Yeah who just mentioned N’s reference to the Brahmin regarding the abstinence from masturbation and sex? It was superstar I think. Yeah I remember that context now, thank you (from GOM I think). I think he goes on drawing comparisons between the asceticism of the western priestly type and the eastern Buddhists. The former’s self denial is like a sickness, while the monk’s self denial is out of a surplus of strength, discipline and fortitude. Although both are willingly nihilistic, the reasons behind those two nihilisms are quite different; a Christian interpretation presents man as a miserable, pitiable creature who is in all kinds of trouble from the moment of birth. The Buddhists present man as an arbitrary event that might as well be an accident, and a life that is neither good or bad, no god watching it all, and nothing to do for the rest of eternity but exist… unless to want to forfeit the whole thing and achieve nirvana.
I think You’re right, in respect to H. However, depth as a transcendent or an imminence is another subtle distinction, which only appears as lack of depth. This is what I mean by a hiddenness. In Nietzche’s case this hiddenness is illusion, it is a matter of appearances, in the formal sense, in Hemmingway it’s an allusion, not much hidden, but written in levels, where some content has to be inferred. It’s all there, but it can be taken this way, or, that way.
I bet H read N.
Yes, H read ‘Zarathustra’ latter on in life, not in college, though. There is connection there, and possibly influence, but not the way they went about their writing.
As far as the analogy between ying -yang and Appolonian-Dyonisian, there was no linkage for Nietzche, since he disdained Buddhism. He called
Kant Chinese, but perhaps as a jest.
To a modern mind, ex post facto, the similarity is there, though.
The masturbatory guilt ,by which so many minds were effected by various kinds of insanity, are also suspect in N, however one wants to interpret Wagner’s comments about it. Nowadays it is simply a laughable leitmotif.
The practice of Kundalini Yoga, was equally shrouded in ignorance, vs. Reichian views clashed with them. Suppression vs. expression has proved equally unmoderated hypothesis, still bound within the incrementally large brush strokes of pre existential Kierkegaard.
As tasteless this critique might have appeared to the pre existentialists, Nietzhe foremost among them, it’s credibility should not be dismissed out of bounds, because of conventional repulsion, but overcome by humanistic needs of tolerance and betterment. Yo any readers, not willing to look at possible underlying motives, this may seem a wate of time. To others yet, it may deserve a hearing.
Tragedy is never what might have been; it’s about what will never be again.