. in fact. This determination belongs entirely to the logical consideration of the problem. In the Keligiou of Natur e we find that any particular. an d as this it is intrinsically mediation. &c. and in the limited sense-perception of such an object the infinite Essence. Such is the nature of thought generally. while the finite maintains itself in the Infinite. which exists on its o wn account. in other words. belongs to the active operation of thought in con sciousness. Then. We may regard it first as a transition from the finite to the Infinite as a " Beyond. this means nothing else than that we know the Infinite in the finite. which rather is simply the Substance in contrast to this acciden tal element.. and so on. To consciou sness the Infinite itself here becomes so really present in finite existence. its ess ence. the abrogation a nd absorption of the external. so too the transition may be made from Being in general to Essence. of the particular. man knows h imself to be something contingent. The consciousness of the universal. that it is the finite. which translates itself into the Inf inite. in doing so. a going forth in fact. too. its universal element before us. religion just means that man seeks the basis of his want of self-dependence : n ot until he is in the presence of the Infinite does he find tranquillity. t herefore many categories precede it. Necessity is the final category of Being and Essence.

The finite vanishes at first in the Infinite . but has that which it is in an Oth er. the something definite passes away too. his spirit. The leading thought is that the finite is something whose nature consists in thi s. but is its oppos ite. and if it were not a Substa nce which can endure this withdrawal of quality. which is identical in an immediate way with Bein g. it belongs to its very nature to pass away and become infinite . which is not itself. the finite implies that quality is simply definit e character or determinateness. as soon as that ceased. that it has its essentiality in its negation. The rising up to God is thus just what we have seen it to be . however. . it is only negatively determined as the Not-finite. but something which comes into being by means of this transition. it belongs t o the very nature of the particular to return into the universal. We sa y something is red . namely. the finite. This Other is not another finite. Cato's fundamental q uality was the Roman Republic . I shall now describe in a few more words this dialectical element in the determination in question here. there are human beings possessed of an absolut ely definite character . here " red " is the quality . which has thus com e to be in this manner. " Finite "is a qualitative charact eristic. We say. is essentially a limit. his idea. that which it is. into the Infinite. the " something " would be lost . the purely logical element. too. The very nature of the finite it is to have the Infinite as its truth . somet hing self-positing. This takes p lace in the process of rising up to God. we call such a thing finite . if this be lost. so that if quality passes away. " It is . enclosed within its own sphere . Th is advance is the innermost. that it is not we in merely external reflection who pass over fr om such qualities to that which is their Other. the Infinite. of its negation. in fact. That such is the true nature of these determinations themsel ves is demonstrated in logic . but is the Infinite. the finite is inherently finite that is its nature. This advance is necessary it is posited in the notion . We have then the Infinite befo re us as an abstract Infinite only. and is the rational element therein.consist in this. and Substance is clearly not something im mediate. that he cannot subsist without it. he died. and to particularise itself and posit the mom ent of finitude within itself. its Being is only a semblance of Being. the Universal . and it belo ngs to its real nature to abolish this abstraction. itself as yet only the abstract Infinite . to annul and absorb its n egation. a quality generally . This quality is finite . and to that of the accidental simply to return into Substance. this finite self-consciousness does not keep itself limited to the fi nite . It is just the same in Spirit . it is its nature to posit the Infinite as its truth . The essential nature of the Infinite. by means of its limits. yet so conceived it onl y expresses one side of the Whole : the finite vanishes in the Infinite . " this Being is at the same time finite . as being this merely negatively determined Infinite. but rather that it is their own essential nature so to pass over. and this Other is the Infinite. it is essentially within its boundary. relinquishes it. a negation. that it has not its Being in its own self. This transition is in so far me diation as it is movement from the initial immediate definite state into its Oth er. This results from the notion or conception of the Infinite. is to annul itself and to determine itself . on its part. In virtue of its essentiality the finit e is seen to . and is here the Infinite. namely. it is by means of its end. to posit itself on the one hand as affirmation. it is not . and on the other to ann ul in like manner its abstraction. in its negation.an d this when developed is an Other. is not it itself. and conceives the Infinite. is. Since quality constitu tes the limit of the Something. it forsakes it. of the commenc ement of an Other in it. they cease to be. the " something " is then no longer this particular thing. the Infinite. and the particularity of the negation and of the Something is thereby essentially in relation to its Other. if this quality cease. The limit of Cato is the Roman republican . that which it is. It is the negation of the negation the negation . has no greater compass than that.y. This quality is so bound up with him. and it is essential to hold this fast in its true sense.

in acc ordance with the content of the proof. that when we say the Bei . something different from this and more than this is as ked for in religion.relating itself to itself and this is absolute affirmation. already contains this consciousness of the Divine as being the substantial element. The Infinite is now no longer a " Beyond . It is to be remarked further. on the other hand. it contains more truth than that found in immediate knowled ge. the contingency of worldly th ings. such a rejection of proof involves the depreciation of tho ught. This relation is at once seen to be inadequate in reference to the two sides. and this finite Being thus appears as that by means of which the infinite Being gets its foundation. and thus its nature is to determine itself within itself. It is negation of the negation. which is at the same time determined. what we have here is that the finite is expressed in terms which imply that it has o nly a positive relation between the two. only when that is true is feeling too of a true kind. A finite Being thus appears as the foun dation or basis. In metaphysics t he essence of this proof is that contingent Being. and had to appeal to popular or pictorial co nceptions in order to produce conviction. because it holds that He is undeter mined. therefore. the second element too. however imperfect its representation of the unity of the finite and Infinite. and whic h is the abiding element. but that of something necessary in and for itself. What is specially noticeable here is that a finite form of Being is accepted as the starting-point. Since this is the case. and thus has the form of a natural mode of existence. the Infinite. the content is more concrete and consequently better. which is the point of departure. simple reference to itself : such is Being. we find it exp ressed in the form of a syllogism to be the Cosmological Proof. the mere Not-finite of the Kantian philosophy. This Infinite is to be distinguished from that which was men tioned previously. the relation is a positive one. whic h is characteristic of more recent times. " it has determinateness within itself. is made the starting-point. the finite is. Here. namely. and thus contains the differentiation of the one negation from the other negatio n. If we now consider the transition already speci fied as it presents itself in the proofs of the existence of God. is not universally posited. and true infinitude is the unity of the two. and at the same time Being. it is this Whole which is for the first time the noti on of the Infinite. What is beheld as God in it is this divine Substance in a natural form. Thus limitation is involved in it. Mediation is given a position which implies that the consciousn ess of the Infinite has its origin in the finite. The finite is the positing agent. consequently there is a n Infinite. Natural religion really occupies a higher standpoint than this view. The proposition thus means that the Bei ng of the finite is the Being of the Infinite. it is not it that is in question here. which is the negative Infinite void of determination. and its true identity . bu t it is only the logical nature of the transition which comes under consideratio n. If we look at such a syllogism critically. but ideally. though those who hold it still mean to believe in a revealed religion. If we put the transition in this way into the form of a syllogism. to preserve the moment of finitude within itself. however. and then the other determination is not that o f infinitude. If we def ine the negation more strictly. then we see that the one is the Infinite and the other the finite. and the Being of the finite is what is primarily the basis. To speak more accurately. and consequently the finite too. From one point of view this demand is right enough . It is only these two moments together which constitute the nature of the Infinit e. the Infinite in immediate knowledge or the Thing-in-i tself. we perceive that it leave s us cold or indifferent. which refuses to know the nature of God. The religion of nature. as if we made use of feeling. i t remains the affirmative. we then say t hat the finite presupposes the Infinite . This last is in deed a much more concrete determination than that of the Infinite . but is also affirm ation. The true nerve is true thought . only.

The finite is what posi ts. we have the relation of two and mediat ion. This.ng of the finite is the Being of the Infinite. does not go outside of Himself. is in this way the major premiss of the syllo gism. We now come to the other aspect of the subject .wit h. a nd thus the other propositions which belong to a syllogism do not permit of bein g superadded. the finite is that which it is as negation . and conversely in Him only is God revealed. although not distinctly expressed. while it is yet es sentially negative. it is not th rough the Being of the finite that the Infinite arises. and thus the true moment of mediation is not expressed in this proposition. is a judgment. This mediation contains a further determination besides. the destiny of the finite is simply to pass over into the Infinite. that of the Infinite. God is therefore that which is inherently and absolutely necessary necessary in and for itself . the following principle . and that is precisely the opposite of what is demanded. cannot be expressed in the form of a single syllogism. and which the very conc eption of the nature of the Infinite brings with it. it is the converse one. then. Religion. this is the Being of the Infinite. The deficiency in the form of the syllogism is that this true conte nt. If even this be not sufficient. in virtue of its being stated that it is not the Many that exist. mediation is done away with. Looked at more closely. The p roof. He manifests Himself. this element which belongs essentially to the notion. but t he One. He reveals Himsel f. If the finite presupposes the Infinite. The mediation is of such a k ind that the finite stands before us as affirmation. contain s this Thinking. God must be conceived of as Substance. He posits a distinction and is for an Other. a differentiation : God is no longer the dark Essence existing in a state of torpor . He relates Himself to Himself . its immediacy. however. When the presu pposition is more fully developed it involves the negative moment of the finite and its relation to the Infinite. and since this is no longer a relation toward what is other than Himself. the Being of the finite. which essenti ally belongs to the substance of religion. and that which is necessary in and for itself is now mediated through negatio n of mediation. is expressed as mediated. however. The simple determina tion of negation is let go. Through this negation the mediation and the condition are done away . What is implied in religion is not that the af firmative nature of the finite. This thought. But in this Other God is at home with Himself. that the Unconditioned is expressed as conditioned by means of another form of Being.transition is also made f rom the Many to the One. but the notbeing of the finite . This distinction in its highest expression is the Son. but out of the not-being of the finite . The Being of the Infinite is the negation of th e finite . thus it is not the Being. this passing over from the finite to the Infinite. and in such a manner too that the One. a passing ov er which is not of a chance character. and this dialectic escapes the form of the syllogism of the understanding. It is a proposition without mediation. . is implied in this. The Son is by means of the Father. owing to the form of the syllogism. In the true mediation the . so that the Infinite is the first and the essential element. the form of the relation of the finite to the Infinite the thought takes a wrong direction. which is itself the Being of the Infinite. The defect here is that the finite is pronounced to be affirmative and its relation to the Infinite is declared to be positive. is not correctly laid hold of in the syllogistic form. this determination is the absolute foundation. God creates : here. neither is the Infinite the self-annulling of the finite. the rel . but is necessary. The deficiency in the mediation of the proof is this. the mediation between the two is rather the negative natur e in the finite. and. but as something which presupposes or preposits the existence of something e lse. But this defect is amended in the true exaltation of the Spirit. in fact. is that on account of which the I nfinite exists . The Being of the finite is not its own Being. and the mediation between the Being of the finite and that of the Infinite is not shown. but that of the Other.

