Archive for the ‘Nietzsche’ Category

Why Am I Destiny?

November 19, 2007

I know my fate. One day there will be associated with my name the recollection of something frightful—of a crisis like no other before on earth, of the profoundest collision of conscience, of a decision evoked against everything that until then had been believed in, demanded, sanctified. I am not a man I am dynamite. And with all there is nothing in me of a founder of a religion—religions are affairs of the rabble, I have need of washing my hands after contact with religious people…I do not want believers’ I think I am too malicious to be believe in myself, I never speak to masses…I have a terrible fear I shall one day be pronounced holy: one will guess why I bring out this book before beforehand; it is intended to prevent people from making mischief with me…I do not want to be a saint, rather even a buffoon…Perhaps I am a buffoon.

我知到道自己的命運。有一天,跟我的名字聯想在一起的是可怕的回憶:史無前例的危機、良心的內在衝突、以及顛覆傳統信仰的另類思想。我不是凡人,我是炸藥。儘管如此,我絕非是宗教的一代教主。宗教是愚夫愚婦的事,跟這些教民接觸過幾次後,我就不敢再領教了。我不需要信徒。我自己也是因緣說法,了無定性。很多境界實在也不足為俗眾言明。我很擔心,有朝一日,我竟被供奉為聖主。所以我提前出版這本書,以防備日後人們把我妝扮戲弄。我不想要當聖徒,請別把我當小丑般妝扮,弄得好似我就是小丑。

And nonetheless, or rather not nonetheless—for there has hitherto been nothing more mendacious than saints—the truth speaks out of me.—But my truth is dreadful: for hitherto the lie has been called truth.—Revaluation of all values: this is my formula for an act of supreme coming-to-oneself on the part of mankind which in me has become fles and genius. It is my fate to have to be the first decent human being, to know myself in opposition to the mendaciousness of millennia… I am the first to discover the truth, in that I was the first to sense—smell—the lie as lie. My genius is in my nostrils…I contradict as has never been contradicted and am nonetheless the opposite of a negative spirit.

    這是因為聖徒是有史以來天大的謊言家。而我所說的卻是句句真理。但是我的真理像是危言聳聽,因為大家已經錯將謊言當真理。重新評估一切價值吧!人類若要返回本我真如,這是我身體力行所領悟的不二法門。在數千年基督教謊言的籠罩之下,我是第一位堂堂正正的人,知道人是什麼,所以我有使命感。我是第一位發現真理,因為我是第一位能感覺,能嗅出謊言的腐臭。我的特長在鼻子的嗅覺。我反駁重重謊言謬說,積極奮發,不落入悲觀孤憤。

I am a bringer of good tidings such as there has never been, I know tasks from such a height that any conception of them has hitherto been lacking; only after me is it possible to hope again. With all that I am necessarily a man of fatality. For when truth steps into battle with the lie of millennia we shall have convulsions, an earthquake spasm, a transposition of valley and mountain such as never been dreamed of. The concept politics, has then become completely absorbed into a war of spirits, all the ower-structures of the old society have been blown into the air—they one and all reposed on the lie: Only after me will there be grand politics on earth.

我帶來的福音是前所未有的。我在高山上沉思時就知道,直到目前,我們缺乏真正的福音。只有等我宣揚後,大家才可能重新懷著希望。這樣,我注定是悲劇性的人物,因為真理要跟數千年的謊言相搏鬥,必然像地震暴發,天崩地裂,山谷移位。本來是理念不同,就變成主權信仰之爭,因為舊社會的權力結構,完全依附謊言,會被炸得粉身碎骨。這場搏鬥將是前所未有的慘烈,只有在我之後,思想的戰役才會如此大規模出現。

              2

Does one want a formula for a destiny that has become man? It stands in my Zarathustra.

  –and he who wants to be a creator in good and evil has first to be a destroyer and break values. Thus the greatest evil belongs with the greatest good: this, however, is the creative good. I am by far the most terrible human being there has ever been; this does not mean I shall not be the most beneficent. I know joy in destruction to a degree corresponding to my strength for destruction—in both I obey my Dionysian nature, which does not know how to separate No-doing from Yes-saying. I am the first immoralist: I am therewith the destroyer par excellence.

