Schopenhauer and the Philosophy of Desire
А. Ч. Бхактиведанта Свами Прабхупада
Главы
Material existence as a dreamlike state
This is Schopenhauer. For Schopenhauer, happiness is inactive satisfaction, inactivity, nirvana. The will to live is the irrational. What does he explain about the nirvana?
What, the will to live is the irrational urge that brings about all suffering. His is a philosophy of extinction. Now, in his first book, The World as Will and Idea, he ascribes to the philosophy of māyā, like Māyāvādī.
He writes, "The Vedas and Purāṇas have no better simile than a dream for the whole knowledge of the actual world, which they call the web of māyā, and they use none more frequently."
From this, Schopenhauer concludes that life is a long dream. What is this world of perception besides being my idea?
Is that of which I am conscious only as idea, exactly like my own body, of which I am doubly conscious, in one aspect as idea, in another aspect as will? So from this he concludes that life is a projection of the will.
Material life is a projection of... Yes. The will. Yes, that is... it is taken from Indian. It is called vāsanā. Vāsanā means desire. That desire, material desire, but the living entity, it cannot be desireless.
Desireless nirvana means material desires finish. But because the living entity is an eternal spiritual being, he has got spiritual desire. Now it is covered. The desire is there. Desire is a constant companion.
But because it is materially covered, we are thinking this temporary world as reality. And it is not reality; that is changing.
We are having different types of desires according to the body we get, and the soul is transmigrating in this material world from one body to another, and he's creating a certain type of desire, will.
And to fulfill that will, he is getting a different body, and by the supreme will.
He is willing, and the supreme will, God, Krishna, understanding his will, giving him facility to accept a certain pattern of circumstances, body, to fulfill his particular desire. And that is going on.
Therefore, uh, this vāsanā or will is the cause of his material existence constantly changing, and on account of changing will, his changing body— this is the complication of material existence.
Purifying desires and spiritual identity
Our Krishna consciousness movement is to teach the living entity that as a living being, you must have desires. If your desires are, um, stopped, then you become like stone.
So you have to, uh, cleanse this disease, uh, the diseased form of desire. And that is what sarvopādhi-vinirmuktam. Now the desires are according to the upādhi, according to the body. A man gets the body of an American.
He thinks, "America is my home, American nation, that my brother, American advancement is my business," so and so on. And as soon as it's changed, he's a Chinese man, again he thinks like Chinese. He got his body of a dog.
He's watching, "I am a dog. It's my business to bark." So this is all desires. So these desires are temporary. By one desire I get one body, then I desire another body, another body, it is body.
So that one is, in one sense, it is dream, that factually he cannot fulfill the desire. Dream, yes, there is so many different circumstances. They're all temporary.
So these at night with day... it is said for one hour or two hours, nobody sees one kind of dream for two hours. Say even two hours, then finish. Then another dream. So this change of body is also like a big dream.
At night we dream, we forget everything of our daily activities. And again, when the dream is finished, again we come to this body and we do something.
So in that sense, all material activities, subtle or gross, they are manifestation of different desires. That was the Māyāvādī philosophy they say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā, the dreamer is fact, but the dream is false.
That is, one says it is right. Well, our Vaiṣṇava philosophy is the same: that the dreamer is the living entity and the dream is temporary.
Therefore, the dreamer has to be brought to the real spiritual platform so that these material dreams, either in day or night, they can be extinguished. That is nirmala.
«sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena nirmalam hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate». When we give up these dreaming facts and come to the real fact, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is bhakti.
The activities in Kṛṣṇa consciousness are bhakti; that is reality.
Schopenhauer writes: "Every keen pleasure is an error and an illusion, for no attained wish can give lasting satisfaction, and moreover every possession and every happiness is but lent by chance for an uncertain time."
Explaining this side good, this side bad. The same thing. Stool is stool. So this side or that side.
But here, in this material world, they are accepting this temporary or false, whatever we call platform, and we are manufacturing in that false platform. Temporary platform. This is good, this is bad.
Where is the good and bad? They're all temporary or false. We don't say false, we say temporary. They say false.
So that is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that the pains and pleasure of this material world, it is experienced by the tabernacle. The spirit soul does not touch this. It is different.
He is not concerned with this material. But he is in illusion that this pain and pleasure is mine. Therefore Kṛṣṇa advises in the Bhagavad-gītā: these pains and pleasure simply touching the skin body. But I'm not this body.
