always do the will of others; that makes living easy and brings good
friends without any attending difficulties.
With dependent people it is best to be short, but always friendly and
good-mannered, if they themselves know their place; otherwise “_parcere
subjectis et debellare superbos_.”
It is always difficult to know how to conduct oneself rightly toward
very wealthy or very distinguished people; for to be with them means
either a kind of dependent relationship, or a constant watchfulness
against receiving favors that is inconsistent with real friendship.
Real friendship gladly gives and gladly receives, without keeping any
account. Besides, wealth and distinction very often make men insensible
to life’s true riches, and limit them in their views of men and life.
It is not pleasant to have to do with people who do not think out their
own problems, but are always seeking advice and never following it. One
should especially avoid lightly advising one to marry or not to marry,
nor should one ever express his opinion to authors about their yet
unpublished works. It is very hard, too, to fellowship with those who
are “persecuted by fate,” and have no conception of their own failings.
Christ himself on one occasion curtly dismissed such a man, who wished
to make him a “judge and a divider.”
Those who are always reflecting over themselves or others, likewise
make companions in whom is no reliance nor peace. They are always vain,
besides weak and forever vacillating in their judgment of others, as
well as in their estimation of themselves. They love no one, not always
themselves even, and are loved by no one. Shun them.
Against naïvely shameless people there are three kinds of self-defence:
roughness, which, however, is somewhat lowering; coldness, which is
not human and leaves a reproach on the conscience; and humor. The last
alone shows true superiority.
Selfish men who have quite lost the sense of shame have a way, when
they want something of another man, of insinuating to him that it will
be for his own advantage, so that they may be exempt from showing
gratitude or from resting under any other obligation in return. This
is something one must not, even tacitly, ignore, but first set the
matter quietly upon its proper footing, if he intends to respond to the
request.
Should one always give to those who beg? I believe, generally speaking,
yes; the commands of Christianity in this regard are too positive; in
most cases the question is rather “How much?” and this depends upon
the good-will of the giver. One should at least turn beggars away in
a friendly spirit; a kind word is also a gift and many a time of more
real value than a small bit of money. But that is something to be
learnt, and is really a very great art.
To give cheerfully is, on the other hand, partly a habit. Children
ought to be accustomed to it from childhood, instead of being
one-sidedly trained to mere frugality, as more commonly happens. They
should be frugal as regards themselves, but not as regards others.
An outward expedient is to carry no purse; it is easier to thrust the
hand into the pocket than to open a purse.
Very much that is not the proper thing in human intercourse springs
from simple inertness toward the good, or from a desire for personal
comfort.
Many men, whom everybody knows by sight and praises, are quiet and
tolerably dutiful--egotists,--whose ways one must not follow.
The really noble men, the aristocracy of the spirit as opposed to this
mere bourgeoisie, have always, on the other hand, found enemies.
Perhaps the most useful, though by no means the pleasantest,
intercourse is with our enemies; not only because they are often
future friends, but especially because we receive from them, more than
from any other, a candid disclosure as to our own faults and a strong
impulse to amend them; because, too, they possess, on the whole, the
truest judgment as to the weak points of a man’s nature. Finally, we
also learn, simply by living under their sharp eyes, how to know and
practise the important virtues of self-control, of a strict love for
the right, and of a constant attention to oneself.
That is, therefore, a foolish expression (which is often used with
intent to praise) when it is said of a man, perhaps in an obituary
notice, that “he had no enemies.” A man of the right sort does not go
through life without making enemies; but it is a fine thing, of course,
if at the end of his life he no longer has any.
By this I do not mean to imply that this intercourse with enemies is an
easy matter; on the contrary, it belongs to the most difficult tasks
of a rightly conducted life. It is particularly hard to endure a long
series of injustices which seem to have success on their side. Here
comes the need of faith in a just God, who can employ even the wicked
as his instruments, but can hold them so firmly in hand that they may
go no farther than he wills. Otherwise we should not go through these
things without harm. Surely no one who has learned to know himself
will make the assertion that he is already a past-master in this art.
Trust in God is the first essential; after that, the best means for
acquiring this art is seriously to resolve that we will, as much as
possible, avoid useless anger, and take care not to judge our opponents
unjustly; and in any case never to allow real hatred to settle in the
soul. This can easily be done at the very first moment of the affront;
it is harder later, when hate is once established in the heart. It is
very helpful, besides, to fix clearly in mind, from the beginning, that
we absolutely must forgive, even to “seventy times seven.” This thought
makes it much easier to determine from the outset to keep collected,
and thus we are better disposed to shut out hatred from the start.
Here are some other helpful considerations:
The truth is not always victorious on this earth; that is, not the
truth as it is embodied in a man, mixed with all his weaknesses and
errors; for which very reason it is impossible for it always to
conquer. But God is victorious, and nothing happens against his will;
this alone is the true consolation when enemies assault us.