 我們既然生而為人,就要真正當個人,這個不二法門是什麼呢?且聽蘇魯支法師言:   想要創造善惡價值觀,必先破除舊價值觀。   惡跟善環環相扣,欲創造善者不可無氣魄。   我是古今第一可怕的人物,反之,我也可能是最具悲憫的人物。摧枯拉朽,其樂無窮。猶如英雄豪傑,力足以撼動山河,既然知道真理正義在於我身,就毫不怯懦猶豫。我猶如一代「背德」思想家,將舊觀念摧毀破除無餘。                   

 3  I have not been asked, as I should have been asked, what the name Zarathustra means in precisely my mouth, in the mouth of the first immoralist: for what constitutes the tremendous uniqueness of that Persian in history is the precisely the opposite of this. Zarathustra was the first to see in the struggle between good and evil the actual wheel in the working of things: the translation of morality into the realm of metaphysics, as force, cause, end-in-itself, is his work.  

 身為一代「背德」思想家,本來應該有人問起:我口口聲聲,蘇魯支法師是何許人也。可是在波斯歷史上,蘇魯支法師教義的精深博大卻是時常為人提起。蘇魯支法師首先從人性善惡交戰過程中,領悟出人生輪轉的運行之道,於是他致力於將道德詮釋、提昇到形而上領域,做為生命的動力、目標,及嚮往。

 But this question is itself at bottom its own answer. Zarathustra created this most fateful of errors, morality: consequently he must also be the first recognize it. Not only has he had longer and greater experience here than any other thinker—is the whole of history is indeed the experimental refutation of the proposition of so-called “moral world-order’

   但是以道德做為人生的解答,問題也出在本身。道德是蘇魯支法師所創造,錯誤也鑄在此;結果他自己必須先認同。對於「秩序井然的道德世界」的構想,他比任何思想家體會更深,因為整個人類歷史就是一部道德的興衰史。 

What is more important is that Zarathustra is more truthful than any other thinker. His teaching, and his alone, upholds truthfulness as the supreme virtue—that is to say, the opposite of the cowardice of ‘idealist’, who take flight in face of reality; Zarathustra has more courage in him than all other thinkers put together. To tell the truth and to shoot well with arrows : that is Persian virtue. –Have I been understood? The self-overcoming of morality through truthfulness, the self-overing of the moralist into his opposite—into me—that is what the name Zarathustra means in mouth.

 但是重要的是,蘇魯支比其他思想家更愛真理。只有他的教義揭櫫真理為最高的善。比起「理學家」一遇到現實就逃避的怯懦,他可說是勇敢。其他思想家總加起來的勇氣都比不上他。義無反顧的說出真理就是蘇魯支的優點。我的意思,大家明白吧?道德需要透過真理來反躬自省;道德的反躬自省可能發現對方才是對的,也就是,我「背德」思想家,被詆為「不道德」,其實我才是真正的「道德」。我出口必提蘇魯支就是這個意思。                

     4At bottom my expression immoralist involves two denials. I deny first a type of man who has hitherto counted as the highest, the good, the benevolent, beneficient; I deny secondly a kind of morality which has come to accepted and to dominate as morality in itself—decadence morality, in more palpable terms Christian morality. The second contradiction might be seen as the decisive one, since the over-valuation of goodness and benevolence by and large already counts with me as a consequence of decadence, as a symptom of weakness, as incompatible with ascending and affirmative: denial and destruction is a condition of affirmation. 

基本上,我用「背德思想家」這字眼,表示雙重否定。第一、我否定直到目前被視為最崇高、最善良、最悲憫、最仁慈的耶穌。第二,我否定現在已被接受是主流的道德,頹廢道德;說得更明白些、就是基督教道德。第二項否定最具關鍵,因為我認為善行跟悲憫造成頹廢的結果,羸弱的病徵,跟生命的提升和肯定格格不入,所以我要予以重新評價。 

I deal first of all with the psychology of the good man. In order to assess what a type of man is worth one has to compute how much his preservation costs—one has to know the conditions of his existence. The condition for the existence of the good is the lie–:expressed differently, the desire not to see at any price what is the fundamental constitution of reality, that is to say not such as to call forth benevolent instincts at all times, even less such as to permit at all times an interference by short-sighted good-natured hands. To regret states of distress in general as an objection, as something that must be abolished, is the niaiseri par excellence, in a general sense a real disaster in its consequences, a fatality of stupidity—almost as stupid as would be the will to abolish bad weather—perhaps from pity to the poor. 

