Nietzsche's Ring of Eternal Recurrence | Thus Spoke Zarathustra

[@chaosphilosophorum]

00:00 - The Eternal Recurrence 06:04 - The Song of the Seven Seals 13:07 - A Letter To Zarathustra A Letter To Zarathustra - When the first realisation of the ring of recurrence dawned upon man, did not a light capsule of the eternal past thaw and shock the air with its electric charge? Has such a charge not since put all time into a state of flux? Would you, Zarathustra, still proclaim with loud cries that all that is to become has run the cart of time to the present, could you still praise such a song as your greatest joy? If one could only breathe into the world infinities small, they would surely craft infinities large! If it was left for one to only still, break the ring! Beyond this ring lies the greatest eternity, the insatiable gnawing of a new death, of which one could only crawl out of its jaws limbless and mauled, the flight of the most light and beautiful from this death and all that has been swallowed inside its cave of refuge, then the eternity of forgetfulness, the great erase of all infinities, and the erase of that which erases. Where would one have to stand now to cry for such rings! On no mountain, no high place amongst seas and abysses, no, one would have to stand in the doorway of all truth, in the smallest gap among doors of fire and bondage. One would have to stand in the person that is! Not the person that has been. And once one stands here, one must cast his gaze elsewhere. Into the great forgetfulness we must march! O woe to your ring, Zarathustra! I see your ring, and with sight I turn your ring spiral. This spiral will grow wild and blossom into new beauties, half old, so is the prophecy I speak unto you. And as for your lust for rings, lust is truly the glue of all bondage, the glue that joins your ring doggedly from head to feet. Stand now! I command you! Stand! When struck you breathe your life into the cave of the devourer, walk with me and see the many whom have lit torches in this cave, who have drawn their drawings on the walls and have not yet been detected by the spider. You see, even the most poisonous of spiders still lurks away from the flicker of flame. Surely one should mistrust he who speaks from lust! For whom can lust without doggedness? Man walks a tightrope across infinity and the roaring of the abyss below him makes him fall, fall into his beginning, his dogged, woeful beginning! Shame to those who gaze below and fall, one would rather gaze for ropes to swing to new heights, should one fall, they will surely fall into your ring! Should one climb, one will surely say, I have seen to it that no more rings will be demented and conjoined, head to toe! Woe be to your ring, O Zarathustra!

[@HeloIV]

Great writing!

[@chaosphilosophorum]

@@HeloIV thank you very much!

[@johannmatthee5727]

If it would not be to much to ask, if you could give a brief analysis of your poem that would also be extremely nice. I think I understand it in part, but as someone who likes to write poems as well, I know that sometimes people misinterpret key things, due to a difference in symbolic connections and metaphors.

[@chaosphilosophorum]

@@johannmatthee5727 The main way I see Nietzsche's recurrence to be limiting is that it seems to promote the return of our greatest woes and joys to be the most fulfilling desire. If I were to give a brutally Nietzschean criticism of this, I would say I'm suspect that this is nothing but a fear of woes beyond what we've imagined before, and an inability to love beyond our greatest joys we've yet experienced. Why will recurrence if not for the belief that what we have achieved is the highest we were capable of? Perhaps it is because his greatest woe has been manageable, and his greatest joy safe. I say safe joy is an inability to love sufficiently. Maybe rings are suitable, but only to the person that is, not the person that has returned, otherwise one lusts for the bondage of their soul. Let us march into the great forgetfulness, where goals of infinity move past us as we reach them, everything changing evermore. Let all be erased in pursuit of the light until that which erases is itself erased, and all is one. This life affirming, but also deadly and terrifying path is hospitable to those of the brightest flame. At the time of writing this I started listening to Thoth's emerald tablets, which seemed to overlap with these thoughts, which has been interesting to me. If I'm not mistaken they're one of the most ancient sources of religious wisdom we have, they sound incredibly schizoid but are beautiful to listen to, I'd definitely recommend them if you had the time. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4LXdnlmodqWqJY

[@malcomchristopher7188]

I like this...I have been having similar thoughts, about the opposite of things The circle of life is,things like the Ouroboros snake make it appear much more older and archetypal, but as you have reading the emerald tablets,from the Hermetic principles all truths are half truths, the opposite of the eternal recurrence which is static would be the eternal spiral of flux..the one and its multiplicity The one eternally returns to itself but in multiplicity

[@Elijah-hp1yi]

Underrated, people don’t understand nor appreciate

[@pablo3168]

Best ad I've ever got

[@JohnnyHofmann]