That is the first. The soul is not this body. Therefore, these pains and pleasure is on account of this body, material body. So Krishna says: mātrā-sparśās tu kaunteya śītoṣṇa- sukha-duḥkha-dāḥ.
So these are not reality; they come and go in due course. And we are being too much absorbed in this material body, we feel pains and pleasure. But I am not this body.
Therefore one should be intelligent that this pains and pleasure is due to my bodily concept of life. And they come and go, why should I bother about it? If I feel pain, let me tolerate and do my own business.
Overcoming material attachment and sex desire
Schopenhauer's second book was entitled "The World as Will." He writes: "My body is the objectivity of my will." Besides will and idea, nothing is known to us or thinkable.
But if we narrowly analyze the reality of this body and its actions, we find nothing in it except the will.
And he goes on to state that the genitals are properly the focus of the will, and consequently the opposite pole of the brain, which is the representative of knowledge.
The former, that is, the genitals, are the life-sustaining principle, ensuring endless life to time.
In this respect, they were worshipped by the Greeks in the phallus and by the Hindus in the lingam, which are thus the symbol of the assertion of the will.
Knowledge, on the other hand, affords the possibility of the suppression of willing. This willing... Why? This willing is perfect. Because this willing is according to the body.
I get one body and will, again we get another birth. So I am willing with I am. So I am now identified with this willing situation; that is my trouble.
Well, I understand that I have nothing to do with this material world which is the production of my will, material will, and I am spiritual. So when I will spiritually, that is Krishna consciousness. That is wanted.
Materially willing means I get different types of body. That is dream-like. But what he says, that... Well, he sees that the basis of life is sex. Yes. That the will is asserted mainly due to sex. Yeah.
So that is material then. Yes. That is material life. That we say our life. Yeah. Those who are addicted to the material world, the basic principle is maithuna, sex intercourse.
So this strong desire for sex will continue so long as we are in the material existence, because that is the center of all pleasure. But when we get a taste of Krishna pleasure, we can give up this.
Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate: by seeing superior pleasure, they give up the inferior. Well, as to the nature of the world, Schopenhauer is vague, but he sees material life as basically irrational and whimsical.
Yes, that's right. Therefore you are changing body. Material mind is not fixed; now rejecting and accepting, this is going on.
The Māyāvādī philosophers said, the Buddhists also say this: material pains and pleasure is according to the material combination. He does not say material combination of this body. So this department...
He did not say because during his time they could not understand. So he did not say that there is a soul. But he simply said that this body is a composition of material things; that is the cause of pains and pleasure.
So dismantle it; let the earthly part of the body go to earth, the watery part of the body... Then it becomes zero, śūnyavādī.
Because he does not give any information of the soul, he takes account of the body, he analyzes the body, and it is a composition of earth, water, air, fire, like that. So when it is dismantled, then where is pain?
He sees the pleasure of the world as ultimately frustrating; eternal becoming, endless flux, characterizes the revelation of the inner nature of will.
Finally, the same thing shows itself in human endeavors and desires, which always delude us by presenting their satisfaction as the final end of will. As soon as we attain to them, they no longer appear the same.
Therefore, they soon grow stale or forgotten, and though not openly disowned, are yet always thrown aside as vanished illusions. This is why, huh?
He says we go—there's a constant transition from desire to satisfaction and from satisfaction to a new desire, a rapid course of which is called happiness, and the slow course sorrow, and does not sink into that stagnation that shows itself in fearful boredom that paralyzes life.
So it's this flux from desire to satisfaction that characterizes the will's activities in the phenomenal world.
But for Schopenhauer, outside of all of this flux, there is only—uh, the only solution is nirvana or extinction. In fact, one has to study that willing and satisfaction of the willing.
So behind this willing and satisfaction of willing, there is a person who is willing. He does not take that person into consideration. No. He takes only the willing and satisfaction of will. That is the only business.
But he does not see the person who is willing. That is his person. The supreme person? Not supreme person. The individual we put in this temporary world: willing and satisfaction.
But his reality behind this willing and satisfaction... The Schopenhauer defect is that he does not see that there is a person behind this willing. The individual shows his willing.
So when he stops this flickering willing, then what is next? That he does not say.
Nirvana: stopping willing, of this nature of willing— temporary, one kind of willing, one kind of satisfaction, again another kind of willing. Behind this willing, basically, there is the spirit soul.