首先我們來分析一下善人耶穌的心理學。為了評估信仰善人耶穌是否值得,我們必須先算一算信仰他要花多少代價,以及他是在什麼狀況下存在。人需要善人耶穌存在,原因就是人需要謊言。換言之,人自己不敢去面對生命赤裸裸的現實狀況。只好不惜代價,請善人耶穌召喚悲憫情懷來承擔,甚至還希望他大仁大德伸手幫助到底。依我觀點,痛苦是生命流轉的常態。將痛苦視為不祥之物,欲去之而後快,其實是幼稚之極,結果反而都帶來災難。這種不智之舉,就像我們要日日陽光普照,永遠沒有壞天氣一樣。   

 In the general economy of the whole the fearfulnesses of reality( in the affects, in the desires, in the will to power) are to an incalculable degree more necessary than any form of petty happiness, so called’ goodness’; since the latter is conditioned by falsity of instinct one must even be cautious about granting it a place at all.   

就生命的整體活力而言,人的生命本質包含了各種感覺、慾望、以及生命意志力。這些本質的發揮展現,比起那小小的善行之樂,迫切性高出不知多少倍。而善行說穿了只是在掩飾生命的本質,實在不必太過度重視。    

 I shall have a grand occasion of demonstrating the measurelessly uncanny consequences for the whole of history of optimism, that offspring of the hominess optimi.  Zarathustra, the first to grasp that optimism is just as decadent as pessimism  and perhaps more harmful, says: good men never tell the truth. The good taught you false shores and false securities; you were born and kept in the lies of the good. Everything has been distorted and twisted down to its very bottom through the good.  

且讓我舉個明顯例子,樂觀主義要鼓舞大家積極奮鬥,結果卻反而招致極端不幸。蘇魯支首先注意到,樂觀主義跟悲觀主義一樣頹廢,甚至更加有害。他說:「善人從不說實話!善人告訴你的海岸是不真實的,安全措施也是假的。你生活在善人的謊言之中。由於善人每件事物都被扭曲得面目全非。」  

  Fortunately the world has not been constructed for the satisfaction of instincts such as would permit merely good-natured herd animals to find their narrow happiness in it; to demand that everything should become ‘ beautiful soul’—or , as Mr. Herbert Spencer wants, altruistic, would mean to deprive existence of its great character, would mean to castrate mankind and to reduce it to a paltry Chinadom—And this has been attempted! …Precisely this has been called morality..  

所幸,這世界被創造,並非只是滿足那些天性善良的綿羊族群得到庸俗之樂。若如史賓塞所言:「人要利他,要溫馴和睦,要慈悲善良,要靈魂崇高」,那簡直是剝奪了人的本性,閹割人的氣概,使人變得畏瑣萎縮。可是,竟然大家就是這樣在搞,還美其名謂「道德」! 

In this sense Zarathustra calls the good now ‘ the ultimate men’, now the ‘beginning of the end’; above all he feels them to be most harmful species of man, because they preserve their existence as much at the expense of truth as at the expense of the future. 

因此,蘇魯支有時稱這些善人為「人的終結者」,有時稱「末代族群」。尤其是,他認為這些善人真是傷天害理,表面上是拯救人類,事實上,犧牲了人生真相,也剝奪了人的未來。 善人無法創造,他們只是人的終結者。誰創造新天地、新價值,誰就受其迫害。善人犧牲未來,整個人類的未來!善人總是人終結者。世界曾受到許多傷害,其中善人為害最大!     

