"The World as Will and Representation" was a book first published in 1818. A second two volume edition was published in 1844.
Reacquainting ourselves with the spelling of Schopenhauer's name reminds me how much I enjoy his understanding of Will and how much sense it makes to me. What hints at his character and genius will in my last days remain his assurance to me and to anyone who would listen that Hegel was a charlatan, a chicken shit - my words - and a paid lackey of the Prussian State.
Difficult to think of Schopenhauer as anyone's disciple, his purpose in life seems to have been to ferociously disagree with everyone on principle, but lucky for his disciples he was able to give us all hope by fundamentally disagreeing with Kant on one very important aspect of Kant's thinking.
Kant's thing-in-itself, his ding an sich - the true underlying reality - was unknowable. Schopenhauer's ding and sich was very knowable because we can feel it, experience it, it was there whether we liked it or not, nothing we could do about it, and essentially it was the source of all misery, discord and the awfulness of having to go though life as a human. Hegel was a moron, a weak minded idealist.....
"Can you remind me what it was?"
Schopenhauer called it The Will. It wasn't thoughtful, it wasn't conscious - consciousness for Schopenhauer was derived from the brain, consciousness was put there to serve as an indentured servant to The Will - the will itself had no plan or reason, it had no clue what it was doing, it was an endless, whining, urge to exist, force itself onwards into ever expanding nothingness, it was quite insatiable.
And it was everywhere, in the sea, the mountains, on the way up to his rented rooms, it was in plants, animals, even in the seamstress who took him to court for pushing her downstairs because she was talking to loudly to his neighbor while he was busy solving the problems of the universe.
The world and everything in it was a representation of The Will, and depressing though it was, its true underlying reality was absolutely knowable. And yes indeed, a lonely life was his, a Saint in a land of the heathen, until he came across a a book called Oupnek'hat - translates as 'Secrets to be Safeguarded.'
The book that gave Schopenhauer what he called "the solace of my life and the solace of my death" was published in 1801 in Berlin. It was a Latin translation of a 17th Century Persian phonetic rendering of a Sanskrit text which contained the Upanishads, or some of them. The Upanishads are a collection of hymns from the late Bronze early Iron Age in North Western India that greatly contribute to later movements of thinking within the many and splendid directions of the Hindu Religion.
"Schopenhauer found solace?"
He did. He called it solace, no holding back, he wasn't ashamed to admit Oupnek'hat was a comfort from anguish. Like many he was generally disgusted by the inadequacies and convictions of conventional theism, but more than that the Vedic texts confirmed his own directions in philosophy, and it's always good for us people to bathe in those moments when we don't feel shunned, alone and surrounded by idiots.
Instead, as confirmed by the ancient texts, the world was an illusion, a veil of multiplicity, a subjective abundance, the truth so much deeper, the best you could do is belong to it. Liberation from suffering was a denial of will, quietness, renunciation and the death of ego. But again, Schopenhauer didn't completely agree with scholarship from the East, he was still totally miserable, doggedly going were few had been before him.
The understanding of the underlying Will he shared with the Hindu tradition remained what he thought of as a unity reaching out, always reaching. But, as the Vedic scholars saw it the Gods didn't come first, they came afterwards, their underlying Will like Schopenhauer's had always been, not as a blind all-encompassing unity of some sort of un-directed purposelessness, it was a supreme intelligence, it was absolute unity, it was bliss, it was Teresa of Avila's wordless prayer that god was more than words, that god was real.
Yes indeed, to loosely quote our man, "reading is thinking with another's mind," and thinking with another man's mind just wasn't something Schopenhauer was prepared to do.



