The Manifest of Homo mortem
by Serge and Galina
Roganov
The gift to humanity on the threshold of a new century
1.
Every cultured modern person knows that history develops through two
main stages of human relation - tragedy and farce. But nobody is ready
to admit that the universal form of historical relations is a parody
and in the XX century when the time of historical epoch belongs to earth
way of one generation, parody becomes the primary form of culture's
world. Our world comes to an end. Nothing happens among us. Nothing
new. Let's greet forgetfulness as an absolutely safe instrument for
everyone! We can invite bikes everyday and invite others to admire our
inventions so as nobody can closely study the whole of human history
(for what?) to find same questions and the same answers.
What else can dead godman write except a manifesto? Like as what else
can dying godman write except the gospel from godman? As to me, to real
earth godman, I did as anyone from godmankind did - I wrought the gospel
and manifesto. To tell the truth, I could choose another title for my
masterpieces, for example, "Science of Logic" or "Being
and time"; all the same, even with such honorable titles my works
would remain the same, the gospel and manifesto.
2.
Any godman should die
together with its own epoch
like as any god should
From the beginning of the new Russian revolution (Perestroyka) I decided
that I was godman. Why not? The new image was better than the old soviet
"young communist". We need to create a new earth world like
as earth gods, but our worldwide recreation has failed. Everybody agrees
with me, that if I should die (because communism is destroyed) I'll
better die as godman. This "godman" sounds more solemnly.
Or maybe you think I should to tear up or hide my Party-membership card
and become a Russian democrat and rush into church? Don't trouble, I
wasn't member of the Communist party, but I dream to create a new earth
world. I was free godman like many others.
As a rule, there must be the great grief and, as a good Russian rule,
there must be the repentance. It is repentance that serves us as the
door to the new world. It is the grief that must follow us when we say
"good buy" russian communism.
For the first time I wanted to die when I was offered to make a suicide,
or, in other words, to repent. New Russian "democrats" (former
party members) cried: "Repent! Repent!" I couldn't repent
- that wasn't the matter whether you were a member of the communist
party or not - all soviet people were communist or, as Dostoevsky said
"godmans". We get accustomed to on the one hand that history
must die especially when we tire to watch how our epoch conquers peaks;
on the second hand, sometimes, regretfully, every person dies. We like
to watch when history dies; we always hope for something, and we are
always sure that the death of history is the death of the old generation,
government or party structures. But what should we do when a whole epoch
must die, when all our life becomes our whole word's dying? Certainly,
I can cry out: "I shall not dream to rebuild world as communist;
I shall not fight against enemies of soviet people," but all the
same, we want to build a New World in some or other way, and in spite
of our social revolution, we all remain "soviet" people, communist
or "godmankind". We always need to recreate something as many
people need to. It is not the matter what we need to create - new soviet
epoch, new metaphysics or new ethics. All of us always want to ruin
old values, history, theories and to create something new. Maybe I should
die somewhere and never begin to cry out: "The Godman is dead,
listen to me attentively -the godman is dead, dead, dead!" - I
remember in the nineteenth century somebody cried: "God is dead,"
and greet godman, but whom I should greet now, when I am dead as godman?
I must greet the human being, mankind and so on. I gladly agree. But
sometimes it seems to me that we hurry to die as communists; precisely
speaking, we hurry to cry that we are dead (everybody agrees that such
repenting allows us to live eternally).
When I decided to die I didn't know how I could die and for what. I
soon tired from such decisions. But it seemed to me that there was more
sense in my decision than I thought at first glance. Maybe as a mortal
being I could find a solution for myself first of all. It was all the
same for me: what else could I find in human culture, because each person
has only one life, and it is impossible to ask for another order of
my earth being. Daily problems are greater for me than all cultural
values like they are greater for any common person. When god dies then
godman enters the new world. When godman dies, the man, the common earth
human being, enters its own world. And if I wouldn't like to rebirth
as the new godman in the realm of repentance I must understand that
all in the earth world come to an end and nobody can exist without such
ability. It is easy to become a cadaver and leave the earth world and
[every]body else. But it is more difficult to leave earth history when
you still remain in that history, when you continue to act, to deed,
to do something. Truly speaking, this is a misunderstanding because
your "leave of the world" as the image of human death belongs
to the death that is an instant Christian event for daily god's usage.