   5Zarathustra, the first psychologist of the good, is—consequently—a friend of the wicked. When a decadence-species of man has risen to the rank of the highest species of man, this can happen only at the expense of its antithetical species, the species of man strong and certain of life. When the herd-animal is resplendent in the glow of the highest virtue, the exceptional man must be devalued to the wicked. When mendaciousness at any price appropriates the word ‘truth’ for its perspective, what is actually veracious must be discovered bearing the worst names.      蘇魯支這位善人的首位心理分析師,隨後也同流合污。當頹廢的族群盤踞高位,積極向上的人,雖然堅強自信,也難於施展抱負。當綿羊族群沐浴在善行的榮光照耀中,鶴立雞群的人必然被貶抑為邪惡。當謊言強行篡奪「真理」的寶座,真正的「真話」只有在假語村言中尋覓。   Zarathurstra here leaves no doubt: he says that it was knowledge of precisely the good, the ‘best’ , which made him feel horror at man in general; it was out of this repugnance that the wings grew which ‘ carried him to distant futures’ –he does not dissemble that it is precisely in relation to the good that his type of man, a relatively superhuman type, is superhuman, that the good and just would call hims superman a devil…   對此,蘇魯支瞭然於胸。他說,正因為他太瞭解這些善人的顛倒是非,他對俗眾感到不寒而慄。積鬱莫伸,他只好響往振翅高飛,遙遠未來的超人。他也不諱言,他的超人,儘管高瞻遠矚,將會被這些所謂善人、正義之士,醜詆為「惡魔」。    目睹你們這些位居高堂之士,竟然醜詆我的超人為惡魔,不禁令我鄙夷之餘,心中暗笑。   超人的鴻圖大志,磊落情懷,你們萎瑣的心思何能識得?    It is at this point and nowhere else that one must make a start if one is to understand what Zarathustra’s intentions are: the species of man he delineates delineates  reality as it is: he is strong enough for it—he is not estranged from or entranced by it, he is reality itself, he still has all that is fearful and questionable in reality in him, only thus can man possess greatness…    就在此刻此地,蘇魯支的意圖展露無餘:他所創造的超人才是宏觀真正宇宙。他足夠堅強自創新世界。他並沒有疏離世界,也不是沾沾自喜,因為他已自成一世界。他的世界恢宏廣闊,令人肅然起敬。憑此胸襟人才夠得上「偉大」!           6  But there is also another sense in which I have chosen for myself the word immoralist as a mark of distinct and badge of honor; I am proud to possess this word which sets me off against the whole of humanity. No one has yet felt Christian morality as beneath him: that requires a height, a farsightedness, a hitherto altogether unheard-of psychological profundity and abysmalness.   但是我選用「背德思想家」這字眼尚有另一意義,就是表示尊崇。我很自負此字眼落在我身上,因為我有「自反而縮雖千萬人吾往矣」的氣概。直至目前都還沒有人發現,基督教道德觀配不上我們。我們人類需要更高瞻遠矚,博大精深的人生觀。直至現在,所有思想家都繞著基督教道德觀頂禮膜拜。在我之前,有誰膽敢闖入基督教聖堂,將污染世間的惡臭謊言找出來源?誰膽敢懷疑聖堂是真是假?在我之前,有那位哲學家是心理學家,而不是賣弄「理想」的高級騙子?從我開始,才真正有心理學。打前鋒的難免頭破血流,這畢竟是我的命運。我自知危險所在,因為我也是第一位嚮往超人,藐視俗眾,睥睨一切。            

Why Am I So Clever?

November 19, 2007

 

Why I Am So Clever

By Nietzsche

Ecce Home

   Why do I know a few more things? Why am I so clever altogether? I have never reflected on questions that are none—I have not squandered myself.—I have ,for example, no experience of actual religious difficulties. I am entirely at a loss to know to what extent I ought to have felt ‘sinful’. I likewise lack a reliable criterion of a pang of conscience: from what one hears of it, a pang of conscience does not seem to me anything respectable…

為什麼我懂得比別人多?為什麼我如此聰明?因為有些瑣碎無聊的問題,我根本不屑一顧,我才不浪費我的寶貴時間。例如,我從未為實際的宗教問題所困擾。

所謂「原罪」我完全不予理會。「良心不安」對我而言也是缺乏可靠的準則。據我所知,人為「良心不安」所困擾,實在不是什麼光彩的事。

  I should not like to leave an act in the lurch afterwards, I would as a matter of principle prefer to leave the evil outcome, the consequences, out of the question of values. When the outcome is evil one can easily lose the true eye for one has done: a pang of conscience seems to me a kind of ‘evil eye’. To honor to oneself something that went wrong all the more because it went wrong—that rather would accord with my morality.—‘God’, ‘immortality of the soul’ ‘redemption’, ‘the Beyond’, all of them concepts to which I have given no attention and no time, not even as a child—perhaps I was never childish enough for it?