So when the spirit soul comes to his real understanding of identification, that willing is pure willing. This willing is contaminated willing, material willing.
So simply one should not be satisfied by stopping this whimsical willing, but when he comes to the real willing of the real person—uh, that is spiritual life.
He says: "Voluntary and complete chastity is the first step in asceticism or the denial of the will to live.
It thereby denies the assertion of the will which extends beyond the individual life and gives the assurance that with the life of the body, the will whose manifestation it is ceases.
Is this kind of extinction the purpose behind chastity? Behind the willing activities, there is a person who is willing. So simply negation of this temporary willing will not help you. He has to will reality.
That is eternal willing. That is Krishna consciousness. Here the willing is sense satisfaction, material world, because he does not know there is another field of willing.
So the same willing, when he satisfies the senses of the Supreme, that is his eternal living. Jīvera svarūpa haya kṛṣṇera nitya-dāsa.
Because when he analyzes and comes to the real knowledge, he finds himself that he is the eternal servant of God.
As such, when his willing will be concentrated how to serve God, that is his real position of life: eternity, knowledge, and bliss. That is his svarūpa.
Understanding death and the immortal soul
Although it appears that Schopenhauer does not believe in God, although his stand appears atheistic, he writes:
"If a man fears death as his annihilation, it is just as if he were to think that the sun cries out at evening, 'Woe is me, for I go down to eternal night.'"
Thus, even already, suicide appears to us as a vain and therefore a foolish action. When we have carried out our investigation further, it will appear to us in a still less favorable light. That means God. The what?
Investigation. Oh, when we have carried out our investigation further. Further. Yes. Further. Further. More. When we have investigated further, it will appear to us that suicide, that death, is not extinction.
After death, death is life. There is life. There is desire, willing. Yes. He says that, so therefore that's no solution. He says that death and life are integral. They go together, death and life.
Therefore, death is not stopped of life; he gets another life. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ.
So this proves that the life of the person who is willing, desiring, is eternal, but he does not know what should be his eternal willing; that is his defect. So we are teaching this.
His eternal willing is that he should always will to serve Krishna. Then he will be happy.
As to the identity of life and death, he says the wisest of all philosophies, the Indian, expresses this by giving to the very God that symbolizes destruction, death, by giving, I say, to Shiva as an attribute not only the necklace of skulls, but also the lingam, the symbol of generation, which appears here as the counterpart of death, thus signifying that generation and death are essentially correlatives which reciprocally neutralize and annul each other.
So it's not death that is the solution. What dies will be born again. So that is not the solution. The solution is the nihilation of the will to live. How is it possible?
So long as the living entity is alive, he will have some sort of will. So that means the willing body, the living being, is eternal. Now the willing, this activity, has to be purified, then his life will be happy.
Willing cannot be stopped because he is eternal, but he is wrongly willing. Therefore he is unhappy. When he comes to the position of... then according to him, the man of knowledge is not disturbed in any condition.
He says such a man would regard death as a false illusion, an impotent spectre which frightens the weak, but has no power over him who knows that he is himself the will of which the whole world is the objectification or copy, and that therefore he is always certain of life and also of the present.
He goes on to say that he could not be terrified by an endless past or future in which he would not be. For this he would regard as Nirvana. Which is contradictory. Yes.
One side he says Nirvana and other side is there... He could not understand the Indian philosophy. He's trying to adjust in his own way. He speaks of Bhagavad-gītā.
He says: "Krishna thus raises the mind of his young pupil Arjuna. When seized with compunction at the sight of the arrayed hosts, armies, he loses heart and desires to give up the battle in order to avert the death of so many thousand.
Krishna leads him to this point of view, and the death of those thousands can no longer restrain him. He gives the sign for battle." But was it actually Krishna's assurance of immortality that brought Arjuna to fight? Yes.
Immortality. So what is his philosophy of the immortal living being? As he is immortal, his willing business is also immortal. If he accepts the living being as immortal, how he can stop Nirvana, his willing?
He seems to have no other solution other than the suppression of willing. That is not possible. Suppression of willing. That is not possible. He has to change the quality of willing.
Then he... that is what we sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena. The process of willing should be purified and then we will be happy. And the process of purifying the willing is bhakti.
Bhakti yoga and spiritual purification methods
Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ. Chanting and hearing of the pastimes or about the Lord, that is purifying.