You may find this funny. Maybe this is a joke. My need of death has
its own history. When we start to play we forget the starting point
of our game. I started from eager intention to remain, to save myself.
I used to be the godman and I needn't any rebirth as a new Russian democrat
- I always thought that I always deed with my own brain and hands only,
and if the world refuses to accept my vision of world happiness, so
I must come to an end. And let's come to an end together. And as godman
I wouldn't allow somebody else to live eternally. Let all worlds come
to an end if the world can't understand where the world happiness is.
This is the common step - you may find this in each great masterpiece
of human culture. Each "godman" starts with such intention.
Each godman avoids the present and seeks for new gospel in the past
or in the future. The present commonly remains for common people and
only godman knows how silly, how weak they are. Let's greet godman,
or you are still sure that godman is the person who can kill any person
for any divine purpose?
3.
"To dream about breakfast" and
"To have a breakfast"
are absolutely different things
One problem remains - I can't die. Can you die? I can't. My death always
belongs to Nature, God or communists. Without such murders all of us
are suicides. Truly speaking, natural death is death without man who
really dies. I can die only when I die with my own earth efforts, with
my own hands. We struggle for freedom for human beings and now what
do we need? Who am I then? I am suicide. Let's think over this again.
How can the epoch die when generations refuse to realize the death of
the epoch, or, in other words, they don't want to have such goals to
die themselves? The death of the epoch is the social death of the generation.
When the generation wants to live eternally, the history of the nation
become ruthless and endless.
What is the man who doesn't need to die? Only a mould of eternity.
And the main problem which I have tried to decide - to whom belongs
the realization of my own death? To Nature? To God? I know the single
solution of that problem - the realization of my own death may belong
only to me, and must belong to me. Nobody else. I realize my own death
with my own earth efforts like everybody does.
To realize death - this is the deed of earth man. Everybody will die
some day, everybody can think over this coming event, but who realizes
[his] own death? Everybody. Who can realize the human death except the
man itself? Nobody. Now we all are like suicides - the sense of my own
death reveals as my earth possibility to realize it, and this deed is
only my deed, and only as the sense of realization of my own death it
belongs to me. It is very easy to decide when theory, or metaphysic,
or culture must die, but what we can decide about our own death?
I wish to die but I don't wish to resort to assistance of psychiatrist
or to die by means of traditional methods of suicide. [Does] everybody
who needs death require somebody's help? [Is] everybody who needs [his]
own death ill? If our century builds the New World of the human being,
where there is human death without fail, who prevents me not to admire
the last instant event of everybody's life in the mirror of my consciousness,
but to realize personally that last event of my earth way? And at the
same time I can't realize my own death because when I am there, [there]
is not any death, when death is… You may play with words, with
logic but when somebody dies there are not any words and logic. This
is the beautiful idea to die, and, certainly, I agree to die not only
with my own generation but I agree to die personally, but I don't know
absolutely why should I die or in other words, why should I realize
my own death. Maybe it is really god who can realize my own death better
than I try to realize.
The need of death, or as philosophers said " need-to-death,"
has its own history like the death itself. We can't believe in the history
of death. The instant fundamental event remains as natural nonsense,
which we shall think over and find the answer: "for what?"
All of us know the answer for the cunning question "for what?"
because we are absolutely sure from the beginning of earth human history
that such an instant event is the great fundamental instrument not only
for god or nature, but also for us, for our human history, for every
person.
We often gladly say that human natural death isn't nonsense, but such
event that is absolutely possible and necessary for our god, for our
nature, for our law, social justice, defense, government and so on.
