Romanian-American historian, writer, philosopher and professor at the University of Chicago (1907–1986)
Mircea Eliade (13 March 1907 {O.S. 28 February} – 22 April 1986) was a Romanian historian of religion, fiction writer, philosopher, and professor at the University of Chicago. His most enduring and influential contribution to religious studies was possibly his theory of Eternal Return, which holds that myths and rituals do not simply record or imitate hierophanies, but, at least to the minds of the religious, actually participate in them.
From: Wikiquote (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Odată, când eram mic, mă întorceam acasă într-un car cu fân. Asta se petrecea la via noastră de lângă Râmnicu-Sărat. Adormisem și m-am trezit deodată, singur în carul cu fân - și deasupra mea erau numai stele. Erau numai stele. Și parcă totul se oprise pe loc. Parcă timpul nu mai curgea. Nu erau decât stele.
Voiam, insa, ca-pana atunci- sa nu tradez nimic din zbuciumul, din intunecimile si flacarile sufletului meu. [...]
Voiam sa trec printre semeni neluat in seama. Sa fiu crezut un adolescent urat si plicticos- si cu toate acestea sa am cugetul si sufletul desprinse din stanca. Sa izbucnesc dintr-o data, coplesind turma taratorilor si uluind neputinta celor care m-au cunoscut si m-au dispretuit. Sa-i biciuesc si sa le necinstesc fetele si sa ma desfat simtindu-mi trupul galgaind de viata rodnica si creatoare.
Nu mi-a placut sa am prieteni. N-am vrut sa-mi descopar sufletul adolescentilor livizi si melancolici. Mandria ca port in mine o taina pe care n-o ghiceste nimeni mi-ajungea.
Si gandul ca voi infricosa candva cetele oamenilor de carne- ma imbata. Eu stiam cine sunt. Si lucrul acesta imi umplea sufletul cu o nemarginita incredere si ma silea sa-mi incordez bratele ca pentru lupta. Cu atat mai mult cu cat nimeni nu banuia cine sunt si ce voi putea ajunge.
...Dar n-a fost asa. Mi-am cautat si eu, ca toti oamenii slabi, prieteni. Mi-am descoperit si eu sufletul cersind mangaiere si sprijin. Am tradat colturi din taina mea si am lasat sa se vada ceea ce nu trebuia sa cunosc decat eu. M-am vrut neindurat. Si n-am izbutit. Am fost schimbacios si plin de compromisuri, ca orice adolescent. Am facut si eu glume, am ras si eu mai mult decat era nevoie, mi-am risipit si eu timpul in vorba cu colegi imbecili si prieteni plictisitori, am dormit si eu opt ore ca toti ceilalti, am ratacit si eu seara, pe strazi ,murmurand confesiuni[...]
Si nu numai atat. Am nesocotit cea mai frumoasa hotarare a mea: aceea de a pastra in mine, pana la desavarsire, tot ceea ce nazuiam sa impart mai tarziu celorlalti.
If Samkhya-Yoga philosophy does not explain the reason and origin of the strange partnership between the spirit and experience, at least tries to explain the nature of their association, to define the character of their mutual relations. These are not real relationships, in the true sense of the word, such as exist for example between external objects and perceptions. The true relations imply, in effect, change and plurality, however, here we have some rules essentially opposed to the nature of spirit.
“States of consciousness” are only products of prakriti and can have no kind of relation with Spirit the latter, by its very essence, being above all experience. However and for SamPhya and Yoga this is the key to the paradoxical situation the most subtle, most transparent part of mental life, that is, intelligence (buddhi) in its mode of pure luminosity (sattva), has a specific quality that of reflecting Spirit. Comprehension of the external world is possible only by virtue of this reflection of purusha in intelligence. But the Self is not corrupted by this reflection and does not lose its ontological modalities (impassibility, eternity, etc.). The Yoga-sutras (II, 20) say in substance: seeing (drashtri; i.e., purusha) is absolute consciousness (“sight par excellence”) and, while remaining pure, it knows cognitions (it “looks at the ideas that are presented to it”). Vyasa interprets: Spirit is reflected in intelligence (buddhi), but is neither like it nor different from it. It is not like intelligence because intelligence is modified by knowledge of objects, which knowledge is ever-changing whereas purusha commands uninterrupted knowledge, in some sort it is knowledge. On the other hand, purusha is not completely different from buddhi, for, although it is pure, it knows knowledge. Patanjali employs a different image to define the relationship between Spirit and intelligence: just as a flower is reflected in a crystal, intelligence reflects purusha. But only ignorance
Sunt si alte lucruri esentiale pentru un tanar. Sunt lucruri care il privesc mai direct decat dragostea. Majoritatea oamenilor de astazi sunt umiliti de societate, sunt anihilati de evenimente. Aproape nimeni din noi nu mai poate creste in voie, nu-si mai poate implini destinul lui...Ideile care circula astazi fara a mai intampina vreo rezistenta, sentimentele-tipar, mari si sterpe, care ne coplesesc-atentatul acesta la fiinta noastra e mult mai grav. Tu nu crezi ca avem si alte datorii decat de a iubi o femeie pana la moarte?
"Man becomes aware of the sacred because it itself, shows itself, as something wholly different from the profane. [...] The modern Occidental experiences a certain uneasiness before many manifestations of the sacred. He finds it difficult to accept the fact that, for many human beings, the sacred can be manifested in stones or trees, for example. But as we shall soon see, what is involved is not a veneration of the stone in itself, a cult of the tree in itself. The sacred tree, the sacred stone are not adored as stone or tree; they are worshiped precisely because they are hierophanies, because they show something that is no longer stone or tree but the sacred, the "ganz andere". [...]
It is impossible to overemphasize the paradox represented by every hierophany, even the most elementary. By manifesting the sacred, any object becomes something else, yet it continues to remain itself, for it continues to participate in its surrounding cosmic milieu. A sacred stone remains a stone; apparently (or, more precisely, from the profane point of view), nothing distinguishes it from all other stones. But for those to whom a stone reveals itself as sacred, its immediate reality is transmuted into a supernatural reality. In other words, for those who have a religious experience all nature is capable of revealing itself as cosmic sacrality. The, cosmos in its entirety can become a hierophany."