 我不想要把事情弄得曖昧不明。原則上,我寧可認為:「惡有惡報」的觀念,不涉及價值問題。因為它使我們無法正確地看待自己的所做所為。「良心不安」對我而言就是一種「惡報觀」。它本身就有問題,以問題來處理問題,還隆重得煞有其事,這是我的道德觀所無法接受的。「上帝」、「靈魂不朽」、「救贖」、「天堂」等等觀念,我即使在小時候,都不予理會,也沒有時間理會。可能我還不至於幼稚到相信這些。

   I have absolutely no knowledge of atheism as an outcome of reasoning, still less as an event: with me it is obviously by instinct. I am too inquisitive, too questionable, too high spirited to rest content with a crude answer. God is a crude answer, a piece of indelicacy against us thinkers—fundamentally even a crude prohibition to us: you shall not think! …I am interested in quite a different way in a question upon which the ‘salvation of mankind’ depends far more than it does upon any kind of quaint curiosity of the theologians; the question nutriment.

   我絕非有什麼無神論的知識來做推論或受到什麼影響。我純粹是靠著本能。我凡事喜歡追根究底、心靈崇高,簡陋的答案滿足不了我。「上帝」之說過於簡陋,對於我們思想家簡直是冒犯,本質上甚至還是禁令:你不可思想!「人類的救贖」這個問題,神學家費心思量,我卻寧可從「營養學」的觀點來探討。

  One can for convenience’ sake formulate it thus: ‘ how to nourish yourself so as to attain your maximum of strength, of virtue in the Renaissance style, of moraline-free virtue?’—My experiences here are as bad as they possibly could be; I am astonished that I heard this question so late, that I learned ‘reason’ from these experiences so late.

Only the perfect worthlessness of our German education—‘idealism’—can to some extent explain to me why on precisely this point I was backward to the point of holiness.

  為方便故,我這樣說明:吾人該如何滋養自己,以獲得最大力量,發展文藝復興的昂揚精神,及免於教條化的品德?我在這方面的心路歷程其實甚為坎坷,因為我聞道太遲,恨不得早得知此「窮理辯義」方式。原因是:我所受的德國教育,是「理想主義」,其實百無一用,以至於我對「營養學」之說,認識甚晚。

  The ‘education’ which from the first teaches one to lose sight of realities so as to hunt after altogether problematic, so-called ‘ideal’ objectives, ‘classical education’ for example—as if it were not from the first an utterly fruitless undertaking to try to unite ‘classical’ and German’ in one concept! It is, moreover, mirth-provoking—just think of a ‘classically education’ Leipziger!

   德國古典教育從一開頭,就教導我們忽視現實,以追尋大而無當的所謂「理想」,好像將「古典」與「德國」融合成為一體,到頭來就能有所成就一般。瞧瞧!這種「古典教育」所培養出來的德國公民,那副德性不禁令人發噱。

  Until my very maturest years I did in fact eat badly—in the language of morals ‘ impersonally’, ‘selflessly’, ‘altruistically’, for the salvation of cooks and other fellow Christians. With the aid of Leipzig cookery, for example, which accomplished my earliest study of Schopenhauer, I very earnestly denied my ‘will to live’. To ruin one’s stomach so as to receive inadequate nutriment—the aforesaid cookery seems to me to solve the problem wonderfully well.

   從小到大,我的精神食糧確實營養太差。那些道德字眼:「客觀」、「無私」、「利他」,都是當時烹調給基督徒享用的。在這些精神廚師的調養之下,再加上我早年閱讀叔本華的悲觀哲學,我幾乎要拒絕我的「生命意志」了!營養不良,終於弄壞我的胃腸。正本清原,我還是要回到以上所說的「營養學」才能解決。

   

Why Am I So Wise?

November 19, 2007


@font-face { font-family: 新細明體; } @font-face { font-family: @新細明體; } @page {mso-page-border-surround-header: no; mso-page-border-surround-footer: no; } @page Section1 {size: 595.3pt 841.9pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin: 42.55pt; mso-footer-margin: 49.6pt; mso-paper-source: 0; layout-grid: 18.0pt; } P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: “Times New Roman”; mso-style-parent: “”; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt } P.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } LI.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } DIV.MsoDocumentMap { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; BACKGROUND: navy; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-pagination: none; mso-fareast-font-family: 新細明體; mso-font-kerning: 1.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: “Times New Roman” } DIV.Section1 { page: Section1 }

Why I Am So Wise

                  1

The fortunateness of my existence, its uniqueness perhaps, lies in its fatality: to express it in the form of a riddle, as my father I have already died, as my mother I still live and grow old. This twofold origin, as it were from the highest and the lowest rung of the ladder of life, at once decadent and beginning—this if anything explains that neutrality, that freedom from party in relation to the total problem of life which perhaps distinguishes me.