One may play with a million meanings of this sense, but for me, personally,
for me where is the sense of my death? I must explain this point more
properly. We rarely find ourselves in a strange condition of our common
life when we absolutely needn't our death. What a pity[ful] condition!
- may say others. As to me, I may say only that - Let others die but
I needn't die. I mustn't defend my nation, I mustn't struggle for world
happiness for all nations, and I needn't to kill other people to establish
the great order of my country, and I needn't to kill somebody to steal
one's money. Answer me then what should I personally die for? Maybe
both the god and the nature are impossible without my personal death,
but it isn't the matter for me whether they are possible or not. As
to me, I would like to know whether I am possible without my death?
The history of human illusion answers me that it isn't possible. Let
it be. Maybe I am mad and I need a skilled psychiatrist or money, which
I'll get for such confusion for somebody's usage. We get accustomed
to the thought that we can deed in a strict field of our abilities where
our death hasn't a place. But answer me then what people seek for when
they play with human death for any purpose? Maybe it is people who need
assistance of that skilled psychiatrist and always need money to have
a good meal and to play and play with human death or with the image
of human death (this is all the same). Am I right? Or, maybe, I am not
right?
This is only the first step to new madness. Let's give up the play
with the sense of death. Truly speaking, I play with sense because people
like such play, and if you need human understanding you must play -
people like the theater of consciousness and need such play first of
all. For example, let's look at the eternally modern play with the death
of god. Let it be.
I must explain thoroughly my "holy" decision to die because
I often encounter such confusion of ideas that my explanations turn
into the funny play with a single actor even for me. When I ask myself
why should I die, I don't mean the death as a pure murder or suicide.
Nobody wants to be murdered. Somebody wants to be a suicide. As a rule,
such people must be sent to hospital, but as to me I would like to send
them to philosophers, to thinkers of the XX century. What could they
advise to poor suicides, especially if we remember the simple crucial
point of such speculation - if the man is impossible without the event
of [his] death, then who must realize man's death? Certainly, only the
man itself can realize one. Are there any differences between healthy
men and suicides? The sense of death may be revealed as the sense of
realization only. Why should I die? - this the first step. Why should
I realize my own death? - this is the final step. Where is the sense
of my realization?
4.
Who realizes my death? If you mean "natural death" we needn't
seek for such a silly sense and answer. Naturally, the realization of
"natural death" belongs to Nature itself or to God itself.
But maybe God is really dead? And maybe the human being isn't a mere
natural being. As I remember, the last century's struggle against the
natural human being, [o]ne can turn human death into a natural event
or into the play of language, but as to me, as for all people, this
is not the play or the divine act. Where can we find natural death if
we aren't natural beings? You assure that I am not natural being, a
natural animal, and offer me to play with natural death or with the
sense of a natural fundamental event. This is great nonsense, and if
there aren't any Gods and Natures there is not any sense of natural
death for me because I am not a natural being nor a good Christian.
We try to build the finite world of the human being. We have built
the finite world of our consciousness as we've built finite worlds of
[all] human abilities. Are you tired? Are you tired [of building] new
finite worlds of human beings? History teaches us that any kind of human
ability, any kind of human organ, can serve for Your Majesty [the] Thinker
as a basis for any kind of interpretation of the human being. Even a
nail can serve like as existence or reason. One can build a divine image
of humanity from a cell of the human body. Who can contest such a cultured
approach?
The finite world means only the world that has a history, the world
that can not only start but can come to an end. Only such worlds have
history and are real earth history. And if we declare that human life
is impossible without human death, so we must declare the right-to-death
for any human being as the main human right like the right of human
life. Moreover, we must declare the right-to-realization of any human
death, realization that belongs not to gods or nature but to man itself.
The sense of human death now can reveal for us as the sense of realization
of our death. Now we get real finite human beings, human beings, which
can realize their death[s] without assistance of any skill orders. If
we can't realize our death, there is not any sense of death for us,
but there is only the sense of a murder, the sense of being killed.