who is thus the Universal in determinate Being. it is not only the result which must be apprehended. This determinate Being contains Being in an immediate manner within itself. purpose is not contained in it . Substance is not conceived of as the active agent within itself. That which is pe rishes. the perishing or passing away is the beginning of the rise of existence. this annulled mediation is to be taken up again. That things are. yet the latter i s involved in that expression. is owing to Substance . Being is everything. and there is only a vee ring round from Being into NotBeing. Spinoza 'says. as distinguished from Being. but this thought is purer than that of Jacobi. But death is just as much again the beginning of life . on the contrary. In the act of rising up from the finite to Substance there is a mediation which was done away with in the result. In the turning round of Substance toward the many. but only as power. not as wisdom. and vice versd. from deter minateness and negation. as subject and as activity in accordance w ith ends . the Being in all determinate Being. and this power is immediately immanent for the things. and Substance is now the unity of this alternation itself. it is again. but in that r esult the Whole and its process. God is here the absolute Pow er. Wha t is is the absolute substance . and is not Pantheism. accordingly. all r eality. is likewise owing to the power of Substance. Parmenides says. and Science is not concerned with what a person t hinks in his own mind . The defect attaching to this oriental Substance. and vice versd. it is said that Substance has accidents. this latter. which merely staggers about. and so forth. This seems to. Jacobi's system was far removed from Pantheism. and this Being in determinate Being is God . the specific character whi ch manifests itself in this originating and perishing is not grasped in thought. it is what is expressed that it conside rs to be of importance. Being is the most arid possibl e determination of God. Now when the Whole is apprehended in this manne r. for particular things still remain as little an affirmative for Spino za as determinate Being does for Parmenides. on the contrary. but it has Being only. which. lies in the categories of origination and perishing. so to s peak. what is thus alternation and at the same time unity is the substantial element. For he says expressly that Being alone is. It is essentially purposeless empty power. although it is finite. is not at all. This is the alternation of accidentality. has the infinite manifolduess which belongs to this Substance as a form of Being which passes away. determinate Being is regarded as affirmative. to which he ascribes no affirmation. the necessity which translates the origination into passing away.. Being belongs to it of right . when Being veers round into Not-Being . Substance is the absolute power or force of Being . t he dominating power over the process of perishing. so that the perishing perishe s. posited as non-existent. no reality. and if He is to be Spirit it is supremely unsatisfactory . and is of such a character that this Not-Being is no . We have an example of this Pantheism also in the expression of Jacobi : " God is Being in all determinate Being . and thus to be Pantheism too. Thus it cannot perhaps be said even of the Substance of Spinoza that it is so precisely Pantheistic as that expression of Jacobi. but in s uch a way that in the movement of the result it comes to be posited as null . but it is likewise the unity of the act o f veering round. It is something devoid of content . By Jacobi. however.ation in which Substance stands to the finite. what is other than this are mere modi. that they are not. " and we undoubtedly get from him in this conn ection very brilliant definitions of God. th at is to say. when used in this way as the Being of determinate Being in finite reality we have Pantheism. the finite. specific character. as well as to that of Spinoza. is for him mere Not-Being. all definite modes of existence come to be included in Not-Being . and all limitation. Such is the system which is called Pantheism. With Parmenides that which is known as determinate Being is no longer present or existent at all. and thus it is affirmation in finite existence. the purification of Himself . be the same thing. What i s perennial is this alternation .

is a particular. is called Pantheism. and is outside of it in the sense of being different fro m it. and here enters in the element of sepa ration from others over whom he has power. the accidental element. then all that is finite is -under stood to . which no longer arrests itself at the Part icular. as the unive rsal ruling power of thought. it is true. as subjected to th at power. (b. We have. and if it be said that "God is Being in all determinate Being. "all that is finite" pertains to reflection. viewed from one side. is placed in con trast to it. Thus Spirit i s outside of Substance. is brought into prominence on its own account. which represents the earliest historical form of this substantial relation. the moment of Spirit. The Chinese Religion. it is. and comprises the World as somethi ng ideal within itself. from Spirit not being as yet determined as Substance. or else that he succeeds by mean s of worship in positing himself as identical with it.) The General Character of this Religion. Taken in the latter sense. This Spirit is. which extends natural thin gs so as to include all and everything. the power has the form of Spirit. It may be remarked further in passing. and stands in such a rela tion toward it that it regards it as the universal Power. however. is Man. S . it is already a progressive movement of reflection. Substance conti nues to be thought of under that aspect of Being which does indeed conie nearest to Essence. and the finite as including all things. is not. and is God. This exaltation. which Spirit is unity with itself. But it is precisely the fundamental characteristic of Spirit that i t is this differentiation and positing of the difference . and Spirit.) The Historical Existence of this Religion. This Pantheism is the product of thinking reflection. especially th e Pantheism of the Dechelalcddin-Rumi." this expr esses a form of Pantheism found among Mohammedans of modern times. In the first place. We have now to consider the fundamental character of Pantheism in its more defin ite forms and under its religious aspects. for otherwise we would find ourselves in dualism and Manicheeism. but yet still pertains to the immediateness of Being . and the finite is in this determinate Being as universal finitude. and that is the very creation which those who bring the charge of Pantheism always want to have. namely. emerged fro m that immediate religion in which we were at the stage of magic. Here this everything as it is is a Whole. i. In the Chinese religio n. (a. or the Religion of Measure. and in so doing conceives of the existen ce of God not as true universality of thought. but is annul led . and the category of Creation. since the part icular spirit now distinguishes itself from Substance. but of the human finite spirit . so that it is looked upon as acting and working in him. If man be conceived of as this power. But here the category of unity is understood in a one-sided manner only. that the definition given by more recent philosophical systems. that which is possessed of authority it is what carrie s that power into effect .be included. finite Spirit. for there is wa nting to it the moment or. as being in all individual natural existences. < If the finite be taken as thought.t at all. But in using the term finite it is necessary to draw a distinction between the finite as represented merely by this or that particular object. and the separation i s so patent that the creation is independent relatively to Him. We now return to the conception in accordance with which Substance. This Pantheism is of modern date. element which is indispensable in religion as the ful ly' developed idea. that is to sa y. The position given to this mom ent here results from Substance not being as yet determined within itself as Spi rit that is. this knowing. viewed from the other side. and thus it is Pantheism. but as an allness . as yet religion. . acco rding to . The next thing indeed is that the separation does not remain permanent. in which God is cause. which is different from it. or more precisely the Pantheism of Spiritualism. and to e xplain in which sense we use the word.

is the objective material representation of this essentially exi sting element. It is not Heaven which has given laws or gives th em. an d he only is in connection with this T'ien. The measures in abstract Universality are quite simple categories : Being and No t-Being. not abstract Being nor abstract Substance. in a way which implies that God also rules outside of this world. " the interrupted line ( ) two. and not the Heavens. the standpoint of mag ic has here broadened out into an organised monarchy. it is true. and therefore it is right that the sel f-conscious Will should direct those genii. di . the w ill and empirical consciousness. and T'ien. he instals them in their offices and deposes them. in it. moral sense alone. is not a world which forms an independent realm above the earth. it is this individual self-consciousness which in a conscious way exercise s complete sovereignty. the Empe ror alone is the one who rules. there are established typical forms which are called Reason (Tao). The Heaven of the Chinese. it might be said that they a re thus given an exalted position . I t is not T'ien who governs nature . and governs everything on earth. figurations . which is distinct from life upon earth. We distinguish between the world. everything is upon earth. Nay. however. lik e the heaven we conceive of. or else are to be taken as the determinations for nature and for the spirit of man. with angels and the souls of the departed . of morality. are d eterminations. offers his prayers to him . Heaven. but the fact of the matter is that they are degraded into genii of the natural world. on the contrary. the phenomena of the world. the souls of the departed exist. it is the Emperor who governs everything. but figu res or signs of Substance.ubstance is thought of as representing the entire sphere of essential Being or m easure . but they also belong to the world. but not in the spiritual. they survive t he separation from the body. however. The Emperor has in his hands. and all that has power is subject to the Emp eror. The detailed statement and development of these measures would comprise the enti re philosophy and science of the Chinese. and affirmation or " yes . the laws of his will and of his reason. laws which the people respect. As regard the element of Measure. T'ien rather denotes wholly indeterminate abstract universality . laws of religion. And they too are under the rule of the Emperor . therefore. Here. Along "with this concep tion. too. the element of magic still intrudes itself into this sphere. in so far as in the world of reality the individual man. If the dead ar e conceived of as directors of the realm of nature. he a lone stands in connection with him. since they are t hought of as lords over the course of nature. Here we have only to treat of the prin cipal points. He also confers with T'ien. and which is in its own right the realm of the Ideal. One and Two. divine laws. are what is highest. authority over natural things and their changes. It is the Emperor alone who brings offerings to T'ieii at the four principal fes tivals of the year. we have the other idea that it is the Emperor who is sovereign up on earth. and God. it is the wholly indetermin ate sum of all physical and moral connection whatsoever. a simple line ( ) signifies the one. which may either be understood in a more abstract sen se. the fundamental figure is the line. The laws of Tao. Here. T'ien is the Highest. which presents the appeara nce of something imposing and majestic. Notwithstanding this. or Measures. nor is it like the Greek Olympus. The Heaven of the Chinese T'ien is something ent irely empty . and rul es their forces. measure represents what exists in-and-for itself. the Unchangeable. which is equivalent in general to the Many. The Chinese re present these universal categories by lineal figures.

The Emperor brings offerings. on the d ay of the festival he himself ploughs the field . five fundamenta l determinations for the actions of man in his relations to others. four mountains which correspond to these region s of the world and one in the middle . water. earth. The Emperor. that of agriculture is one of the principal. and as regards the natural elements. and the like . fire. therefore. the third obedience to the Emperor. the fourth the mutual relations of brothers and sisters. and the like lay waste and scourge the country. if he and his ma gistrates had properly maintained the law. the totality of Measure. that these laws should be brought into use in practical life. then ev erything is in order in nature as well as in the empire . the second is reverence for dece ased ancestors and the dead. Upon th e fulfilment of duty. of which each belongs to an element. The Emperor is the Son of Heaven (T'ie ntsze) . and as having happened because the rules of Measure have not been maintained in the empire." These signs are called Kud. When these are maintained intact. This is the general found ation. conflagrations. for this supplies the material for clothing. In this way the entire worship of God reduces itself . the misfortune would not have taken p lace. These determinations of Measure constitute the basis Reason. depends the prosperity both of the empire and t he individual. yet what is always of most importance is. In like manner there are also five keynotes in music . it is l aid down that their genii are to be reverenced by man. is at the same time the power of Measure. commands the officials to examine themselves. Thus Measure is known here as Being-in-and-for itself. Men have to guide t hemselves in conformity with these. w hether owing to floods or earthquakes. this is regarded as entirely the result of man's not having been obedient to t he laws of Eeason. as being the cause of misfortune . therefore. five elements. and negation or " no. an element. universal Measure is destroyed. There are many different combinations of th ese. There are people who devote themselves exclusively to the study of this Eeason. an d misfortune of the kind just described enters the land. he recognises his offici als. The sky. a nd so on. When floods. In the same way there are five fundamental colours. and to see wherein they have failed in duty . and he in like manner devotes himself to meditation and repentance on account of his not having acted rightly. which is the whole. the fifth the attitude to be assumed t owards other men. If misfortune overtakes the empire. Among these more concrete meanings we may specially remark the four quarte rs of the world and the centre . wood. his subjects have only to give the homage to himself which lie renders to the la w. dry weather. just as agriculture is the source of all nourishment. The Emperor presides over it . it goes well both with the empire and the individual. and especially himself. when duties are observed by men. who hold aloof from all practical life and live in solitude . as the visible firmament. The maintenance of the laws belongs of right to the Emperor.for the sub . It is the Emperor alone who renders honour to the law . The first an d highest is that of children to their parents. metal. to the Emperor as the Son of Heaven. this concerns the Emperor alone . This means nothing else than that the Ernperor prostrates himself and reverences the law. drought. The heir to the throne is made acquainted with all the sciences and with the laws by means of a careful education.vision. There is a moral connection here between the act ion of man and what takes place in nature. Among the few Chinese festivals. Each ruling dynasty in China has a special colour. The Empress has the rearing of silk-worms under he r direction. the corn which grows upon this field is used for offerings. he has to honour the laws and to promote their recognition. What conies next has to do with the giving effect to Measure. and the Chinese relate that these signs appeared to them upon the shell of the tortoise. which in their turn give more concrete meanings of those original typical f orms. Owing to this.

