The playground is an interesting situation. Rife with a necessity to dominance or at least capability within the dominating group, but plagued by inexperience and inability. Not yet has each child been either distilled and bitterly restrained by institutions older and more powerful than they, or developed the rewarding reservation of judgement that has the potential to assist later in life. Reservation that opens up opportunities to come to know alternative forms of capability and power, thus flexibility and more rounded security.
Playground bullies are cruel because they are controlled by their need to exert dominance in the only ways they know how, being so haunted by their inabilities in the many other ways in which they have yet to learn capability. In the playground, they have an outlet that sublimates their frustrations of weakness in other areas. Their path is to remain cruel, at least until they are subsequently thrust into of the plight of the weak under new reversed circumstances, because they have only ever known capability in such narrow channels, and as such their hauntedness of inability in other areas persists further.
The bullied - or in your words, the normal - are doomed to renounce their associations with the grounds on which the bullies win, and so they band together to collectively share submissive reassurance in the face of their shame. They don’t envy the bullies, but they envy their power. Their path is to make it their life-long task to succeed in other areas, and to belittle the areas in which they failed so monumentally - to cover up this shame. Some taste dominence in new subsequent petty ways that they find themselves unable to stop exploiting to sublimate this terrible shame.
Each of the above are weak who struggle to hold onto a niche of strength. But in rare cases of huge potential and unrelenting will, there is inability to join the playground elite and refusal to stand down in shame with the wretched ‘normal’. They are forced to carve their own way as an individual, yet remain plagued by the mysteries of their rejection. Often they filter off into creative pockets of solitude, but in rarer cases still, they learn to succeed in the ways they refused and in the ways they failed. Yet neither is marginalised nor clung onto, so true freedom reveals itself. These are the strong and so they subsequently reject the bullies and bullied as the weak excuses of strength that they are. They can immerse themselves within ALL aspects of life, yet find none satisfying to their strength as long as they are accompanied by the narrow weak.
I do not bully you, you mistake my exertion of passion and its minimal but appropriate restraint which merely wishes to carry with it, the proper exposition of its beauty. Such is my offering that I do not give out of morals, principles or ethics, but out of sublimated overflowing will and power. Not to dominate, but to demonstrate dominance and tempt you with it as something to take that is so extremely rewarding. Thus I am benevolent but cold, until ignited by rewarding returns of inciteful passion from another!
But first you must renounce your narrowing principles that give your inabilities away as the strengths of others that you oppose. I only oppose weakness because I do not want to have to pity, nor to be restricted only to engagement with ‘last men’ who live the longest, trapped in the most restricted weakness.
As for these Upanishads, I came across them after my formulation of the above ideas that Nietzsche backs up and contributed most pleasantly towards, upon my highest fortune to read him when I did. I suppose it would be a sermon if I was just quoting them, but in actual fact I oppose many aspects of the Upanishads. For example they privilege peace and calm over explosive messy passion. They also talk of life outside of real life with implications of rebirth and the spirit as separate from the body. More ludicrous abstractions of real life that may as well give birth to proposterous notions such as God!
How can I be anything other than certain when my life is so continously and obviously immediate to me and any propositions of life outside of life are just naive culminations of abstractions FROM real life taken OUT of context. If only these abstraction artists knew what they were talking about and they would realise that in order for these abstractions to make sense and actually WORK, they would resemble this exact real life - the ONLY source from which they have been able to draw upon all along!!
I am original because I draw from the origin of myself and the existence that is me. Original texts that I come to read merely inspire and broaden that which I take into account, only to confirm it later with myself and make up my own mind. This is what originality is.