Explain to me then what is murder? I can take the gun or knife and
kill somebody. But I can refuse somebody's right to die and then I am
the same murderer as in the first case. There are not any differences
between two approaches to the murder of a human being. Having finished
the horrible stage of human history in the twentieth century the murder
leaves the strict borders of natural violence. But it is very comfortable
for people to deal with murder as mere natural violence. The murder
of people has a wider scale of usage. We know very well where the evil
is or where the good is. We are mistaken. We still kill history like
an animal for Christmas because we know very well when a new epoch can
begin its stream and where one hasn't any right to start. New generations
decide who is to blame and who cheats the youth of new culture and then
thunders sound as the divine critic of miserable human existence.
5.
Yesterday I got to know that
god was dead. I didn't know
Each religion begins with godmankind and each religion comes to an
end as godmankind. Modern godman is the slave of eternity and it is
not the matter what kind of eternity you like. Eternity means pure history
or the pure divine order of logic, or beauty, or language or the human
being without realization of its own death. They are illusion because
they never can be finished and remain as real human deeds. Or maybe
you still think that eternity is something other?
Maybe god is dead and maybe god is not dead. Strictly speaking, that
is not the matter for any real person. God is really many-sided. Every
historic epoch has its own image of god like as its own image of godmankind.
If you are not a worshipper of a parody, you maybe feel that now the
image of christian god vanishes into thin air and only eternity as parody
remains for common use. We needn't rush into other religions. We would
do our best to find a new image for our dying world, but all the same
we remain christians which are absolutely caught in our consciousness.
The death of god is interesting only for god itself, in better case
for past generations which lost its belief, but for us now there isn't
any interest except our deep intention to appear in the cultured world
as a very witty and insightful person which can ruin heaven. As to me,
it is more important to answer present questions, or in other words,
to follow my earth way. I must die to remain in my own world and to
expose it to my children, not for future generations.
Oh, I think that only I am godman because I believe in the eternity
of our historic way, because I believe in my own eternity. We all get
accustomed to earth eternity - all our deeds that never can die. One
can destroy somebody's dreams but dreams can't die; one can destroy
plans, ethics, culture but these human deeds don't need to die to become
real earth events. Earth events rarely need death, and therefore, they
exist like modern earth human being, without realization of its own
death. I am not right, I am not lone godman. Godmankind enters the third
millenium destroying old values as if old values can't die.
Murder remains the universal instrument of human relation. It is not
the matter who is the murderer, and our century reveals for us the eternal
beauty of social murder when we buil[d] new history - revolutions, civil
wars, two world wars; the eternal beauty of criticism - we tried from
the beginning of our century to put an end to rationalism, to metaphysics,
to religion, to old culture and so on. You may not kill somebody to
prove you are a murderer. You may only take one's own death, or, in
other words, all of us know that we must struggle for the right-to-live,
but who knows that everybody needs the right-to-death too?
I understood that I should perish if I couldn't die. I need death to
stand in the impetuous world of russian history; I need death to stand
in itself because I needn't a new personal image, new social place.
I was so astonished that I forgot the death of an epoch, the death
of the Soviet Union at once. I must die and I need to die or maybe I
feel that it would be better to die - I don't remember exactly. One
can easy understand the death of history or the death of philosophy,
and it is very interesting to bury something and it isn't interesting
absolutely to me to bury myself.
6.
There is not any one's cadaver
I can offer to you a million language games and you may give me [as
many] too. I am right and you are right. Or maybe you would like to
examine my basic intention to die? I am gladly agreed. But your examination,
your close search for my mistakes can't help me really die, and if I
offer you to realize your death what would you play with?
Let's think over human death. Let's re[t]ain "natural death"
for others['] gods. The death of finite being may be finite itself only,
or, in other words, it may be only history, the real earth history,
and only now death and realization of death can belong to human beings.