He's missing the point that he is individually accepting the life is eternal and still he was prepared this Nirvana, but he does not know what is Nirvana. Nirvana means this kind of physical willing is stopped.
He has to stop this whimsical willing. He has to come to the standard willing. That is Krishna consciousness.
He looked on the Indian philosophy and religion as basically a philosophy of the denial of the will, and he gave several examples of religious suicide as a religious act. He says especially, but that is not—
he did not study Indian philosophy and religion perfectly well. He simply has taken some portion of the Māyāvāda philosophy or Buddha philosophy. But he did not know what vaiṣṇava is.
Well, he gives the example of... although he has touched Bhagavad-gītā. Yes.
He did not study Bhagavad-gītā thoroughly, that in the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna that if you, by your living, what is called knowledge, if you simply try to have full knowledge about Kṛṣṇa, then this material living is over, and after giving up his body, he goes back to home, back to Godhead.
That he has not studied. Either he did not study Bhagavad-gītā thoroughly, or he could not understand for want of a real spiritual master. He couldn't understand devotion to Kṛṣṇa, that's for certain.
Because he did not study Bhagavad-gītā as it is, the commandment. The recommendation is that one should go to guru. And what kind of guru? One who has seen the truth, practical. That he did not do.
He is simply speculating on his own experience. And although everything is there in the Gītā, he could not see it. That is the difference. As an example of suicide, he gives—
he says at the procession of Jagannātha in eighteen forty, eleven Hindus threw themselves under the wheels and were instantly killed.
And he also mentions the satī rituals of the woman throwing herself into the sacrificial fire, the fire of her husband's funeral pyre. This is not suicide.
This is... our life is continuation, but on account of poor understanding, we are getting different types of body and we are suffering in different varieties of miseries.
So this suicide, this is not suicide, that voluntarily accepting death so that while dying, if he thinks of spiritual life, he gets it. Like Kulaśekhara, he has that poetry, that
in the Bhagavad-gītā it is telling: «yaṁ yaṁ vāpi smaran bhāvaṁ tyajaty ante...» We get next life according to the desire at the point of death.
So generally when death takes place, one sometimes remains in coma, all the bodily functions become defunct. He dreams in a defined way and so on, so on. So he cannot, uh, dream or think independently.
Therefore, sometimes the intelligent class, they think that if I meet death in sound health, then I can think of my next life, go back to home, back to Godhead. And I achieve.
Because at the time of death, my thinking is taken into consideration. So by thinking of Jagannātha, if I die, then I go back to Jagannātha. That is not suicide.
That is voluntarily accepting death so that immediately he can be transferred to the spiritual world. And that works? That's an actual... Caitanya Mahāprabhu, of course, that's different.
Threw himself in the ocean, but that wasn't, uh, that was, uh, that was different.
Uh, He speaks of the Indian religion, which demands the greatest sacrifices, and which has yet remained so long in practice in a nation that embraces so many millions of persons cannot be arbitrarily invented superstition, but must have its foundation in the nature of man.
And he says that the religion has endured for more than 4,000 years, despite the fact that the Hindu nation has been broken up into so many parts. But he sees the religion basically as a religion of the denial of will.
But does the religion have its foundation in the nature of man? Yes, the denial both... There are two kinds of sects: Māyāvādī and the Vaiṣṇava. So both of them know that this material world is fleeting.
Uh, and sometimes they see it as false and earthly. So there is another life, that is spiritual world.
So, uh, the Māyāvādī philosopher, that spiritual life means to merge into the Brahman, or Parabrahman, and the Vaiṣṇava philosopher to go back to Goloka Vṛndāvana, Vaikuṇṭha, where God is situated and become His associate person.
So both the, uh, ideas, spiritual ideas, that is attained after death. What does it say? About Hindu, yes, he said there's a denial. He sees it basically as a denial of the will. Yes.
Denial of the will for material happiness. So we'll not denial willing, that willing for spiritual happiness, that is required. As you deny something, you must accept something.
Otherwise you cannot remain in the neutral position. That is not possible. Following this channel, when you get a better position, then you give up this meaning for Lord puruṣa.
The... uh, he speaks of the sannyāsī who lives without a dwelling and entirely without property, who is advised not to lay down often under the same tree, lest he should acquire a preference or inclination for it above other trees.
The Christian mystic and the teacher of the Vedānta philosophy agree in this respect also, that they both regard all outward works and religious exercises as superfluous for him who has attained to perfection.