The enemies God sends a man he also takes away, as soon as they have
fulfilled their purpose. “When a man’s ways please the Lord, then he
sets even his enemies at peace with him.” That is a very sure sign that
one stands in God’s grace.
It is much better to forget the evil one receives than to forgive it.
It is easy for a remnant of bitterness to cling about forgiveness, or
a kind of haughtiness, a kind of holding oneself superior to offenders
“beneath one’s notice.”
Bearing a grudge, feeling resentment, taking things ill is always a
mark of a rather small nature. Better take revenge; impotent hate is
quite worthless and injures only yourself, not your adversary.
In the criticisms made by one’s enemies there is in most cases a grain
of truth, though put in a light too sharp and one-sided. Therefore it
is always well to listen to an enemy’s criticisms, but not to rate them
too high nor to feel them too keenly. Above all, one should never let
them impose upon him; that is always a mistake.
That men speak evil of us is hard, but it preserves us, as Thomas à
Kempis says, “from the magic mist of vainglory,” and compels us to
seek God, who knows our innermost heart, as our witness and judge. Then
for the first time he becomes indispensable and fast bound to us.
Such a passage through ignominy is therefore especially needful for men
who afterward are to bear great honors without harm.
One may accordingly be induced not to hate his enemies, not merely
through motives of religion, but also through motives of prudence;
for enemies not only often become friends later, but one is likewise
indebted to them for very many correct views; on the other hand, those
who at first are very amiable often speak a different language later
on. Those who oppose one in important matters are always particularly
easy to come to terms with; for they are people who have serious
scruples and are open to reason. The indifferent, who interpose no
objections, but also do not listen, are far more dangerous opponents.
The right programme for one’s demeanor toward enemies is not, generally
speaking, that they must be crushed (as would be quite impossible in
most cases), but that they are to be reconciled. Whoever keeps this
constantly before his eyes will never hate too violently and will
suffer much to pass by in silence that discussion would make only worse.
Wherever possible, then, we must deal with our enemies in our best and
calmest frame of mind; for if we are inwardly ruffled, we are also much
more inclined to an unfavorable and unjust judgment of others. Nor
should we lower ourselves before them in order to gain their good-will;
that seldom succeeds. Many men, many nations in fact, will not at all
tolerate too much kindness.
Thus it is a great point of prudence not to come frequently, and never
unnecessarily, into the company of those who are radically opposed to
our conception of life. For we either suffer some loss in character, or
there results a widening of the chasm.
But what, then, is there left for us to hate? or are we to explain
everything away? I am far from asserting that. There is still enough
left in the world worth hating, and with this, war can and must be
waged. Above all, there is the spirit of being bad on principle, the
spirit that purposely contends against the spirit of God, and that
persecutes the good because it is good and endeavors to overthrow it.
To this spirit give your vigorous and outspoken hate, wherever and in
whatever form it appears; but in most cases it dies out in the men who
embody it, in the third or fourth generation at the very latest. Very
often it changes, in their descendants, to the opposite spirit of good.
To give help to evil men of this stripe, or to stand “impartially”
between them and good men, instead of standing by the latter in every
such conflict, is a serious fault that will be avenged on every one who
is guilty of it.
* * * * *
A very difficult chapter to write is that on companionship with women,
for they are the instruments of both the best and the worst that can
be awakened in a man: on the one hand, unbridled self-gratification
and alienation from all that is higher and nobler, qualities which
they awaken especially in young people and which are the chief
cause of the downfall of entire nations; on the other hand, a most
efficacious uplift away from a man’s natural tendencies, to a wholly
different, freer, and better conception of life. Most critics of women
accordingly err in speaking of them as of a uniform mass similar in
character, while, on the contrary, in this part of humanity there
is a far more marked division into two distinct classes, and a much
more constant retention and transmission of good as well as bad
characteristics.
In a very peculiar passage of the Old Testament the same distinction is
made, even in that very early stage of humanity, between the “sons of
God” and the “daughters of men,” who are not lacking in outward charm,
indeed, but through their very charms become a curse.
This difference in women is still to be found in our day, and so
the first counsel is this: Have no unnecessary association with the
“daughters of men” and guard against every closer alliance with them,
no matter what may be sung by the poets, for they themselves are often
led astray by just this peculiar charm of women.
In other respects, however, the difference between women and men would
not be so great if their education and especially their legal position
were more alike, and toward this the politics and pedagogy of to-day
are striving. Christianity at any rate makes no distinction, and even
the Old Testament already knows of women (even married ones) who
filled the highest state offices, not of hereditary right as to-day,
forsooth, but solely by virtue of their own worth, of the spirit which
dwelt within. The “spirit of God” can surely dwell in every human
being, and this is the thing that decides, and not the structure of the
body.