Death as instant event belongs to murderers only. Everybody can grow
old. But you can't find any death in old age in common sense. Oold age
is only the language of death, the language of a new history of human
earth existence. It is death which allows us to stand in our existence,
it is death which reveals for us our being which exists now as our memory,
it is death which allows us to understand ourselves and everybody, it
is death which allows us to finish our earth search because from some
moment of our earth way there will not be any new search for us, any
new being for us, any new understanding for us, any new steps and leaps.
We always come to a deadlock with death as an instant natural event.
And the sense of such nonsense never reveals for us both any place for
our human death and any sense of our human death. For what do we play
with an instant fundamental event? Because we are still slaves of ourselves?
For what do we play with the language, with meaning of natural death?
Are we tired to be earth people or do we eagerly seek for a new divine
boss?
Old age is a loss of vital energy, extinction of life, but where is
the death here? Extinction of life is only extinction of life, not death,
and if we look closely at a cadaver, where is the death? The cadaver
is not the death. Then, why do we deal with our death as if the death
is the cadaver? Let's remember all words and images of death that exist
among us. All these words belong to existence of one's cadaver. I know
about death only one simple thing - sometime I'll vanish into air. Nothing
more. The life of my cadaver hasn't any relation to me. I couldn't even
say "my" cadaver because there is not any "me" near
my cadaver like there is not any cadaver near me. The image of natural
death haunts human history. I don't know why people identify human death
with the human cadaver. All interpretations of death don't leave the
field of a cemetery where the cadaver decays. (Alive cadaver!). [It's]
no matter what "my" cadaver does when I leave this world.
"My" cadaver exists for my relatives and friends till they
bury me. Truly speaking, I don't know whom they will bury. I don't drag
"my" cadaver with me all my life long, so how they can bury
"my" cadaver? And why can't I bury my cadaver too? Let's bury
our cadavers together!
So, cemeteries and cadavers have no relation to one's death. It is
known that all of us will die one fine day. And that is all we know
about our death. Nothing more. And the main item is that we never can
die with our own earth efforts. Natural death exists as natural nonsense
that has a sense only for high orders - God, History and Nature. When
somebody wants to die then somebody must take treatment and all of us
take care of one's health. Good will and good treatment - what do you
need else!
Our relations to a social murder differ from our relations to our death,
but we often confuse these relations and confuse these different ends.
No matter what or whom I can meet in that final event and, no matter
is there an afterlife or not regardless of any logic. I needn't any
afterlife now, here on the earth. I don't know why. Moreover, it is
said that there is the being only, there isn't any non-being. Why? Precisely
speaking, the being is given for us. And the non-being never can be
given for us, [o]nly for our consciousness. Let's re[t]ain this act
for skilled philosophers. It is all the same for many people whether
the non-being is given for somebody or not.
Death associates with grief and sorrow. We get accustomed to look at
our death as a great grief which we must avoid and we do our best to
avoid it till death catches us some day. We leave our death in the realm
of somebody's violence and we are not ready to accept another approach
to our end. God deprives people of their death because he maybe knows
that from this fundamental point man can start its free way in earth
history. Death never can belong to a human being. Let truth and consciousness
or any human fundamental abilities belong to man, but death eternally
remains in the realm of divine order. There are not any griefs and sorrows
for a dead body except for its relatives and children.
Maybe the one's death helps somebody [be] aware of something more fundamental
than common problems. Actual death demands to act, not to relate in
some other way to it.
This stage of one's earth way is possible by means of extinction of
life. In other words, when one tries to keep one's world one must ruin
all another possibilities or enter the realm of non-being. This "extinction"
is only the language of death, but death itself folds as actual earth
history. Really, we only keep that [which] we have created yet and as
to our being - oh! There is not any being beyond [our] earth existence-
we must keep it too. There is the one way only for real earth being
- right-to-keep itself or, in other words to die. No matter what will
happen when we leave the earth - the history of death comes to an end
like any actual earth process. The death of finite being may be only
finite death. Finite death is a history, and there was not any other
death from the beginning of human history. Death as history, real earth
history of every person, knocks in every consciousness but everybody
has a right not to note this knock. One may refine everybody and everybody
has the right to refine. Let it be. But everybody must start its way
and must finish it. One may dream for eternal becoming, and only eternal
becoming needn't any end. Re[t]ain this eternity for somebody in heaven.