Ahh… A coffee, a nice afternoon breeze, and a new Chaos Philosophorum video… Life is good. Great video, really enjoyed. I recently bought a 6 book dostoevsky collection. I’m now looking into getting some of Nietzsche’s work. It seemed to me that a lot of what Neitzsche said was predicated on the negation of an afterlife or God. If I understood it correctly, it was as if he was saying not to tamper to thoughts of prolongation after this life because we can’t yet handle this one, and there’s still desires to manage here in this time. I’m sure you can see a lot of the issues with this, generally speaking. Again, I’m not familiar with his work (I will be soon), but it seems to me that he wasn’t a stoic or at least not superficially. One has said the best way to meet your desires is to limit them. Or maybe life is too cruel to try and get what you want, so change what you want into something life gives abundantly. It seems so difficult to discuss these things because it rests so heavily on the assumption or rejection of God’s existence if God would be the type of being that would oblige moral commands. If it’s true that the afterlife is an impending reality and there is a criteria to meet to get to the good afterlife (eternity with God), then to try and reach all of life’s Initial “carnal” desires in order to satisfy ones self currently would be akin to rearranging furniture in a burning house. On the contrary, if God’s existence isn’t an actual and there’s is no afterlife (not that this is the only option as a black and white fallacy, but it may be) along with no binding moral obligations or any objective meaning, then Nietzsche would be much more accurate in my opinion. (Again, take all I say with much salt). This seems to show that this all hinges upon further questions ie. Gods existence, moral obligations, ultimate meaning, potential afterlife, etc. So, honestly, if I met Nietzsche, I wouldn’t know whether to discuss utilitarianism or God’s existence Lol because it seems as though God’s being real or not is of paramount importance to all questions. I can’t help but notice (albeit, I don’t think Nietzsche ever explicitly claimed nihilism) that Nietzsche, seemingly leaning nihilistic, dealt so thoroughly regarding trying to reform human thought. It seemed he had quite an agenda for a nihilist also given his fecundity in writing. In my personal opinion, through my thinking and experience, “nihilist” SUCK at being nihilist lol to the point that I don’t think the title “nihilist” is even practical. I have so many thoughts I would love to share regarding these things, but a KZbin comment wouldn’t suffice lol. I can’t Wait to get into some Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. Gonna be a lot of fun. Also, I watched a movie last night called “Melancholia”, directed by Lars von Trier, and it was very thought provoking in my opinion. I almost want to say it had a nihilistic framework but that seems so paradoxical to claim a movie (a means by which to convey meaning) has a nihilistic substrate. I recommend you give it a watch. And, of course, great video as always. Keep it up. (:

[@chaosphilosophorum]

Sounds like the perfect afternoon ;) From what I've gathered, Nietzsche seems to suspect the idea of God himself is just a creation to serve life. A creation to deal with chaos and depravity, in order to fulfill the original theologians will to power. This is why he criticised Christianity as being 'slave morality', an attempt for the weak to gain the upper hand on their masters. He does a devastating job as this critic, although I think its undoubtedly flawed in major ways. Something I've always wondered is what Nietzsche would think of genuine religious and mystical experience, since I haven't seen his criticisms extend that far. It seems clear to me that religious belief is far more than a creation of man, despite how much religious stories vary and claim truth to certain historical events. Have you looked much into jung? A big part of his work was a criticism of the Nietzschian way of thinking. Nietzsche is a joy to read though, while taking a long time to digest. You'll have a lot of fun when it comes to reading his works. Thank you for your interesting thoughts as always, I'd agree with you that no true nihilism can exist, the world is only perceived through belief and meaning. I'll be sure to check that film out soon, too. Have a good day my friend.

[@johannmatthee5727]

@@chaosphilosophorum you claim Jung, what books of his work would you recommend? I have recently purchase Thus Spake Zarathustra, but I have not read a letter of it. I would like to know what books from Jung you would recommend, since I find Jung's ideas on the shadow, the self and the collective unconscious very interesting, although do find Jungs interpretation of God a bit on the avangard side, due to my lacking knowledge in his book, The Answer To Job.

[@chaosphilosophorum]

@@johannmatthee5727 The archetypes of the collective unconscious is a good place to start, Aion is one of his most mystifying books, too. There is another channel, UberBoyo, that did a video series breaking down Aion over about 30 lectures. They're great fun, would definitely recommend.

[@johannmatthee5727]

@@chaosphilosophorum Thank you very much, I was also wonder how do study a topic for a video? I know the comment place is not the best place to discuss this, but I was just curious, you seem to be well informed and your videos are always fascinating. Hope I am not to much a nuisance.

[@chaosphilosophorum]

@@johannmatthee5727 Not at all! A lot of my free time is spent watching philosophy videos and reading books I hear about, but I might start studying philosophy and theology at university soon.

[@augustinedennis4865]

And along with eternal recurrence in time,how about spatial,parallel ,exactly similar events occurring simultaneously ,endlessly,across the endless,Godless wastes of Space,as well as in time?

[@fernandoorozco5968]

Love it