Women are in general more easy to understand than men. They deceive
no man for long, in the sense that he really holds the bad in them
for good, but only in the sense that he prefers the bad to the good
because of its sensual charm, in the false hope that this charm may be
a lasting and happy one. For women, therefore, there is surely but one
means of lastingly appearing to be something that they desire; and that
is, to be it. Yet it is harder, though by so much the more meritorious,
for them to be spiritual, good, and noble, since, instead of reaping
recognition for it, they are often obliged to see exactly the opposite
qualities valued and sought. A truly noble woman, therefore, stands on
a higher level of moral perfection than the best man.
Furthermore, what is generally true of humanity is especially
applicable to women, that those who have not experienced trouble, but
have only been fed upon the pleasures of life, remain superficial and
mediocre. With women the latter experience is found in even special
measure, because their whole present training, in the so-called
cultured circles, tends to give them the impression that a finer
enjoyment of life is the real aim of their existence.
From this conception of life there results a naïve and thoughtless
egotism which conceives the whole world to be only a beautiful meadow,
where the women have all the flowers to gather to adorn themselves with
and to please themselves with. In this egotism they often far surpass
men in selfishness; the more amiable outer side of this naïveté may not
blind us to this.
The character of women can very well be judged from their treatment of
flowers. A girl that on her walk pulls as many flowers as possible for
herself and has no desire to leave any behind for others has a tendency
to greediness and pleasure-seeking. A lady who, after looking at a
beautiful flower or bouquet for a short time, will permit it to lie and
wither, instead of putting it in water or of making some poor child
happy with it, has no warm heart. But if she pulls flowers quite to
pieces, she will some day no less unconcernedly deal with men who have
put their trust in her.
It is naturally still worse with the hearts of those tender creatures
who with their fingers crush a harmless gnat sunning itself at the
window, or purposely tread upon a little worm or beetle crawling over
their path. It is well to keep oneself at a good distance from them.
Likewise from all those who wear conspicuous dresses; the clothing of a
true lady should never attract attention, either by being too striking
or too plain.
Women do rightly, on the whole, when they act with warmth and feeling;
they are rarely fitted for a merely intellectual companionship, and
those who are, are not very lovable, as a rule, and have no inward
peace. Even a very clever woman brings unqualified happiness only to
a man at least as clever, and she is herself never happy if she has
the constant feeling that she far surpasses the man. Ardent feminine
natures are a great happiness for him who understands how to enjoy
their companionship without blame; otherwise they are like a fire that
diffuses light and warmth indeed, but may consume their own house and
the houses of others. Very quiet women, on the other hand, easily grow
to be somewhat insipid.
What women value most in men is power, whose complete absence they
never pardon. Therefore adorers like poor Brackenburg, in Goethe’s
“Egmont,” never get their deserts from them; they actually think more
of the men who slight them or treat them badly than they do of men who
are weak.
Most unhappy are the feelings of a noble woman when, through her own
bad choice, or through the folly of her relations, she has fallen to a
weakling who seeks compensation for his unmanliness in the outer world
by a constant and petty mastery in the house. Dante would have had to
invent yet another special punishment for these house-tyrants, against
whom it is just the best women that are defenceless, and who may be
governed only by a woman of strong egotism.
With this, we have come to the question of marriage. The best
relationship with women not already in the family is marriage, and it
is one of the chief causes of the deterioration of our age that (and
in large measure on account of the pleasure-seeking and the false
education of the women themselves) marriage is made difficult to a
large proportion of educated men, so that they do not marry at all, or
do not marry at the right age. Indeed, among the “civilized” nations,
it has actually resulted in the circumstance, unfavorable for the
position of women, that they are no longer valued for their own sake,
but only for what they “bring along” with them.
Who in fact could wish to torment himself with cares his life long,
just to support a vain creature fond of dress and pleasure, while he
might, with the same means, procure a far pleasanter mode of life? This
is the word pretty generally current now among the younger lords of
creation, who have none too much of the spirit of sacrifice.
It is often rather doubtful whether marriage always deserves to be
called a “divine” institution under present-day conditions, when the
husband very commonly seeks in this way a betterment of his financial
situation, or, if he belongs to the less “cultured” classes, seeks a
slave to do his work without pay, while the parents of the wife wish
to secure, in marriage, a life-insurance policy for their daughter,
however wretched a one it may prove to be, and the daughter herself,
in the momentary triumph of this social promotion, forgets the sad
ensuing loss of her rights. It is one of the saddest yet commonest
tragedies to see a fine, highly educated girl in the almost unlimited
power of a mediocre young man, solely because many mothers still regard
it as a kind of shame to keep their daughters unmarried.
