/lit/ - Literature

>>14625028
Timaeus
Hymns to the Night
Concluding Unscientific Postscript

>Where do we go forth then? Always home.

>Friends, the soil is poor, we must sow seeds in plenty for us to garner even modest harvests.

>We seek everywhere the Unconditioned and find always only things.

>Self-alienation is the source of all degradation as well as, on the contrary, the basis of all true elevation. The first step will be a look inward, an isolating contemplation of our self. Whoever remains standing here proceeds only halfway. The second step must be an active look outward, an autonomous, determined observation of the outer world.

>We are on a mission: we are called to cultivate the earth.

>Building worlds is not enough for the deeper urging mind; but a loving heart sates the striving spirit.

>Before abstraction everything is one, but one like chaos; after abstraction everything is united again, but this union is a free binding of autonomous, self-determined beings. Out of a mob a society has developed, chaos has been transformed into a manifold world.

>>13788428

Friends, the soil is poor, we must sow seeds in plenty for us to garner even modest harvests.

Everywhere we seek the Absolute, and always we find only things.

Imagination places the future world for us either above or below or in reincarnation. We dream of travels throughout the universe: is not the universe within us? We do not know the depths of our spirit. The mysterious path leads within. In us, or nowhere, lies eternity with its worlds, the past and the future.

Self-alienation is the source of all degradation as well as, on the contrary, the basis of all true elevation. The first step will be a look inward, an isolating contemplation of our self. Whoever remains standing here proceeds only halfway. The second step must be an active look outward, an autonomous, determined observation of the outer world.

We are on a mission: we are called to cultivate the earth.

Every beloved object is the center point of a paradise.

The best thing about the sciences is their philosophical ingredient, like life for an organic body. If one dephilosophizes the sciences, what remains left? Earth, air, and water.

Nothing is more indispensable to true religiosity than a mediator that links us with divinity.

Building worlds is not enough for the deeper urging mind; but a loving heart sates the striving spirit.

Before abstraction everything is one, but one like chaos; after abstraction everything is united again, but this union is a free binding of autonomous, self-determined beings. Out of a mob a society has developed, chaos has been transformed into a manifold world.

If the world is a precipitation of human nature, so to speak, then the divine world is a sublimation of the same. Both occur in one act. No precipitation without sublimation. What goes lost there in agility, is won here.

The normal present connects the past and the future through limitation. Contiguity results, crystallization by means of solidification. There also exists, however, a spiritual present that identifies past and future through dissolution, and this mixture is the element, the atmosphere of the poet.

Which poet produces the greatest effect of ecstasy?

>>13512415
>he does not wallow in the unspeakable

>>13386955
Novalis, Hymns to the Night

>turns fichte's Nicht-Ich into Du
romanticize the world... kidd....

>>12938225
Novalis, Hymns to the Night

>>12927514
>tfw no sophie

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you do not at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon (muh african authors)
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

If you agreed with any of these, please leave this board and never return.

>>5308682
Novalis was prettier and had nobility going back to the 1200s.