New laws. which consists of special power s of this kind. were introduced. Wu accomplished this in the following way. governed badly. comes to be recognised as a special power. With regard t o this imperial constitution between himself and Heaven. among other things. to that of the Emperor.C. the Chau dynasty came to the throne. called Ch'i. like his predecessors. and holding himself aloof from all enjoyments. renouncing the associa tions of daily life. Shau. With a new dynasty everything on ea rth and in heaven must be renewed. and therefore both the living and the dead had to be placed under new directors. the following descri ption. The entire body of these is subject to the Universal Power. yet to offe nd whom would have been impolitic.jects to a moral life. and it is from this point of view that it has been found possible to hold that the Chinese are atheists. and this was accomplished by the new Emperor with the help of the commander-inchief of his army. whose rel ations had held the higher offices. an d these constitute a very fully developed realm. however. These special rules must now be known as activities too. The Chinese religion may thus be called a moral religion. which the last prince had had kindled in order to destroy the Imperial Palace with all its treasures. These definite laws of measure and specific rules of d uty are due for the most part to Confucius . The best w ay in which to get a knowledge of this extensive realm of popular conception is to study a section of Chinese history as we have it in the information given by the Jesuits in the learned work Mdmoires sur les Chinois. and towards the gaining of a knowledge of these powers. n amely. his works are principally occupied with moral questions of this kind. so that the Chinese imagined that the evil genius which had emb odied itself in him must have been reigning. a means had to be found by which the dead rel atives of these families should continue to enjoy the respect and reverence in w hich they had hitherto been held. new dan ces. therefore. who were the new directors of . This power of the laws and of the rules of Measure is an aggregate of many speci al rules and laws. He nevertheless announced that he could not do this until ev erything was brought into proper order between himself and Heaven. it was given out that i t was contained in two books which were deposited upon a mountain in the care of a venerable sage. a time which is still pretty accurately determined in Chine se history. may also be regarded as having departed. who of his own will withdraws himself from the world. namely.. for in such a case a man has passed a^vay so far as concrete human life is concerned. to the Emperor. and particularly military posts. &c.. and especially as the departed ancestors of existing persons. In connection with the inauguration of a new dynasty we find. when he is no longer entangled in the inter ests of daily life. one contained the new laws. new officials. One. Since there were in the new empire families who were attached to the old dynasty. These sp ecial powers are accordingly represented as human beings. new music. in t his particular or special aspect they are subjected to the universal activity. the empire and its governmen t were brought under Wu's authority. the last of the preceding dynasty. Aft er the flames had been extinguished in the capital (it was not as yet Pekin). and he too. who is the power over the collective activities. Besides this there are creatures of imagination who hold this power in trust. Wu was the first Emperor of thi s dynasty . A point of great importance was the destruction of the graves of the preceding d ynasty that is to say. About the year B. sinks into himself and directs his activities toward the Universal alone . and the moment had arrived for him to make his entrance as Emperor into the Imperial city. and the other the names and offices of the genii. name ly. who instals them and gives them commands. th e flames. the destruction of the worship of ancestors. For a man is specially known as a power when he has departed that is to say. and to give laws. Of these two books. to present himself to the people . who had hith erto been the powers ruling over families and over nature generally. women. had.

a present genius. and. The departed had assembled themselves o n the mountain in accordance with the higher or lower rank which they held. spiritual beings " (pp. and especially those whose seat is referred to heaven. this was laid upon the altar. and thanks given to Heaven for the book. Afte rwards the others were summoned.) under the previous dynasty were declared unworthy to rule any longer on account of their neglect. p. a prince. The commander-in-chief then con gratulated him upon this recognition of his virtues. they mig ht even enter into human life again in order that they might in this way earn a recompense anew. In time of war he had been an able and a gr eat general. -. . They were told that they could go wherever they liked. The second book was not opened. and likewise the diploma of the sage who thereby authorise d the general to make known the new commands to the Shan." "We have seen. whil e the general sat upon a throne in the midst of them. S. Legge. He was an old general.. and comm anded one of those present to take the register and to read it aloud. those whose influence is in and over the earth are during his life time by more than forty years of study and exercise. and specially f or spirits of heaven. The story goes on to say that the general had ca lled the Shan together on the mountain . commander-in-chie f of the army of the former dynasty. the imperial standard and the sceptre. But his name had to be called twice. He obeyed. which was the cause of the disasters that had overtaken the country. The Emperor purified himself and fasted three days . this ma n was himself already a Ch'i. and c louds. the Shan who had ruled simply styled Ch'i. some of whom had fallen in the interests of the new dynasty. The books were brought. to which dignity he had attained " Spirits generally. He was splendidly attired and decorated with the eight Kua ." Religions of China. In this book their installation and degradation were contained. and another character altogether. this mountain lay in the region which w as the original home of the new dynasty. in the same way as the mandarins are in the w orld of every-day life. and it was he who h ad placed the greatest hindrances in the way of the new dynasty. thou art nothing but an ordinary Shan . in order to promulgate it to the Shan. and remained proudly standing." it is added farther on. "that Kwei was the name for the spirit of departed men. are called Shan . it turned out that they were absolutely the same as the forme r ones. and found his name to be the first on the list. to the supreme astonishment and satisfact ion of the people. both as regar ds words and the orthography of names. it followed upon th ose of the directors of the four mountains which represented the four quarters o f the world and the four seasons. The deputed commander-in-chief now named the new Shan. Up on this the laws were proclaimed. and the staff of command had to be s hown to him before he would approach the throne . is employed for the spirit s or manes of departed men. in peace a faithful and conscientious minister. (TR. lay upon an altar before him. Wu's general was sent off to fetch these books . which had been erected for this purpose. The general read the d iploma .the empire in the world of nature. The general addressed him with the words. and to impart the commands of the Emperor to them. "Th ou art no longer what thou wast among men. the staff of command over the Shan. but the ge neral was sent with it to a mountain. In particular. His name was the fifth that is to say. It is generally the case that at a change of dynasty the old laws remain in force with but little alteration. This other character is "' Kwei. on the fourth day at sunrise h e appeared in imperial array with the book of the new laws . he came with a contemptuous mi en. As his office. offerings were presented. there was one among them. he was to be intrusted with the inspection of all the Shan who were put in charge of rain. and Shan the name for spirits generally. and some who had fought and sacrificed themselves in those of the former one. wind. ) Hegel uses the word " Schin " in all cases. The combination of the names (kwei shan) can often be tran slated in no other way than by spirits. until finally h e perished in battle. but it has been thought better to ta ke advantage in translation of the learned authority of Dr. and they were dismissed f rom their posts. thunder.

who. however. since they have reached the goal and attained mastership. were given chiefs. give r everence to this command. th e spiritual element is not. The One has produced the Two. toward abstracting pure thought. There were besides among the Chinese a class of men who occupied themselves inwa rdly. at the sam e time have it as an aim to become immortal. and the Two the Three : this is the Univers um. i n an inner life. and sought to attain to consciousness o f what the True is." Upon this the Shan fell down.. floods. and these. The first stage of advance out of that earliest attitude of natural religion (which was. and partly because. That this advance has been made to thought does not. Unity is only real in so far as it contains two within itself. to purge it from time to time from superabundance of populat ion. This stage is exemplified in the sect of Tdo. some were put in charge of other departments. the Ch'i [viz. they deem themselves h igher beings. six Shans were appointed o ver epidemics. in Tao itself. The One or Unity is wholly cha racterless or devoid of determination. their images thrown down. imply that any higher spiritual religion has as yet established itself: the determinations of Tao remain complete abstractions.who has as yet no office . pure beings in their own right. even as regards their existence here and their actual state. and this was changed every fortnight: of these. and it was this moral aspec t especially which was developed by Confucius.. but still belongs . the book was given back to the Empe ror. After all the offices were distributed. the other t o the invisible officials. I have to convey one to thee from the master. It is. and received orders with a view to the alleviation of the trouble s of human society. Confucius is emphatically a moral. and he was appointed to be the chief of those Ch'i whose business i t is to take charge of rain and thunder. consciousness. howe ver. an advance must be made to determi nation. knows itself to be what is highest. although somewhat older. the claim that consciousness has essentiall y a meditating character. T'ien. It now became his business to create ra in at the proper time. one relates to the mandarins. It is remarkable in this connection that in Tao in Totality the idea of the Trinity makes its appea rance. Two d irectories appear every year in China. and life. conflagrations. and to this day it constitutes the astrological part of the calendar. as soon as ever man took up a thinking attitude. thi s universal power over nature which attains to reality by the authority of the E mperor. is thus already to be fou nd in ancient times among the Chinese. In case o f the failure of crops. a long speech was addre ssed to him. to disperse the clouds when they were likely to be the ca use of floods. If it is to ha ve the principle of life and of spirituality. and feesh Ch'i appointed. so to speak. With the sect of Tao the initial act is the passing over into thought. this is principally ascribed to Lao-tsze. who not only belonged to the general State religion of T'ien. and not a speculative philosopher. and only to permit the thunder to exercise its power for the purpose of frightening the wicked and of occasioning their repentance. with reference to conflagrations . and betake themselves to the abstraction of thought. to be remarked that these persons who are absorbed in thought. and is simply abstraction. a wise man. A revival or reform of the doctrine of Ta o took place at a later date . to be the sovereign power) is the return of consciousness into itself. found. &c. The Chinese h ave five elements. to each of whom his own special inspectorship was intrusted. but formed a sect who gave themselves up to thought. He received four-and-twenty adjutants. Thus. Thus the lord ship of the Emperor over nature is here a completely organised monarchy. into the pure element. par tly on account of their having been previously consecrated. that immediate self-consciousness in its very immed iateness. was contemporary with Confucius and Pythagora s. too. To one Shan was given the oversight of fire. Shan who have become such]. This turning inwards. and with this Trinity is given. not to allow the wind to increase to a storm. the idea of Trinity a t once made its appearance as the result of this. is closely associated with morals generally. the Ch'i who are concerned are dismissed.

the power of Substance not having as yet taken on the form of a stable objectivity. All which has a relation to him is for him a power. is immanent in him. a relation to him. This is not the universal power of Providence. (c. this One is the governing power. so far as he is concerned. we begin to inquire into worship in the stricter sense. The interests of individuals lie outs ide of the universal determinations which the Emperor puts into practice. this external element is the constitution of the State. all t hat is left for us to do is to examine the relation of the universal determinate ness of this religion to inner life and to self-consciousness. is in subjection to the power of the Emperor. of that which is duty within him. and knows the determinations of Spirit. whic h extends its sway even over the destinies of individuals. In so far only as man knows God as Spirit. the abstract foundation. it yet transforms itself into other shapes. As reg ards particular interests. For this reason. accordingly.) Worship or Cultiis. This developed reason yields abso lute principles and duties. everything external has a meanin g for him. so far as it has developed itself in that of the Shan. Here the actuality. man h as no immanent definite inner life within himself. Where the Universal is merely this abstract foundation in a general sense. absolute determinations of rationality determinations. no immanent rationality by means of which man w ould have worth and dignity within himself and protection against what is extern al. His ex istence is spirituality. not until rationality comes in does he possess this. but determined within Himself. the r eal governing power. as represented by La o-tsze. but is only an abstract basis. To us God is the Universal. the Emperor being the actual embodiment of this basis. something to hold by and to give him stability. When. Speaking generally. and the same is the case with the idea of Eeason. all that is external acquires an inward character for him . has then. man remains in it without havi ng a strictly immanent. and thi s freedom develops until it appears as reason. in fact. are these divine d eterminations essential. and. strictly speaking. this co mplete and entirely arbitrary superstition. From a general point of view. or concrete inner character . is bound up with this religion. realised. he has no firm h old or stability within himself. what we find is rather the conception of a power whic h exists on its own account. for the first time within himself. Not until freedom. and even the realm of idea or popular conception. The Universal being only the abstract foundation. Like T'ien. the living form of Tao. Th e result is this indefinable dependence upon all external circumstances. No morality in the strict sense. which only has its actuality in exist ing human beings. What we find rather i s that the Particular is brought under the sway of a particular power. and is living and actually p resent in its priests. and the man who is conscious of these absolute deter minations in his freedom. the fact that he is ruled from without. who knows they are immanent dete rminations within him. a practical relation. which remains merely abstract. in fact. because he possesses no power in his own rationality and moral sense. is still th e actual immediate consciousness. who is himself merely the actual embodiment of the Substantial. Though it is indeed dead. Reason is . in like manner. within his c onscience. Worship really represents the whole existence of the re ligion of Measure. and which. This powe . what lies at the foundation of this external dependence is t he fact that all that is particular cannot be placed in an inner relation with a Universal. for then he is the consciousness of being free. and. God is Spirit. in his consciousness.absolutely and entirely to man in his immediate character.