 

為何我如此智慧

我何幸生而為人,獨立特行,注定踽踽獨行,宛如難解之謎。我猶如自己生父,前世已不可考。我又如自己生母,現在仍生存,而且已漸老邁。生命的階梯需有雙重起源,最高為父,最低為母。既是沒落,又是開始。兩者兼俱使我能離群索居,截然不同於云云眾生。

 

I have a subtler sense for signs of ascent and decline than any man has ever had, I am the teacher par excellence in this matter—I know both, I am both.—My father died at the age of thirty-six; he was delicate, lovable and morbid, like a being destined to pay this world only a passing—a gracious reminder of life rather than life itself. In the same year in which his life declined mine too declined: in the thirty-sixth year of my life I arrived at the lowest point of my vitality—I still lived, but without being able to see three places in front of me.

 

對於上昇和沒落的種種跡象我比認何人都敏感。對此我不用他人指點,因為我瞭解這兩者,我自己就是兼有上昇和沒落。我父親三十六歲過世,他身體羸弱,文質彬彬。對於如此弱不禁風的人,人生只是浮光掠影,而非真槍實彈。跟父親一樣,我的生命也在同一年沒落。在三十六歲時,我的生命陷入精力的最低潮。我雖然活著,但已前途渺茫。

 

At that time—it was 1879—I relinquished my Basel professorship, lived through the summer like a shadow in St.Moritze and the following winter, the most sunless of my life, as a shadow in Naumburg. This was my minimum: “ The Wanderer and his Shadow” came to existence during the course of it. I undoubtedly knew all about shadows in those days….

 

1879年,我我放棄在貝斯爾的教授職位,整個夏天,像個影子般索居聖摩力斯,隨後冬天,移居南柏閣,同樣像影子般黯淡無光。這是我作品最少的一年。這段期間,我只寫了「流浪者及其影子」。不可諱言,當時我對影子感觸頗深。

 

In the following winter, the first winter I spent in Genoa, that sweetening and spiritualization which is virtually inseparable from an extreme poverty of blood and muscle produced ‘ Daybreak’ . The perfect brightness and cheerfulness, even exuberance of spirit reflected in the said work is in my case compatible not only with the profoundest physiological weakness, but even with an extremity of pain.

 

翌年冬天,我首次在皆偌亞過冬,由於身體貧血嚴重,肌肉軟弱,自然傾向於喜好甜美和靈性上的事物,就這樣我寫了「黎明」。這篇作品喜氣洋洋,靈思煥發,

正是身體上的委靡不振,痛苦萬分所激發的渴望。

 

(譯者言:國家亦是如此,越是國勢武力積弱的國家,越是強調其精神文明,自卑補償心理也。)

 

In the midst of the torments which attended an uninterrupted three-day headache accompanied by the laborious vomiting of phlegm—I possessed a dialectical clarity par excellence and thought my way very cold-bloodedly through things for which when I am in better health I am not enough of a climber, not refined, not cold enough.

 

我連續頭痛三日,費力嘔吐痰血。就在受盡折騰之際,我的頭腦思辯卻特別清晰。於是心平氣和地將此作品一氣呵成。假如我身體健康,我反而無法足夠精湛、足夠冷靜完成此艱辛鉅作。

 

My readers perhaps know the extent to which I regard dialectics as a symptom of decadence, for example in the most famous case of all: in the case of Socrates.—All morbid disturbances of the intellect, even that semi-stupefaction consequent on fever, have remained to this day totally unfamiliar things to me, on their nature and frequency I had first to instruct myself by scholarly methods. My blood flows slowly. No one has ever been able to diagnose fever in me. A doctor who treated me for some time as a nervous case said at last: “ No! there is nothing wrong with your nerves, it is only I who am nervous.”