We can understand why most women are glad to marry, because it is only
in a good marriage that they have the opportunity of independently
unfolding all the powers that lie within them. But that the selfish
ones, who know how to put themselves at the right time upon a proper
footing of defence, have often a better lot than the good wives, who
lavish a vast amount of love, fidelity, self-sacrifice, thought,
and vitality upon a questionable man of whom they have made for
themselves an incorrect picture in their fancy--this is one of life’s
most melancholy experiences, and one that might most make us doubt
God’s justice. A woman, therefore, should never marry entirely below
her station, never marry a man who is morally not entirely above
suspicion, or is pettily egotistic, or is not a man of thoroughly
good disposition; nor, as a rule, should she marry out of her country
and nationality. But for men who are seriously struggling upward, an
alliance with a high-minded woman from the better ranks of life is the
method best of all suited to get quickly forward.
It will always be disputed whether it is better, in a good marriage, to
seek and to find ardent love, or quiet esteem and friendship. I would
decide for the latter, as a general rule; but--he who does not know the
former knows not what life is.
The true and unselfish companionship of a man with a worthy woman
of his home circle--wife, mother, sister, daughter, and not least,
grandmother and granddaughter--undoubtedly belongs to the highest, the
tenderest, the purest joys of this life, and brings out qualities in
him that otherwise would always lie fallow. A marriage is not by a long
way always to be called a stroke of good fortune, but an old bachelor,
too, is never the man that could and should be made of him.
* * * * *
On the whole do not seek to know men by relying overmuch on theories.
The greater part of that knowledge is attained through one’s own
experiences, mostly sad ones. Only, resolve to experience nothing twice
over. They who do so are the truly wise; not those, if there are any
such, who make no mistakes.
Besides, our knowledge of men must not serve merely to help us separate
the goats from the sheep and henceforth concern ourselves only with
the latter; but it should serve to keep us from being deceived, and
to enable us to work for the improvement of ourselves and of all with
whom our lot brings us in touch, with a better understanding of their
character. For when a man once abandons the belief that every single
human soul has an infinite value and that it is worth any trouble taken
to save it, then he finds himself upon an inclined plane on which he
gradually slips back again into complete selfishness.
The final word as to the knowledge of men must be--love to all. Love
alone enables us to know a man exactly as he is, and yet not to flee
him. To know men, without love, has always been a misfortune and the
cause of the profound melancholy of many wise men in all ages; it has
driven them to renounce the society of their fellows, or to take refuge
in the theory of absolute government. For there are only two ways of
dealing with men, when one has once learned to know them--through fear,
or through love. All intermediate methods are delusions.
But if any one appeals to fear, or if love is to any one only
lip-service, let him hear Brother Jacopone da Todi: “That I love my
neighbor I really know only when, after he has injured me, I love him
no less than before. For if I then loved him less, I should thereby
prove that, before, it was not he I loved, but myself.”
IV. WHAT IS CULTURE?
IV. WHAT IS CULTURE?[1]
A prophet of Israel of the latter days of the Kings, who himself seems
to have been, in a way, self-taught, announces to his nation the
oncoming of a new era in about the following words: “Behold, the days
come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a
famine of bread, but of the hearing of the truth. In that day shall the
fair youths and maidens faint, who now are relying upon the god at Dan
and the way of Beer-sheba. For they shall so fall therewith that they
shall not be able to rise again.” What Amos meant by the god at Dan and
the “way of Beer-sheba” is hardly to be discovered now with exactness,
and indeed, for our purposes, we may leave it undetermined. Only thus
much is clear from the context, that they were for the time elements
of culture whose insufficiency should later come to light--as actually
happened at the beginning of the Christian era.
Widely recognized phenomena of our own days fittingly remind us again
of these ancient, half-forgotten words.
On the other hand, a struggle that may almost be called violent is
passing through the broad masses of the nations. They are striving to
win culture for themselves as quickly as possible, so that they may
elevate themselves to the power which, in their view, goes hand in hand
with this culture, or, as they mostly conceive it, with the acquisition
of certain kinds of knowledge.
On the other hand, the upper circles of the classes hitherto known as
cultured are being gripped with a kind of despair over the already
attained and still attainable results of this search for knowledge for
its own sake, as a renowned scientist has already plainly expressed
with his well-known saying, “Ignoramus, ignorabimus,” and as is
becoming actually manifest in the ever-growing specializing of the
sciences. For this specializing means, at bottom, nothing less than
that there is no universal knowledge any more, still less a universal
culture which comprehends all that men have achieved and thought; it
means that there are only isolated departments of knowledge, behind
which the abyss of ignorance yawns, for the most learned specialist,
no less than for the most commonplace layman.