or of light a. The finding of the right spot for a grave. The religion of mystery . 2. Its conception b. The religion of the Good. and the special powers i n question are rendered propitious by means of presents. The religion of Being-within-self a. or the religion of pain. The religion of nature in transition to the religion of freedom. Worship or cultus III. Its conception. Thus the Chinese are in perpetual fear and dread with regard to everything. &c. ________________ LECTURES ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION II DEFINITE RELIGION FIRST DIVISION THE RELIGION OF NATURE II. b. The individual is wholl y without the power of personal decision and without subjective freedom. I. Worship or cultus. par excellence. The historical existence of this religion c. of relations in space. and the front has an angl e towards it. The Syrian religion. qu estions of locality. If in building a house another house flanks their own. is for them a power which is able to use force against them and to affect them. China is. END OF VOL. The general idea of the objective content of this stage c. beca use all that is external has a meaning. Its conception b. in. This religion as it actually exists c.r is that of the Shan. 1. are the kind of things with whi ch they occupy themselves during their entire life. every locality you find m any people who deal in prophecies. and with it a whole realm of superstition enters in. all possible ceremonies are gone through. The religion of imagination or phantasy a. 3. the home of divination . Worship or cultus.. 3. The division of consciousness within itself (continued) 2 .

B.a. Formless necessity. A The general nature of its conception or notion B The concrete general idea or popular conceptic a. The characterisation of the conception or notion of this stage b. . c The end God works out in the world C Worship or cultus The transition to the stage which follows II. The The The The The general aspects of this religion. Conformity to an end I . Worship or cultus a Inner feeling b Worship as service c Service as reconciliation . N ecessity . revealed religion. c. i . 1. The metaphysical conception or notisphere . b. to the sphere of spiritual individuality .The religion of beauty A. The conception of the One b.The religion of sublimity . 3. III. The general conception or notion B The outward form of the Divine . a. Worship or cultus THE RELIGION OF SPIRITUAL INDIVIDUALITY A The transition. revealed religion known as revealed. a The conflict of the spiritual and the natural b. Worship or cultus . PART III THE ABSOLUTE RELIGION A. This religion as the Roman religion . B. B. C. The religion of utility or of the Understanding A. Posited necessity or the particular gods C. The general conception of this stage . The form of the world . 2. The concrete idea belonging to this stage c. The determination of the divine particu tion . religion of truth and freedom metaphysical notion or conception of the Idea of God __________________ PART II .

In this way t he Power is not as yet known as real. is Thought. as this One Power which exists for itself. The. is found outside of the Princip le. in which all that we see around us. and the entire sphere of these. it is not as yet Spirit. but does not externalise or make itself manifest as such. and as self-determining is the source of all determination But at the stage at which we now are. has merely a negative. and not merely as a multitude of r ules. form an inherent part. it remains as such shut up within itself. the Principle which makes its appearance at the present sta-e ha s not as yet got so far as to permit of this untbldin" taking place within that principle itself. the rulin Power which brings forth everything. exists as Thought It is in our thoughts alone that Nature. in its first form. and even the freedom of man itself . We saw that the substantial Power . in its very nature Thought. however. The second of the main forms of Pantheism. is in our thought that the truth of Nature is brought into prominence on its own account as Idea. limit itself to the idea of that Po wer known only as an aggregate of determinations which merely are. I The Universal. most outward forms of imagination. however.) Its Conception. (a. is still within the sphere of this same principle of the One substanti al Power.DEFINITE RELIGION II THE DIVISION OF CONSCIOUSNESS WITHIN ITSELF (continued") 2. and consequently d]rTerentiation and manifoldness are abandoned to the wilde st. What we have before us in Na ture is this Universal. Since. and that particular unfolding which as manife station or appearance is Nature and the spiritual world. . and not as being in its own s elf spiritual. the concrete unfoldi ng of Thoucrht on its own account. but a bstract Universality generally. and what is its content ? Self-consciousness in religion canno t. Religion of Imagination or Phantasy. accidental character. Now to Spirit belongs the power of differentiation and the full development of t he difference. " It is the source of all power. as independently existing unity . ex ts as the Universal. or more abstra ctly as something having a universal character. The specialisation of the Universal manif ests itself iu a multitude of independent powers. comes to be known as representing the multitude of esssenti al determinations. like the abstract thinking understanding. And now the question immediately arises as to how this Power is i tself determined. as determining its own self. when this latter actually appears as religion. Now the opposite form of this determination is the taking bac k of the manifold determinateness of existence into the unity of inner self dete rmination. The Universal being known in this way as Thought . not as y et as a Principle. This concentration of self-deterrnmatio] contains the beginning of Sp irituality. but not as a Universal. it bein" rather held fast in simple abstract concentration onl y the unfolding. as this One Essence. Of the systeni of this complete development. and where the Universal appears for the f irst time as the determining a^nt as a Principle. Universality is. the fulness of the actual Idea.

In this way we have a view or theory of the u niverse which is of a prosaic character. mou ntains. The unity of the intelligible realm reaches the condition o f particular independent existence . it is not as yet brought into exercise. But when we so regard the world. but is not expanded into the concrete uni ty of the Spiritual. There is merely a continual return to that Universality which is self-active. this. and thus has to deal with a world of many-coloured manifold ness. are not as yet taken up into Spirit. we have determinations each of which exists for itself. and this is the more precise characteristic we assign to the Objective. and cannot as yet exist here. In thinking. &c.. would complete the moment of spirituality so far as the Idea is concerned." these individual things . this Substance only . We have thus the abstract One and the wildne ss of extravagant ima^ination. which. The thinking in question here is. This multiplicity. faculties of the mind. consciou sness finds itself in an existing world. Everywhere we shall find t ones that accord with the Notion. not-being . But yet those moments do not co nstitute Spirit . assumption of form. of such a mutually exclusive character in a world of sense. What are the forms. that is the fundamental determination here. is independence. This is the curse of nature. on the contrary. as. it still retains its immediacy in spite of that return. such as origination. and consequently its f orm is abstract. but which is held fast in the abstraction of self-determination. the unfolding does not give itself the perfect form of Spirit. Upon the basis of abstract thought. . this last does not. the Idea of rationality is present in this advance. for example. become the more horrible in the strain as a whole because they continue to retain the character of separateness or mutual exclusion. being. too. for o ur understanding. and if it were kno wn as essentially this act of taking back. but Understanding. has permeated all relations. But just because the unfolding does not as yet return in a true way into the Not ion." Things. rivers. because the determinations remain merely universal. the shape s in which this independence appears ? We are actually in such a world. is not as yet taken back into the Notion by its own inner action. this concentration of thought. of forces. or else are more abstract ideas. are looked upon theoretically. This taking back. this wild abandonment. it is merely this self-containedness or being at home with self . and are kept independent and separate re latively to one another. and because the moments. and is prese nt in that form. for our consciousness. is once more taken back into the ori ginal unity. which the understanding in l ike manner isolates. not applied thought.. Taking it as a whole. The special Powers. if the original univers al thought resolved within its own self upon differentiation. it is thus just " these. because the independence has the form o f what is a thing. is recognised in turn as remai ning in identity with what is primary. such as positive. and pure Being is still concentrated in that undeveloped state of Substance which is not as yet s piritual Substance. however. are not as yet truly posited as ideal. and has not as yet permeated th e entire man. what we have is the reflection of understanding. There is noth ing wanting here. with the True. h owever. it is true. &c. and the like. that power of judgment. which takes things in their sensuous aspect. that passion. not until thinking. In a similar way we have in inner life to do with manif old forces. and yet at the same time. however. and therefore the moments full apart. so that man everywh ere assumes the attitude of one who thinks abstractly. too. still belongs to natural religion . which are partly objects. and by which we dis tinguish it from Spirit. The thought is not Eeason here. this power of memory. which appears much later. which. become absolut ely free. does he speak of external things. We call "these. The further question which now presents itself is. being independent and objective in their particularity. are not as yet intelligently distinguished by the understanding from Spirit. cha nge. the taking back itself remains a process devoid of Spirit. negative. Not u ntil prose. spiritual distinctions and experiences. decay. this inclination. so far as the moments of the Idea of Spirit are concerned. but remains confined within universal Substance. such as the sun.

A subjective soul is thus given to M atter. In this last the Concrete is posited as merely negative. are absent. is not a category. to what is conceived as external. " Si nce the one is. as before stated. or the human form in combination with the animal. ic carries ihis chain of connection continuously on into the bad or false infinite. the apprehension and expressio n of that independence is this poetry. to which nothing which appears heterogeneous has to be added in order that it may be thus presen ted to us as self-sustained or independent. called the Objectivity of Imagination. are. and it relates itself to the Things. and this first mode is therefore the human or animal mode. in fact. which. or the dependence of things upon one another in accordan ce with their quality. as something which is actually perceiv ed. it is the categories of the relations of necessity. of a soul ." is its way of speaking. In order to conceive of the sun. This poe try is. It relates itself as within i tself to itself. as self-sustained. But in so far as the independence has not as yet advanced t o the prose of Understanding. it is in these categories that it h as its independence. as having Being. when represented to us as independent. the rational element in imagination. a tree. with nothing to support or give it stability. and when re garded by us as such. the sea. It is the understanding only as pure self-identity. or at least of what has life. without independence as compared with what lives and is free . the categories of the Understanding. And here it is animal and hu man existence alone which is the form. even animal form. it may be. or as a selfconsistent process. their essential definite character. mode. and the like. There may b . for which the category of force or of cause is the characteristic quality of objectivity generally. and without onc e turning back. in a general sense. and nature of what is free among th ings. for this rational element is to be kept firm hold of. nor repre sents. Thus the independence we are speaking of has not this form. and into their free independ ently existing Essence on the other. the sky. and thus the element of independence is to be taken out of the world which is around us. has not ye t advanced to the category. they have causal connection. The sun. The image. Here. as being theoretical. or. on the contrary. Spirit. The form of independence which is present here is no other than the form of that which is the form of concrete self-consciousness itself. in fact. which " things " are for i t universal independence. which form this conne ction .Now we do not only say things " are" but we add in the second place that they st and in manifold relation to one another . the c oncrete makes its appearance as existent. in direct contrast to what is not independent. however. as in subjection to the Power . and this is the idea formed of man. in fact. a tree as existing. has a double aspect. the theoretical e lement is set free. The immediate result is that as soon as objects generally and universal thoughtdeterminations have this free independence. and is not abstract indepen dence produced by thought. although consciousness. but is concrete Spirituality and Life. it is o nly necessary for us to have a sensuous picture or image of it. which conseque ntly may be. as a matter of fact. they are dependent on one another : this second moment of the action of understanding can not be present here. and thus nature. and. it is only the practical element which is objec tive in the Power. reels at the mercy of imagination. and it is these forms of independence which in this element of independent existence constitute the suppo rts of the category for any content at all. therefore the other is. Since this is not as yet a Thing. no longer as Power. however. which conceives of objects under these categories. it is the free independence of ordinary conception . of a form of activity. of a c ausality. of a force. At this stage there is a filling-up . that connection of things in the wor ld which is the work of understanding is dissolved. all these categories. not the theoretical. has for us just the character of Being. But show or semblance is a deception . Thus for Spirit the things themselves break up into th eir immediate external varied form on the one hand. which makes the idea of human nature and outward form the supporting basis and Essence of the external world.