 

讀者可能知道,為什麼我視思維為頹廢的病徵。最明顯的例子是蘇格拉底。隨著發高燒之後,陷入半昏迷狀態,思潮反而澎湃翻騰,此時所激發的東西直至今日我尚不甚瞭然。更不用說要如何以學者的研究方法分析發作性質及頻率了。有位醫生有段時間曾診斷我是神經質,最後說:「不!你的神經沒毛病,我自己的神經才有問題。」

 

Any kind of local degeneration absolutely undemonstrable; or organically originating stomach ailment, though there does exist, as a consequence of general exhaustion, a profound weakness of the gastric system. Conditions of the eyes, sometimes approaching dangerously close to blindness, also only consequence, not causal; so that with every increase in vitality eyesight has also again improved.  Convalescence means with me a long, all too long succession of years—it also unfortunately means relapse, deterioration, periods of a kind of decadence. I spelled it out forwards and backwards.

 

思維的澎湃絕對無法從局部病狀來說明。也無法歸因於引起胃痛的器官,雖然精疲力盡之後,胃腸系統會非常虛弱。眼睛的情況有時危險到將近盲目,不過,那是結果,而不是原因。因為隨著精力的逐漸增加,眼力也隨之好轉。我花了很長久的時間才康復,中間還不幸地時常復發、惡化和頹廢。經歷這些後,我還需要說:我瞭解什麼叫頹廢嗎?頹廢對我而言已是如數家珍了。

 

Even that filigree art of grasping and comprehending in general, that finger for nuances, that psychology of ‘ looking around the corner’ and whatever else characterizes me was learned only then, is the actual gift of that time in which everything in me became more subtle, observation itself together with all the organs of observation.

 

領悟力和理解力的細膩功夫,分析力的明察秋毫,旁敲側擊的心理手法,任何我的特長都是當時得來。我身上的每一樣,觀察力以及觀察的器官都變得微妙敏銳,

都是當時實際上的所獲得的。

 

To look from a morbid perspective towards healthier concepts and values, and again conversely to look down from the abundance and certainty of rich life into the secret labor of the instinct of decadence—that is what I have practiced most, it has been my own particular field of experience, in this if in anything I am a master. I now have the skill and knowledge to invert perspectives: first reason why a ‘ revaluation of values’ is perhaps possible at all to me alone.

 

從病態的觀點展望更健康的觀念和價值,然後再倒過來,從充實生活的意氣昂揚俯視頹廢本能的萎靡不振,這是我曾反復演練過的。可說是我的特別專長,我是個中高手。現在我擁有把不同觀點顛倒觀察的能耐跟知識。這就是為什麼若要重新評估生命的價值,我是最佳人選了。

               2

 

   Setting aside the fact that I am a decadent, I also its antithesis. My proof of this is, among other things, that in combating my sick conditions I always instinctively chose the right means: while the decadent as such always chooses the means harmful to him. As summa summarum I was healthy, as corner, as speciality I was decadent. That energy for absolute isolation and detachment from my accustomed circumstances, the way I compelled myself no longer to let myself be cared for, served, doctored—this betrayed an unconditional certainty of instinct as to what at that time was needful above all else.

 

   姑且不論我是頹廢者,我也是積極向上者。在跟病魔搏鬥時,頹廢者總是處於不利的挨打立場,我總卻總是本能地選擇有利的角度反撲,就足以證明。大體而言,我是健康的,只偶爾局部角落我才顯得頹廢。我有精力完全擺脫捨棄我已習慣的環境,從零開始;我強迫自己不再接受照顧、服侍、或醫生治療;這些都顯露出,在當下最迫切的時刻,我當機立斷的豪氣。

 

   I took myself in hand, I myself made myself healthy again: the precondition for this—every physiologist will admit it—is that one is fundamentally healthy. A being who is typically morbid cannot become healthy, still less can he make himself healthy; conversely, for one who is typically healthy being sick can even be an energetic stimulant to life, to more life.