Isn't this the viewpoint of the Māyāvādī? And doesn't Krishna recommend the lighting of the sacrificial fire even after one has attained perfection? Yes, Krishna says: yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-karma.
Because if he gives up this ritualistic ceremony, then there is a chance of falling down.
So even though he is liberated, to keep his position secure, he should continue these three things: sacrifice, charity, and austerity. He speaks of sleep.
He said the need for sleep is directly proportionate to the intensity of the brain life, thus the clearness of the consciousness.
Those animals whose brain life is weak and dull sleep little and lightly, for example, reptiles and fishes. Animals of considerable intelligence sleep deeply and long.
Men also require more sleep the more developed both as regards quantity and quality, and the more active their brain is;
the more completely awake a man is, the clearer and more lively his consciousness, the greater for him is the necessity of sleep, thus the deeper and longer he sleeps.
Those who are ignorant and materially um, covered, they sleep more. Those who are spiritually awake, they sleep less. Sleep is the necessity of the body, not of the soul.
So those who are advanced in the platform of spiritual identity, they do not require sleep. As we find from the life of Rupa Gosvāmī: nidrāhāra-vihārādi-vijitau. They conquered sleeping, eating, mating.
Their spiritual life... ...to sleep is a waste of time. So those who are actually interested in spiritual life, they adjust life in such a way that almost they sleep nil. Well, Arjuna was praised as Guḍākeśa. Guḍākeśa.
It appears that Schopenhauer recommends about eight hours of sleep a night. And Kṛṣṇa says not too much or too little. About what is recommended in terms of sleep, just concretely?
Sleep should be avoided, but that is not possible. Therefore, it should be adjusted to the minimum. Gosvāmīs, they were sleeping not more than two hours. Even we hear about some karmī, just like Napoleon.
He was also not sleeping. He was taking rest on the back of the horse. I do not know. But I know about Gandhi. He was sleeping while passing in a car. But you say you are so busy.
He gives some examples of men, of philosophers, who slept a great deal. Maybe because they speculated so hard they had to sleep more. Sleeping too much is bad. A lot of stuff. Stuff is my tomorrow.
Renunciation and the vanity of material life
In "The Ages of Life," Schopenhauer writes: "A complete and adequate notion of life can never be attained by anyone who does not reach old age. For it is only the old man who sees life whole and knows its natural course.
It is only he who is acquainted—and this is most important—not only with its entrance like the rest of mankind, but with its exit too, so that he alone has a full sense of its utter vanity, while the others never cease to labor under the false notion that everything will come right in the end."
I could not... Old man is perfect? No, but an old man can see the course of life. Can see life in its entirety. Different or not? I've got different experience.
We have seen in Western countries, old men, they still follow the path of sense gratification. So, very experienced? Unless there is training, simply to become an old man is not sufficient. Training required.
Old man, actual old man, should take renunciation. That is the Vedic plan. At the end of life, one should become a sannyāsī and completely devote his time and energy to understand and serve God.
So unless there is training from the very beginning, as brahmacārī, simply by age one is not mature. There is not one. He says it's customary to call youth happy and age the sad part of life.
This would be true if it were the passions that made a man happy. Happiness to the modern standard means sense gratification. But that sense gratification continues even in an old man.
So actually, it requires training and acquirement of knowledge. There is a word in Sanskrit, vṛddhatvaṁ jñāna-hīnaḥ, one can become an old man even without age. That means it is knowledge that is counted, not the age.
There's an expression, "the old fool." Old fool, yes. An old goat. If he is not educated properly, he develops as an old fool, yeah.
He says in one of the Vedic Upaniṣads, the natural length of human life is put down at 100 years. And I believe this to be right.
I have observed, as a matter of fact, that it is only people who exceed the age of ninety who attain euthanasia, who die, that is to say, of no disease, apoplexy, or convulsion, and pass away without agony of any sort.
To come to one's end before the age of 90 means to die of disease, in other words, prematurely. Yes, the maximum age in this age is a hundred years. But formerly, they used to live for a thousand years.
Before that, they used to live for ten thousand years. And before that, they used to live for one hundred thousand years. So nowadays we don't think even they're going up to 100 years. Even not ninety years.
Sixty, sixty-seven. Sixty-seven is... So the more one becomes sensuous, the duration of life is less. That is the law of nature. So that's all of Schopenhauer.