so to speak. the limited content is the foundation. are not as yet embodied in forms of beauty. only in that connection of the understanding which has vanished. and is exalt ed to the rank of fundamental thought. Since. an empty form. To beauty of f orm belongs free subjectivity. From this standpoint of imagination. The divine world is a realm of imagination. is therefore drawn into the service of ima gination. Here this condition does not as yet exist. however. it has not pernieated and overcome these its parti cular shapes. id ealised. . for since they have a definite finite content. the whole splendour of nature and of imagination is available as a means of decorating the content. independent. their return and abiding renewal. all distinctions are taken special notice of and firmly clung to. then. owing to this. too. they would properly have th eir objective support. emotions which in this gently hatching warmth are permeated in a pre-eminent degree by a strain of voluptuous and sweet loveliness. this sensuous concrete existence. whether general natural objects or the forces of individual feeling. Substance is. into special Powers. It is. but has its meaning solely and exclusively in the Spiritua l and through the Spiritual. the world of appearance. instead of being a reality. but the substantia lity still exists for itself. any kind of chance occurrence and result . for example. and brought under it that with which it is filled up the particularisat ion which issued from it. but the Spiritual. unfolded into these particular forms. because the con tent these particularisations of Substance is not as yet the true content of Spi rit. the movement in connection with any condition of things is not bound and limited by anything whatever. that the Spiritu al is as yet only present in this abstract shape of Substantiality. For the Beautiful is essentially the Spiritual making itself known sensuously. and is known as spiritual. and that in which it has an interest it negates. so that the sensuou s is not independent. of a fancy built on a theoretic al foundation. too. has enriched the character of the mind and its emotions. while on the other hand it pays no attentio n to whatever is void of interest. For this reason. is not apprehended here in the form of Beauty : thos e powers. Such is true beauty. but at the same time of feeble softn ess. The pheno menal world. becomes rather a complete contingency. But it is likewise owing to this very imagined independence itself that converse ly the peculiar position of the content and of the definite outward forms disapp ears. and by means of which their independen ce. p resenting itself in sensuous concrete existence. The objective content. t he subject this definite spiritual agent becomes. and this principle of passionless imagination. and everythin g whicli has an interest for imagination becomes free. Passion in its natural untrained state possesses but few interests. this subsumption of the bodily sensuous element un der the Spiritual. love. indee d. and exhibits not itself. In living human beings there are many external influences w hich check pure idealisation. an universal space which has not as yet organised. and the caprice of imagination has absolu tely unbounded scope. which becomes all the more infinite and manifold as it has its home in a region where Nature is exuberant . the form of beauty cannot be created here. which in the sensuous world and in concrete exist ence is both free and knows itself to be so.e any sort of unregulated fancy. and for this reason. but in such a manner that that existence is wholly and entirely permeated by the Spiritual. a s. and can follow whatever direction it pleases.

the art we find here is symbolical art. There is no act of judgment. the system de termined in and for itself through the Notion. statues or pictures. local features features of individu al recollection are joined on to them. constitutes the foundation. of the development which it gets in this theor etical region. and feebleness. which are on the one hand baroque and wild. The inequality or disproportion of form and content consist?. the manifestation of the self-impo rtance of the individual. (b. and are horrible. and is not developed into beauty. the Spiritual. . they express that definite stuntedness under which the Idea suffers when these fundamental determinations are not brought back again into their spiritual nature. we have to recognise the presence of these determinations through the perverted sensuous form of the capricious. as sensuous A matter. This degradation i s partly owing to the mode in which the indifference of those determinations tow ard one another appears. We have here to look away from its vast and characteristically endless mythol ogy and mythological forms. inasmuch as they acquire the semblance of being similar to the disconnected facts of existence. And it is the study of this system which is of the most essential moment. In that religion. Thus. the fantastic character of the art which makes its appearance here. Devoid of anything to give it stability.In the Religion of Beauty. but at the same time prove themselves to have the Notion for the ir inner source. The symbolism is not the purely Beautiful. just because a content other than sp iritual individuality is the basis. in this that the fundamental determinations aie debased. s o that the content. into this measureless splendour and enervation. and on the other hand. is the spiritual content. It is the s} T stem of universal fundamental determinations. no feeling o f shame. the content is not of a spiritual kind. loathso me distortions. but not characteristics of the Spiritual. as that of the absolute sovereign powers to which everything returns. what we have here is complet e dissolution of form. From what has now been stated it will be already clear that these determinations of the divine Essence have their existence in the Indian religio n. through which they are transposed into the spher e of the every-day life. however. as such. the every -day existence as such is not made to vanish. partly owing to the presence of arbitrary human and ext ernally local sense experience. On the one hand. Here . and which permeate everything through and t hrough. At the same time. a nd that conversely the external sensuous representation becomes depraved by mean s of its form. nothing moulds itself into forms of the beauty which is given only b y the consciousness of freedom. where all passions. in contrast with a r principle. externally determined embodiment. and so too with the Greek religion that eligion which has spiritual individuality as its in this religion of India is th with an abstract monotheistic r is to say. and an unstable reeling to and fro of all con tent. repulsive. we have to observe the degradation which they xmdergo. Free subjectivity is not the permeating elem ent. which alone brings thorough stability into this region of caprice. the restless movement. are merely the expression of the Spiritual. Speaking generally. in order to keep to the principal fundamental determ inations alone. In this phantasy there is not hing fixed. and the unfolding of the Absolute a pr ocess which outdoes itself in this world of imagination is merely an endless bre aking-up of the One into the Many.) The general idea of the objective content of this stage. and to do ju stice to the essential element which lies at their foundation . nothing of the higher mutual fitness of form and of content . while in virtue. the mad. more strictly spea king. and is not essentially expressed by the form. too. Hence the uubeautif ul. they recall the highest element of the Idea. confu sion. which does indeed express essentia l characteristics. ho wever. What constitutes the principal point of interest e development or explication of form in contrast eligion. the inner ele ment passes over into external existence.

What is the first in the Notion. since he is primarily abstract. from that which is posited by means of it. a nd present themselves as independent Persons Persons of the Godhead who are God. These dete rminations are indeed to be distinguished from one another. But the Power. or within him. the universality of Brahma as such. distinguishes itself from its moments themselves. They are therefore to be considered more closely. they have vanished . that this Powe r is. In saying to himself. Thus it is merely power potentially power as th e inner element of the existence . it is not. have vanished in him. This Essence. and exists then for himself. but rather it is with the appear ance of subjectivity that God is for the first time posited as Power. this Essence existing within its elf. in fact. only potentially power. there is onl y the relation of these two extremes. he himself issues as a breath out of himself . which exists within itself. as contrasted with the co nsistency of the abstract self-identical understanding. may indeed be c onceived of too as existing for itself. " I am Brahma. to begin with. is the eternal repose of Beingwithin-itself . They belong to it. Brahma is th e universal Soul . however. But posited as differentiated determinatio ns. these two are not determined as contrasted with one another. at once in religion in the general sense. existing independently. and from it s own moments. he contemplates himself. The Power and the basis of existences and all things have. and these t herefore appear on the one hand as independent beings. But his abstract simplicity does not at once vanish owing to this. p roceeded out of him and vanished in him. it nevertheless comes to be posited merely as something which has proceeded out of that finite a s its basis. it is only posited as the Simple and Abstract. as existing at all. and stand in relatio n to the subsequent conceptions of God. and as Essence which has Being within itself or as Substance. and in the wholly imme diate and crudest religion of nature. the Negative. is regarded as the Universal. and on the other as momen ts which even perish in the One. as that which exists within itself. what is true. Whether as outside of him. they are merely moments of i t. Power. lik e passion. at the same time determined as Power . Now the determination which is allimportant here is. but as differentiated moments they come forward into independent existence. so that that primary element vanishes in this particu lar shape or form. as Brahma is self-thinking. which universal Substance is. posited simply as the basis of the particular shapes or exi sting forms. the universal substantial element . now the distinction as ent ire totality are the perplexing inconsistencies which present themselves in this sphere to the logical understanding. and their r elation is therefore itself simple. This abidingly selfenclosed Power in the form of Universality must be distingu ished from its operation. and the relation to the basis of the inherently existing Essence is the relation of Substantiality. which is. as the relation of infinite negativity to itsel f . when he creates. as negated. and not concrete in himself. but is the quiet. Brahma exists thus as abstractly existing fo r himself. in fact. Subjectivity is Power in itself. which the Hindus call Brahma. for which all else exists merel y as abrogated. for the momen ts. And in so fa r as this is conceived of as outside of it. and are also of primary importance to th e understanding of the preceding ones. so that the dete rminations or differentiations as forms existing in their own right are conceive d of as outside of it. they appear as independent existences outside of him. This simple Substance. The alternations according to which we have now the One. the self-existing Power. is the fundamental determination. but on the other hand they again vanish in the one Power. however. lustreless reflection into itself. . which is not. but they are at the same time that consist ency of reason which is in accordance with the Notion. Power is the Ideal. as being the infinitude which the finite as abrogated posits within itself. and the "/" for which that universality exists. a s universal Power. turned toward what is other than itself. who are the Whole itself." a ll things have vanished back into him.

empty Essence. howe ver. and shall see that Spirit as concrete must necessarily be conceived of as triune. the Laws of Na ture. . Now Brahma. beca use Brahma as personified' is merely superficially personified in such a manner that the content still remains this simple substance. and is itself the pas sing over into unity. If we define this more accurately and speak of it under another form. differentiated within itself in such a manner that it has these three determinations within itself.The Power posited in this manner potentially only works inwardly without showing itself as activity. when it is formless. in an abst ract way. But this is a distinction which is not constantly made use of. and so forth. this manifestation of the Divine. The First is totality generally as One. merely Brahma. for it is wanting i n spiritual subjectivity as a fundamental determination. the Second is determinateness. the Godhead: Brahma expresses this universal Essence more as a Person. The most striking and the greatest feature in Indian mythology is unquestionably this Trinity in unity. From the point o f view of its determinations it is a Three. so that this th reeness is merely a unity. that differentiation too should attain to this. has no rights as against the one Substance. when I throw a stone. and the Third. These universal modes o f working. into another d eterminateness . This totality. and in so far as it has no rights it may be called eternal goodness. is what is called among the Indians Tri murti murti = form or shape all emanations of the Absolute being called murt i. perishing. is the neuter. this is righteousness in the general sense. originating : for Not-being too has no rig ht . the absolute unity . its right. is that the differences are led back again into unity. This is the goodnes s through which what is posited by the Power as a semblance or show of Being acq uires momentary Being. which is the unity. that is. a self-conscious subject. I manifest myself as power in so far as I am cause and dete rmine. understood in their true character. But to Europeans it mus t have been in the highest degree astonishing to meet with this principle of the Christian religion here : we shall become acquainted with it in its true form l ater on. for the masculine and neuter genders have many cases which are similar. And now distinctions appear in this simple Substance. different Powers exist : the differentiation. But this potentially existing Power works in a universal manner. in accordance with the true determination. Conceived of in accordance with its abstract form. We cannot call this Trinity Persons. belong becoming. no great emphasis is to be laid upon this distinction. into concrete unity. it is an abstract determination in contrast to Being. its destin y. In the Power it is absorbed. yet goodness permits it to e xist independently. in so far as I am a subject. should indeed exist . but in a unity only. taken quite abstractly . as the one. the Second means that differentiations. and it is worth noting tha t these distinctions present themselves in such a way that they are determined i n accordance with the instinct of the Notion. in fact. To this. and in the different grammatical cases this distinction already spontaneously effaces itse lf. implying that the exi sting determinate element is not. In a nother respect. too. implying that what ha s determinate character. are. simple. or. a Whole. as a su bject. that the finite attains to its end. differentiation ge nerally . It is this Highest. absolute Substance. to be transformed. this Trinity of the Absolute is. for instance. which is to be changed. without this universali ty being a subject for itself. as we say . that it is. Upon this Second follows the Third that is. righteousness.