 

   我採取自救措施;使自己重新獲得健康。先決條件是:我體質上就是健康的。

這一點醫生都認同。若天生就是弱不禁風,怎樣也健康不了。相反的,天生健康的人,病魔來襲更能激發生命潛力,更意氣風發。

 

   Thus in fact does that long period of sickness seem to me now; I discovered life as it were anew, myself included, I tasted all good and even petty things in a way that others could not easily taste them—I made out of my will to health, to life, my philosophy….For pay heed to this: it was in the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-recovery forbade to me a philosophy of indigence and discouragement…

  因此,對那段生病的漫長時期,我的心得是:我重新恢復生命的原來面貌; 我品嚐到生命的崇高及卑微,這是別人無法輕易做到的。  我靠自己意志力得到健康,生命和自己的哲學。請注意:就在我精力最低潮的時候,我不再是悲觀主義者。我自我復健的本能使我無法接受貧瘠洩氣的悲觀哲學。

 

     And in what does one really recognize that someone has turned out well! In that a human being who has turned out well does our senses good: that he is carved out of wood at once hard, delicate and sweet-smelling. He has a taste only for what is beneficial to him; his pleasure, his joy ceases where the measure of what is beneficial is overstepped. He divines cures for injuries, he employs ill chances to his own advantage; what does not kill him makes him stronger. Out of everything he sees, hears, experiences he instinctively collects together his sum: he is a principle of selection, he rejects much.

 

   那麼要怎樣我們才真正體認到結果是最好呢?那就是:懂得尊重自己感官的人結果最好。人的雕琢木料是既堅硬、又脆弱、卻芬芳。人喜愛對自己有利益的東西。若自己的利益的衡量受到違背,人怎樣也快樂高興不起來。人受傷時會自覓治療的方法。遇霉運當頭,也會設法轉危為安。死亡的威脅只是使人更堅強。人會從所看、所聽、所經驗當中,累積自己的一套本領:人懂得選擇;人也知道要不斷捨棄。

 

  He is always in his company, whether he traffics with books, people or landscapes: he does honor when he chooses, when he admits, when he trusts. He reacts slowly to every kind of stimulus, with that slowness which a protracted caution and a willed pride have bred in him—he tests an approaching stimulus, he is far from going out to meet it. He believes in neither ‘ misfortune’ nor in ‘guilt’ “ he knows how to forget—he is strong enough for everything to have to turn out for the best for him. Very well, I am the opposite of a decadent: for I have just described myself.

 

  人總是在群體當中,不論跟他所交往的是書、是人們、或是風景。人在選擇時、認同時、信任時,表現最為崇高。遇到外來刺激時,人會從容反應。然後在從容中謹慎衡量,維護自我的意志尊嚴。刺激逼近時,人會先行測試,不會冒然投入。人決不信「噩運」或「原罪」之說。該遺忘時,人會懂得遺忘。為了結果對人有利益,人要足夠堅強。好了,這就是跟頹廢者表現大大不同的地方。我剛才所描述的就是我自己。

                  3

 The twofold succession of experiences, this accessibility to me of apparently separate worlds, is repeated in my nature in every respect—I am a Doppelganger, I have a ‘second’ face in addition to the first one. And perhaps also a third…Even by virtue of my descent I am permitted to look beyond all merely locally, merely nationally conditioned perspectives, it costs me no effort to be a ‘good European’.

     既是頹廢者,又是積極向上者。這雙重經驗的迭替,顯示我能進入兩種截然不同的世界。這在我天性中處處表露無餘。我像是幽靈化身,不僅擁有第二臉孔,可能還有第三臉孔。由於我祖先自外地遷來,我思想宏觀,超越狹隘的國家局限,放眼歐洲,對我並非難事。

 

   On the other hand I am perhaps more German than present-day Germans, mere Reich Germans, are still capable of being—I the last anti-political German. And yet my ancestors were Polish noblemen: I have preserved from them much racial instinct, who knows? Ultimately even the liberum veto. When I consider how often I am addressed as a Pole and by Poles themselves, how rarely I am taken for a German, it might appear that German has only been sprinkled on to me.

 

   另一方面,比起今日德意志帝國的德國人,我是更道地的德國人,因為我不受政治所局限。可是我祖先是荷蘭貴族,血濃於水,種族本能可能尚存,甚至因而時常被認定是荷蘭人。我雖然一心要當德國人,人家不認我,心中難免有戚戚焉。

         4

  I have never understood the art of arousing enmity towards myself—this too I owe to my incomparable father—even when it seemed to me very worthwhile to do so. However unchristian it may seem, I am not even inimical towards myself, one may turn my life this way and that, one will only rarely, at bottom only once, discover signs that anyone has borne ill will towards me—perhaps, however, somewhat too many signs of good will..

 

   感謝父親的教誨,我學會如何善待自己。