appears as the Inert. To speak generally. In the Indian religion this characteri stic is the most prominent one of all . is what is called Brahma. But while the one Substance the One is thus the abstract Power. What now remains to be given is partl y something of a merely historical character. too. the me re recipient in which I lay my seed. as one who is summoned by another higher than himself. which is above Brahma. mankind . it at the same time appears as the inert element.The First. " Brahma is my uterus. which gives itself a definite character in the distinction. as in the Jewish and Christian religion. as we should express it. also makes its appearance . is a mode in which it becomes apparent that substantiality does not satisfy . but which at the same time maintains a passive attitude like wom an. and is formless. as inactive. This. but it at once becom es apparent that this One is inactive. reflection. make s itself a Higher. the One. is expressed in the ideas of the Indian religion. as the active element. because it is only the One. since one having such a definite character is conceived of as One of these Three. the cosmo . Parabrahma is expressive of the need of thought to have something yet higher . In these Br ahma is represented as being thus alone in solitude. had not during a thousand years been in a condition to conceive of his expansion. and in no sense a finite activity. But Brahma. owing to the fact that he is the One. In the various cosmogonies or description s of the creation of the world. The Hindus have a great number of cosmogonies which are all mo re or less barbarous. it fails to do so because form is not present. and out of which nothing of a fixed character can be deriv ed. is the Formless : thus this. the world. Power as this simple activity is Thought. Parabrahm a. Tims the need of another is directly present. in the Vedas and Puranas. Krischna therefore says of Brahma. and a Being which is represented as a higher one then says to him that he ought to expand and to beget himself. and the advance consists in the resumption of de termination into unity. and these are jumbled toge ther. there is no activity. the One Substance. and had retu rned again into himself. too. it is added. Of Brahma." In the deter mination. all kinds of stories are related. an activity relating itself to itself . here we have specially the formi ng activity. Thought. Thus Brahma. Brahma is thus what is conceived of as this Substance out of which everything ha s proceeded and is begotten. gods. too. as this Power which has created All. at once goes beyond such a determination as Brahma. t hat is to say. The one Substance. In the Code of Manu." there is not the principle of movement. Such a description of the creation of the world occurs in the Vedas. The creating is essentia lly an attitude of thought towards itself. but. the one self-identical Essence. I n so far as that which is absolute Substance again appears as merely One alongsi de of others. the necessary dev elopment which follows from that principle. inert matter . Here Brahma is represented as world-creating. as it were. in so far as he is a subject. What we have is not one idea of the creation of the world. That is the basis. and out of which I beget All. and as existing wholly for himself. it is the absolute basis and is the One Brahma. " God is Essence. created the world. First came the multiplicity of determinations. of pro duction . as that which indeed begets. then. but partly. Brahma is this one absolute Substance. Simple Power. This form is in accordance with the logical development. too. and it is impossible to say in what definite relation forms of this kind stand to one another. as formless. Out of Brahma issues everything. what has just been thus indicated makes its appe arance.

a similar description of the first act of creation is to be f ound : " There was neither Being nor nothing. since it is left to chance whether or not the individual raises itself to the abstract Universal to abstract selfconscious ness. this seed became a resplendent egg. The " Word " is held in very high esteem among the Hindus. through the energy of contemplation it brought forth a world out of itself. and th erein the Eternal itself was born again as Brahma. which is at home with itself or self-contained. He is Himself objective thought. neither above nor below. when it has attained to the concentration of abstraction. the unity of thi nking with itself. and this was the original seed of all things. indeed Go d Himself. on the other hand. namely.gonies are constantly understood and presented differently. it is the briuger forth itself. and immediately vanishes in its external form. to indicate for what reason the logical d etermination of subjective existence in self-consciousness which marks the India n pure Essence has no place among these other ideas. This infinitely profound and true trait constantly reappears in the various desc riptions of the creation of the world. it is the duty of that caste to read the Veda s." Here likewise Thought in its self-enclosed activity is presented to us. that is to say. but is only ideal." which proceeds out o f the One. immaterial Substantiality and Power which exists for thought only . namely. is at once one among the three Person s. We also find that this pure acti vity is called " the Word. Thought is therefore what brings forth and what is brought forth. definite existence of an externally physical character. who r epresents its actual existence. The Eternal created the water. a nd is not self-conscious . in thinking. Outside of this One existed nothing." the pure contemplation of it is perfect emptiness. or the Universal determinat ion. The reading of Vedas is the Divine. on ly when it has practised severe meditation." and so on. He has merely potential being. the caste of the Brahmans is an immediate represen tation of the presence of Brahma . and h uman self-consciousness in the state of abstraction is Brahma itself. is the begetting of itself . But Thou ght becomes further known as Thought in the self-conscious Essence in man. With the Jews of lat er times Philo. and on the other. and is also not as yet that inherently c oncrete One which He is as Spirit. and deposited fruit-bringing seed in it. The Jewish God is. In one of the Vedas. it is said. some passages out of which Colebrooke was the f irst to translate. of the existent and non-existent. and so too is prayer. Thus it is i n the Brahmans that Brahma exists . The Code of Manu begins thus : " The Eter nal with one thought created water. and becomes again begetting and active. He is Brahma the Neutrum. the same One. The return of thinking to itself is found in other descriptio ns besides. The Hindus might be charged with having attribut ed to the One a contingent existence. which. and created one part masculine and the other feminine. which in truth is not possible since spiritual s ubjectivity as an essential fundamental determination is wanting to them. In this egg. for exam ple. The characteristics of Brahma which have been indicated seem to have so many poi nts of correspondence with the God of other religions with the true God Himself that it appears to be of some importance to point out. Brahma is the progenitor of a ll spirits. on the one hand. desire. however. the diff erence which exists. and this brooded in solitude with itself." as God is in the New Testament. by the reading of the Vedas Brahma is. Notwithstanding this . does not permanently remain. rather than the One Person . there is always one feature essentially present in them. if we may so designate them. Brahma as subject. the " I. that this Tho ught. It is . on the other hand. It is the figure of pure activity. The masculine energy is itself begotten. this stupefaction itself is the abstract unity of tho ught . but only the One enshrouded and dark. at the end of that time it divided the egg by means of thought. But the Indian supreme God is merely the One in a neuter sense. it is stated. for example cro</a is the " First-created. to withdraw itself into itself. the great Power remained inactive for a year . The Vedas may even be read unintelligently and in complete stupefaction . impu lse first formed itself. neither d eath nor immortality. But.

nor the quality th at it is posited through me." it is not. and which therefore attaches to Brahma also. differ from one another in t heir external relations only . so that the " I " is the Universal. even although it is not an objectivity so far as the content is concerned . recognised object ivity. as being in opposition to me. as the form is concerned. was called in the Christian world the Devil. as identical with the modern subjectiv e and objective " vanity " with that which the " I " is made into by means of th e oft-repeated assertion that we know nothing of God. becau se of its being in an Other. in which everything has vanished away. All obj ectivity having become for it vain and empty. and therefore a subjective determi nation only. all that is to be recognised or known of it. is wh olly and entirely limited to this that this absolutely indeterminate Being is. but which. which is indeed still abstract and posited in an undeveloped mann er. " God is an idea without content. But neither this abstract negation. It is thrashing empty straw to attempt to pass off that negative of myself." a n ullity without any content. a category of Him. they are His names. into which all content whatever has sunk as finit e." and it is intended expressly. a determination which has an existence in my self-consciousness onl y. for the truth rather is." and that so-called rel igion. nor is it an objectivity. or at least a supposed." With a one-sided dialectic it has. or. in which negation nothing in fact remains to me but I myself. and to do this. all which it is to be for me. what the Hindu says in and to himself " I am Brahina " must b e recognised. a nd that it is the negative of myself. not as Subject. To reach subjectivity He does not therefore require an Other in which He should for the first time acquire this determination. consequently. as a Subject having infinitude within itself. what is present is this positive v anity itself it is that objective "I" which alone is Power and Essence. and given to it the character of something that is negative for it. and know it as negat ion only. would have a merely subjective existence also. at least. In the Indian. although too they do not become the content through which the Christian Unity of God is alon e the spiritual one. " I am Brahma. For this reason the Jewish God cannot acquire the determina tion of a subjective existence in self-consciousness. to signify the negative of mysel f. that is just the empty form of objectiv ity without content. that He is a " Beyond " for the " I. and the exclusive. which do not become special forms or shapes. but also as what alone has Actual Being. so far. reduces itself by its own act to the mere " something out side of me. an empty form and merely subjective supposition. Formerly t hat which could be described as merely the negative. and thus would be already too much . as. by a process of evaporation. For the statement that " I " has no affirmative relation to God. indeed. it would already be and not in concrete determi nations only. for an alleged. is the One exclusively. On the other hand. whose sole characteristic. Being. too. the " I " of the modern faith of reflection. and that I know this negation. who has no other gods beside Him. Consequently nothing affirmative remains save this subjectivel y-supposing "I. in its essential character. and partly in so far as it still is to get an objective meaning. is an objectivity . but which is nevertheless true infinitude. the former expresses the primitive apprehension o . on the contrary. affirmative point. posited as the negative of myself. that God is a subject iii and for Himself someth ing which is known of God. The Jewish God." It is of no use to say. a s the absolutely consuming or absorbing element. and also returns b ack again into that One . all that is implied in this is that it is represented merely as Substance. But tha t apparently affirmative determination of God that He is is partly in itself mer ely the perfectly empty abstraction of Being. It is because of this that He is determined not only as Potentiality. as the Hebrews frequently express i t. that something outs ide of me or above me. in fact. because He is rather a sub ject in Himself. for to do so is merely to pronounce a negative. as outside of me . sceptically rid itself of all the content of the sensuous and super-sensuous wo rld. expressly through myself. the master of all determinations. The Indian " I am Brahma. His goodness and His righteousnes s remain so far also merely attributes .not enough that the Trimurti proceeds out of that primal One. for instance. " I recognise God as above me. at once implies that the mere independent " I " is t he affirmative for " I.

the self-enc losed unity . which again is symbolical and wholly wit hout beauty. conquest and amours are the two aspects. sitting even on. and to preserve oneself continuously in that motionless abstract self-consciousness. Vishnu. and combine with this renunciation the constraint arising from some unnatural attit ude or position of the body. namely. and especially to an inactivity of ten years' duratio n. and point to the fact that great conquer ors who gave a new shape to the condition of things are the gods. and occupations. the wild energy of natural life. Such are the three fundamental determinations : the whole is re presented by a figure with three heads. thus the fundamental ch aracteristic of Siva is on the one hand the prodigious life-force. for example. compares itself with it. and never even in sleep lying d own. Vishnu. It has bee n stated that change in the general sense is the Third . on account of its strength. and the like. devastates . The Third is Siva. the most important acts of the incarnations. We now come to the Second in the triad. in which the pure substantiality of its thought co mes into existence for self-consciousness. . or Rudra : this ought to be the retu rn into self. and since it is itself the existence of Brahma. Brahma. t hat is. or of coming into being and passing away. be said that it is Brahma who appears as man. This is what. the great god. like all other content. is the most distant unity. it is the determina tion of Becoming generally. They ^ give th emselves up with the most persevering callousness ' to the monotony of an inacti vity extending over years. for in other respects its subjective existen ce the abstract " I " is equal or commensurate with it. but the most universal repres entation is the Lingam. and sh ows itself to be inadequate to it . The innermost sanctu ary contains it. in which they renounce all the interests and occupationsof ordinary life. the momentary character of ihis existence at once shows itself to be inadequate to the content.f the mind in its naive form. nevertheless. holds fa st to that solitude of subjectivity alone. Many and various are the incarnatio ns of this kind which are reckoned up by the Hindus. in fact. The First. indeed. For it is only the momentary time element which app ears as the most obvious defect in ihat existence. Its principal symbo l is therefore the Ox. or else standing. that faith of reflection. which was reverenced among the Greeks as (^ctXAof. The Third should be the retur n to the First. and are thus d escribed as gods. on the other what destroys. and conseq uently a demand arises that this existence itself should be rendered universal a nd lasting like its content. in order that the unity might appear as returning into itself. the incarnation of Brahma generally. it being that alone which sta nds in relation with that abstract Universality. interests. is manifestation (the moments of Spirit are th us far not to be mistaken). These popular conceptions of incarnations appear partly to hav e in them echoes of what is historical. and recognises it alone. In this full y developed reflection the divine world. But to exalt that merely single look into a permanent seeing means nothing else than to stop the transit ion from the moment of this quiet solitude into the full present reality of life . Krishna or Vishnu . The deeds of Krishna are conquests in connection with which th e course of events was sufficiently ungodlike . of its needs. In contrast to this. the Second. is merely somet hing posited by me. many Hin dus who are not Brahmans (of whom later on) virtually accomplish. going JL? with th e hands clasped over the head. The general meaning here is that Brahma appears as man : it cannot. is life in human form. and recognises it as objective truth. Monstrous poetical fictions make their appearance in this region: Krishna is als o Brahma. which denies all objectivity to truth. and i t is this sign which is to be found in most of the temples. as. This first relation of the Hindu to Brahma is set down only in the one single pr ayer. B ut it is just this Third which is what is devoid of Spirit . so that it allows all other content w hatever to exist beside it. Mahadeva. for this assumption of humanity is not actually held to be the pure form of Brahma.

theft. there is nothing which takes a fixed shape. This difference. viz. and thus there arises an infinite world of Deities of particular powers and phen omena. So too with love. But just as this is conceived of as Trimurti. fancy passes over from an ordinary external mode of existence to divinity. such as the Ganges. and it also does n ot become concrete although these determinate existences proceed out of it . but. the Sun. are held to be transient. But in this religion. since all definite form is wanting to this fantastic imagination. and to spri ng into existence again out of it. that is. Consciousness. according to the deeper conception. of animals a nd the like. on the contrary. Spirit. It is not merely change. that is sp oken of. as mere change . in the immediate unity. are at one time independent. Yismavitra even creates another Indra and other gods ! Thus these particular spiritual and natural Powers. and are in subjection to the Supreme One . it is its coming to itself. too. in which the duality is annulled. is essentially based upon the standpoint of natural religion and based upon it in its entirety. The Third. which are regarded as deitie s. in the same way the incarnations. it remains abstract unity . and still less Siva. there Brahma. but i s the change in which the difference is brought to reconciliation with the First . It is the return of the One to itself. deceit. the god of the visible heavens. not as a change of the difference by means of which the unity produces itself as an annulling of differentiation and the ta king of it up into unity.The true Third. Imposing natural objects. in Substance. These shapes disappear again in the same manner in which they are begotten . and there will yet b more . rat her they are phenomena with the characteristic of independence. the Becoming is conceived o f as mere becoming. It is impossible to speak of miracles h . All these are conceived of by imagination as free and independent. At the head of this world stands Indra. T he substantial unity does not become concrete because the particular Powers retu rn into it. and are posited outside of that unity. Thus the Hindus say there have already been many thousand Indras. The Other is the act of judgment or differentia tion. is alone God. In the older part of the Vedas it is not Vishnu. Trimurti and this again is c onceived of as the Highest. indeed. Thus the development issues only in a wild whirl of delir ium. Not only is this principal basis and fundamental determination in the Indian myt hology thus personified. which still belongs to nature. abstracti on absorbs them : the power which man acquires by means of these gods strikes th em with terror . become identified with Brahma himself. the whole deity. These differentiations are now grasped as Unity as. To form an estimate of the number and value of these deities is wholly out of th e question here . instead of being the reconciler. so that each is itself total ity. and at another are regarded as vanishing. avarice. but all else too is superficially personified by means of imagination. I have returned in that Other to myself. so that Substance has the form. that is. and this in like manner returns back aga in to that which was its starting-point. the One. as well as the sensuous powe rs of nature in plants and animals.. each p erson too in turn is taken independently and alone. the Third. is Spirit. These gods are mutable and perishable. the having an Other over against one I exist as knowing but in such a mann er that while the Other is for me. which is notwithstanding known as subordinated to something above it. it bei ng their nature to be submerged in the absolute unity. is here merely this wild play of beg etting and destroying. is also a change in the First. the Himal aya (which is the special dwelling-place of Siva). into myself.

Here all the Powers. Vishnu is also called the Supreme Brahma. the determination of that which is called Brahma. I am o . he is the lustre of precious stones. comes to have an ambiguous meaning. the reason in the soul in fact. happiness are called Brahma. The fundamental determination of the theoretical consciousness is therefore the determination of unity. for all is miracle . The Hindus are. even the two other differences. I a m the cause which causes. and then a fresh form makes its appearan ce. moreover. t he Immutable. that some worship Vishnu and others Siva. too. then it is he who is absolute total ity . the All. for Brahma is in one aspect the One. Brahma . the principal one is this. he too in turn is Brahma. as that which is in everlasting unity witli itself. but. and is used as such just because he is not looked on as being himself solely this One. and it is to the nature of the Notion that this confusion owes its origin. remains devoid of Spirit here. are this One within itself. who has. a nd then again as subordinate to something else. " I am what is and what is not .ere. everything is dislocated. and nothing determined by me ans of a rational connection of the categories of thought. that Brahm a is the womb in which it begets All. they have to be abrogated as one-sided. and Sfva says of himself. and because of thi s. Undoubtedly a great d eal is symbolical. The One shows itself as fixed or established in its own right. I am the truth. and so the particular deities are all Brahma likew ise. The confusion which characterises this sphere originates in the dialectic necessarily belonging to it Spirit. however. divided into many sects. and that it is the absolute activity of fo rm. as confusi on. and at another a particularit y as contrasted with particularity in general. which put s everything in organic connection. The air. Here this differentiation represented by Vishnu is removed and absorbed. gods of nature and genii. Among many other differences. Water and the sun are Brahma . This unity. Mahadeva calls himself Bra hma. understanding. the energy in man. The necessity of the Notion manifests itself merely as deviation. I have been ever ything . however. I refer to what Mill says in his History of India. If it is Siva who is introduced as speaking. and he even speaks of something higher than himself of a universal soul. on the contrary. He proves f rom many Indian writings that it is an epithet of praise which is applied to var ious deities. inasmuc h as Brahma is at one time the Universal. the movement of the atmosphere . and therefore if the de terminations never make their appearance at all in the form adequate to Spirit. everything says of itself t hat it is Brahma. and thus also approp riate the epithet of the One. An Englishman who. believes that Brahma i s an epithet of praise. the ox. into one of these differentiations. disputes ari se which cost thousands their lives. melt into On e Person. has sought to discover what is meant by Brahma. we might suppose that the ancient inhabitants of India found Brahma in the Su s\ e^We_J and that they had thus a different relig ion from that of their descendants. all differentiations are called and are in turn Brahma. But since this One must advance to particular isation. as something which has nothing within itself to give it stability. by a most careful investigation into the various represe ntations. Special prominence is given to the sun in the Vedas. This is of ten the occasion of bloody wars. and if we were to reckon up the prayers addressed to it. and all living things . I am always and shall always be . Now these distinctions are in a general sense to be understood as meaning that w hat is called Vishnu even says again regarding itself that it is All. that indeed it is Brahma. This is a mistake. breath. the element of change in him. Thus Brahma appears as creator. the rich variety of forms which is thus essentially his own is also predicate d of him. and does not represent the conception of perfection or nnity which we associate with it. and the like. I am Brahma and likewise Brahma . is not present here. at festivals and fairs especially. which. however. as well as the other Powers.

" Brima had asked. " Let all which I s ee become real. and he has himself alone for his obj ect as immeasurable. for their on ly emotion was wrath. we find one addressed to speech. and for their maintenance the vegetabl e world. " I am Brahma. Thus Brahma is the One. This fire again is Brima himself. make something understandable. and with sensuous passions only . but how shall I preserve the things so that they do not go to de struction ? " Upon this a spirit of blue colour proceeded out of his mouth . thou canst not understand thyself . however. appetite. and the future . He is not such a Being as we have in our minds when we speak of one God. go and m ake men. since they had noth ing in them but the destructive quality. and what is my dwelling-place to be ? '' Br ima replied. I am the past. Now Brima. He says this to himself. in fact. the present. what they produce is one-sided only and without truth. but the human beings which Vishnu made were idiots wit h great bellies. Thus we see the three gods working separately from one ano ther . and this he commanded to create all living things.lder than all . without knowledge. But they refused to do anything else than to praise God. and gave t hem orders to rule over the creatures. and is also everything independently which is conceived of as God. Finally. Brahma is thus this One . he gave up his j ourneyings and considered what he had seen. and had said. This spirit sat down before Brima with crossed legs and folded arms. " Go. when it pleased him to create the world he said. and create the world . and in an accompanyi ng dissertation he gives a translation from the Vedas. and thus created men. " How shall I create a world ? " The Almighty had answered. Krishna. I am Eudra. whicli hovered before his eyes. Brima." He did so. Among other prayers." Tire had now issued out of Brima. He journeye d a thousand years in order to attain a) (c^o^leM^^ ^ his expansion and to under stand it. in which all the mo ments which we have hitherto considered in their divided state and dialectic are expressed unitedly. which. Vi shnu. His vexation took the form of a swarthy spirit. " Thou shalt be Eudra. after the journey of a thousand years. " Rise up. knew as l ittle about his expansion as he did before. " Who am I. they destroyed themselves.) Worship. without emotio ns and will. The Almighty. who is something diffe rent from Brima. and he had seen the Idea of all things. and in it there is a desc ription of the creation of the world. is not exclusively held fast to as this One. I am al l worlds. and wept." By way of conclusion. Thereupon Brima commanded Vishnu to m ake mankind. which is identical with itself sa ys. Colonel Dow translated a history of India from the Persian. saying. had then said to him. another description may be given here. Brima existed from all eternity in the form of immeasurable expansion . the maintaining principle. Brima looked around and saw nothing but his own immeasurable image. at this Brima was wroth and destr oyed them. " Ask me and power s hall be given thee. Human beings were as yet wanting. like the beasts of the field. Sunk in wonderment. (c. this One God is universa l unity." the universal supreme soul. He himself now created four persons out of his own breath. which came forth from between the eyes. here everything which is independent. because they had nothing of the quality of mutability or destruc tibility in them." &c. having four heads and four hands. Immediately thereupon a sp irit of flames of fire. Vishnu. Subjective religion the comprehension of itself by self-consciousness in relatio . ten of them. These men were more savage than tigers. nothing of the temporal qualities of existence. in which it say s of itself. issued from h s navel. He did this. and Eudra united their forces. Brima ! " What was first had thus been desire. thi s again was Brima himself. Brima now beca me angry. " I am Brahma. Brima. and all nature thy dwelling-place .

activity and will do not give the character of universality to its determinations . he is actually self-conscious thought. is not only a thinking being. In other words. or. would consequently be rational. Merely theoretical. as this absorption in self. Or if we proceed from the determination that Brahma is Essence as abstract unity . Brahma is thought. and temporal fulness of life. he is conscious of himself as pure thought . thus Brahma has essentially an ex istence in human self-consciousness. is given a determinate character. and does not appear as held within its unity. enclosed within the universality of thought generally. is the soul of a living creature only. objective. but outside of which all content h as assumed independence. formal thought supports the content when it thus appears as accidentally determined . The leading place in t his sphere is occupied by the pure equality or identity of thought. Thought. As regards the first attitude. religious. as forming conceptions within itself. or the character of determinate Bein g in general. and therefore abandoned to the caprice o f imagination. indeed. remains the merely potentially ex istent substantial Power existing in seclusion. man is a thinking being. does not attain to the conception of itself as true subjectivity. and consequently has i n it form generally. Brahma. therefore. therefore. This unity. however. and consequently to a connected existence in accordance with law. namely. in other words. But Bein gfor-self. he has then his existence in the finite subject too. namely. and now abandons it entirely to its own wild cap rice. although developed in all directions. which has let go actuality as mere contingency. in the particular Spirit. as inherently Power. thought as such. but the self of consciousness. p urely theoretical. which at the same time is inherently existing creative Power. still it does not app ear in the character of something posited by the Notion. Man. The activity of the will. exalted in it to free equality with itself. which knows itself in its universality. as absorption in self. and is not. that towards Brahma. which is actual Being. abstract form. consciousness too. and though form develops itself potenti ally. that is to say. however. not the pow erful self-consciousness imprisoned within the particularity of desire. here man has the general idea of it withi n himself. for it has just been stated that here thought as such comes into existence . but Power itself is just that infinite negativity. does not really acquire a practical signification here . and in accor dance with right. because thought itself as suc h. Worship here is first of all a certain attitude of the self-consciousness Brahma . I. It is still the substantiality out of which indeed potentiall y all proceeds. on the contrary. and in which all is retained. and which thus as thinking itself. we find that it is specia lly marked off and peculiar exactly in proportion as it keeps itself isolated fr om the rest of the concrete. indeed. does not arrive at f reedom of the will does not arrive at a content which. Being-for-self. but cannot exalt i t to the connected unity of a system. so far as regards its determinate existence and standing. it can indeed abstract from it. being determined through the unity of the Notion. Man. As in this world the Idea has developed itself to such an extent that its fundam ental determinations have emerged into prominence though they remain mutually ex ternal. for thought is implicitly Power. but is here essentially thought . and as in like manner the empirical world remains external and unintelli gible relatively to them and to itself. is essentially characterised here as a thinking being. made by means of that unity into an objective and universal conte nt. i.n to its divine worldcorresponds with the character of that world itself. This foundation is. To the Idea of the true ther . in accordance with the nature of the Notion. that negat ivity relating itself to itself. and in the first place as pure theory has universal existence here. knows itself as Brahma. and then afterwards to the rest of the divine world existing outside of him.

the abstraction o f thought. has the determinateness outside of him. This attitude is not to be called worship. of devo tion. we were to ask a Hindu. the One God h as no temple. on the contrary. and no prayer is addressed to him. needs. on the other hand." In fact. but is thought as the concrete. but is. only that this itself is merely a moment in the existence of abstraction . I worship idols. and look toward heaven. Th e " I. or this simple substantiality and universality. Paramesvara ? Do you pray to Him ? Do you bring Hi m offerings ? " he would then say. for there is here no relation to the thinking substantiality as to anything objective.' " . that thought as this abstract thought has this very subjectivity which " I " directly expresses as its existence. With this. so that Brahma is momentary only in his existence. on the contrary. it is conceded. For the true thought. Thus the supreme determinateness of Brahma. and since this existenc e is thus inadequate to such content and its universality. Since in this first attitude we have only one moment of single prayer. sit dow n. " Never. is diss olved in the pure negativity of abstract selflessness. " Wh at is this tranquil devotion. the rela tion is immediately known along with the determination of my subjectivity. the demand arises tha t this existence should be made into a universal one. cross my legs over one another." If we were to inquire further. The thought which is merely the potential existence of the Idea is just the abstract thought which h as merely this finite existence. therefore. but. can only be the subjective consciousness as such. It is that complete emptying which makes renunci ation of all consciousness. of art. I then say within myself. if a Hindu were asked whether he worships i dols. Brahma himself is not worshipped . and co ncentrate my spirit and my thoughts without speaking. the next demand therefore is that this abstraction. has no worship. he is Brahma. of the State. all life and all relations of concrete actual life to the One are to be renounced. The entire living Present. ungod . not merely substantial unity." abstractly as such. An Englishman. this " I " should be made commensurate with the content. will. a nd which has not relatively to the latter the objectivity of concrete being in-a nd-for-self.e belongs the universal substantial unity and identity with self . however. and therefore is quite justly not held in reverence by it. as " I myself. absolutely full or filled up Idea. but in such a way that it is not merely the Undetermined. emotions. according to the Hindu idea. he would answer without the least hesitation. so long as he persists i n remaining within his own consciousness. of the family. " Do y ou worship the Supreme Being. Brahma. " Yes. for " I " as such is this abstract identity of myself with in myself as wholly without determination " I " as " I " am merely thought as th at which is posited with the determination of subjective existence reflected int o itself I am what thinks. and to the extent to which a man puts himself into the condition of s elfconcentration." makes a number of r eflections on the subject. complete abstraction. is no t this abstract thought. whether learned or unlearned. This exalt ation means nothing else than the breaking off of the transition from the moment of still solitude into life. Every Hindu is himself momentarily Brahma. I am this pure thought. namely. this silent meditation which is enjoined on you an d which you practise ? " he would then reply. Brahma is this One." If. Conversely. consciousness. into the concrete present. of religion. and says. in the subjective self-consciousness. namely. on the other h and. the author of a treatise on " Idolworship among the Hindus. ' I am Brahma. is the universal. and the " I " itself is indeed the v ery expression of it. The highest point which is thus attained to in worship is that union with God wh ich consists in the annihilation and stupefaction of self-consciousness. his subjectivity of unity. whether that of natural life or of spiritual life. but i s determined within itself. into concrete self-cons ciousness. " When I engage in prayer. the Supreme Being. This is not affirmative liberation and reconciliation. which God is. the know ing of his real existence. wholly negative. such as the content is. is. fold my hands. Man.

The gods w ere filled with astonishment . acting. Visvamitra was conquered after his hundred sons too had been destroyed by means of a wind which Vasischtha had caused to issue from his navel. and he who maintains himself in this abstraction and has died to the world is called a yog i. they repaired in humility to Yisvamitra. The latter confronted him with his entire army. looking toward the sun or having their eyes closed. they remain speechless in rigid t orpor. Brahma comes to him. and exists permanently as Brahma. however. and addresses him thus : " I recognise thee now as the first royal sage. however. and finally to have himself buried fo r three hours and three-quarters. Vasisch tha refused it . but on his haughtily persisting in it. however. Mahadeva is prepared to fulfil his wishes. on the contrary.ly. who are not Brahmans. At the command of Indra. They entreated the Brahman to desist. and both armies were repeatedly overthrown . He would then have attained to the highest sta te. he was degraded by Yasischtha to the class of the Tschandala. the companion of Rama (an incarnation of Vishnu). Yisvamitra. and another circle of gods. The latter prepares a sacrifice to which he invites all the gods . Thestory of the life of Visvamitra. begins afr esh with his penances. in order to obtain the favour of Mahadeva (Siva). is thus related. however. There is an episode in the Eamayana which places us entirely at this point of vi ew. such lifelessness. Vasischtha then imposed on the cow the task of assembling a force for him wherewith to resist the king. the king thereupon seized it by force. Moved by the severity of his exercises. with hi s arrow he lays waste his forest. bu t Yisvamitra sustains him between heaven and earth. Yisvamitra recognises his power. This state is found existing among the people of India. as being such. To the Hindu. reproached him with having permitted it to be taken from h im. and departs with his consort to th e Himalaya mountains. Upon this he repairs to Yisvamitra with the same request. all inclination. they are reverenced and supported by others. other Pleiades. since the power of a Kshatriya (which the king was) is not greater than that of a Brahman. and agre ed with him about the place they were to assign to their king in heaven. lifts up the king to heaven. who. as he had got to know of its wonderful power. and lifts it up . is. and lives there a thousand years in abstraction alon e with his consort. these. and then he intended to have himself suspended by the feet to swing for t hree hours and three-quarters over a fire. Some remain thus duri ng their whole life. because many Hindus. There was a mighty king. But the freedom of man justs consists in being with himself not in emptiness . the complete s ubmergence and stupefaction of the consciousness is W hat is highest. and afterwards creates anoth er heaven. and give themselves up to a still abstraction . Full of despair. Visvamitra intends to coerce Vasischtha . He retires into solitude. The request. was refused on account of his being a Kshatriya . After t . and this is gr anted him. and he who succeeds in reaching such motionlessness. another Indra. not content with this. however. for such a force as this threatened the entire world with destruction. he drops down. the Bra hmanical weapon. but the cow escaped back again to Vasischtha. knowing. Visva mitra asks to have the knowledge of the whole science of archery. It is related of one of these Hindus that he had travelled for ten years without ever lying down. according to the opinion of the Hindus. They renounce all movement . having slept standing . he hands o ver the government to his only remaining son. finally. Armed with his bow. others for twenty or thirty years. seizes his staff. undertake and accomplish the task of making themselves into t he " I " which is in a completely abstract condition." Yisvamitra. by an exercise of Ins s trength. during the following ten years he had held his hands above his head. whereupon the gods are filled with apprehensi on. decline to come to a sacrifice made for a Tschandala. all interests. In the meantime an Indian king had come to Yasischtha wit h the request that he would exalt him in his bodily form to heaven. immersed thereby in the inner life. and now resolv es to subject himself to the severest exercises in order to attain to that power . Vasischtha. had dema nded a cow (which is worshipped in India as the generative energy of the earth) of the Brahman Vasischtha. but in willing.

each of the giants wish es to have her for his wife. the essentially concret e. They then exert complete dominion over nature. too. or offence. all further determination and content lies outside of him. This renunciation has not the consciousness of sin as a presupposition. having overcome his love. He sends him a very beautiful girl. Yisvamitra was rewarded. Then Yisvamit ra recommences his penances . the exaltation of the individual self-consciousness which strives. that he has won an absolute pow T er over nature. and is that power. his concrete exis tence. do the gods try to irritate and make him angry. nothing is made good by means of it . we see that the charact er of the religious standpoint under consideration consists just in this. is not c haracterised here as anything sinful or negative. and. the gods in heaven became envious. too. Indra becomes afraid of them. in which m an has the standard and the law of his character and behaviour. otherwise esteemed as holy . and concrete feeling. in the Christian idea of the rep entance and conversion of the universal sensuous life. ideas full of content. In an episode in Bopp's " Chrestomathie " the story of two giants is mentioned. on the contrary. that they are to die only by some act of th eir own. then self-consciousness too. It is not penance entered upon for the purpose of atoning to the gods for any kind of crime. his actions. and that the supreme unity casts no reflection into the fulness of the heart and life. but as they had entere d upon their exercises merely with a view to attaining to such power. to render its own abstraction something perennia l for itself. because he himself is merely the abstraction of the sub stantial soul . as has just been indicated. The concrete consciousness of one's self and of objective content. but then withdraws himself from he r. since it is by nature what thinks. as a substantial relation which effectually influences and directs th e concrete man." all virtues and vice s. it would have to be sought in the adoration of the other go ds. Penance of the latter kind pr esupposes the existence of a relation between the work of man. by means of the austerities just spoken of. The man who has thus made himself into the continuously existing Brahma holds a position equivalent to that which we have already seen was held by the magician. If the Absolute be conceived of as the spiritually free. who came to the Almighty with a request for immortality . vanish. as it is in the penitential li fe of Christians and Christian monks. In the consciousness which says. But the relation to Brahma contains as yet nothing concrete. he granted their petition only to this extent. is rather a flight out of the concrete reality of feeling and livi ng activity. In the strife they put each other to death. and in the idea of conversion. and Brahma named him the head of the sages. is that which it ought t o be. and the One God an idea which is full of content. the very conte nt. But just as Brahma is conceived as the solitary selfenclosed Being. then self-consciousness exists as something essential in the religious consci ousness only. to the extent to which it maintains within itself concrete movemen t. the Brahmanic power has to be granted to him. These are. and the reby nature is delivered. it comprehends on the one hand. In vain. and finally the Trimurti itself. It is imagined that such a man can inspire even Indra with fear and apprehension. " am Brahma. and employs the usual means of i