Any kind of relations to this fundamental last event in personal life
remain only relations "to" or "towards," and divine
thinkers never look closely at this event itself, no matter what kind
of interpretation you may prefer since this would be the interpretation
of various relations whether to your own death or to the death of somebody
else. XX century has created the world of human beings where there are
a variety of relations to human death or, contrarily, relations of death
itself to human beings are basic intentions of both the human being
and the death. Perhaps such death helps to build and to understand something,
the death that belongs to nature similar to [how] death helps Nazis
and Communists to rebuild the social life of their nations. The cultural
death to which the man always is "to" or "towards"
has no differences with natural death. In each case the death is like
a murder, and it does not matter who kills the human being. One may
relate in some or other way to the fact of death, but death itself remains
for man as an alien death or, precisely speaking, as another's death.
To be sure, natural death is the great universal instrument of the human
being and one may build any being at any time - nobody can contest this
holy right. Now the century quits the earth stage and what is reserved
for us? The same natural death?
The crucial point for last century is as follows - the natural death
that helps us to recreate everything in the earth world emerges finally
on our way. I don't mean the personal death, but first of all, the social
death of our new and happy worlds--and only then somebody can think
over the personal death itself. Truly speaking, one cannot divide these
processes. Actual finite being reveals for us its earth sense. We never
find any sense of human death because we always remain as murdered persons.
The sense of such death always belongs to murderers, and we should search
the sense of a murder, not the death. Certainly, one may ask oneself
"why should I die?" but I am sure, nobody knows why should
I be killed. Any kind of relations to the fact of a murder may be offered
to one's consciousness and finally, - the same question, the same answer,
the same nonsense.
That is so funny, how human thought plays with human death. I am a
human being and like to play too. Why not? Let's take apart such play
with words and with our death. We can't solve this puzzle because from
the beginning we follow the wrong way, and the solution is not the realm
of logic or language cunning. Not only god and gods are dead, but the
death of the lonely man, or in other words, person and so on, in the
shadow of any Unity (metaphysics, cultures) is dead too. We play with
death that is dead now. Only for murder may human death be an instant
event, but for the real earth man the human death may be only the history,
the real earth history. Man is not born as mortal being but he becomes
a mortal one. Human death is human earth history that absolutely belongs
to man, and only as earth history it belongs to man itself, and only
in a such way can he realize its own death. Only now I can answer the
question why should I die. If I shouldn't to die, should I live? We
absolutely forget that we are hostages of eternity not only when we
seek for something beyond the universal, but we are always the hostage
of eternity when we forget our own death. The man must die to remain
a real earth being, and he can die because its death belongs to him
here, on the earth. Human death is earth history like human life. We
must remember now--and I want to emphasize - we don't find such death
somewhere in history and it isn't the matter where we can find such
death. It is important for us that we resolve the problem of our modern
history, it is important that such death is my own choice to stand in
itself and to allow others to begin [their] own history.
Our notion of death remains still in the realm of Christian culture.
God was dead long ago but we still look at our death as if it belongs
to somebody else. Natural death, being-towards-death… what else?
We don't believe in our earth death because we remain slaves of eternity.
And we create eternally ideas as if we never could die, as if it is
absolutely impossible for us to die. Then how can we live? How can we
come to an end? How can we seek for truth if we can't keep our ground?
How we can create something new? Any creation comes to an end only when
it enters its own non-being when it becomes the history of death; only
then any creation becomes a real human deed.
7.
First of all we must refine our own image of a human being to refine
the images of both life and death. That refining is not rebirth of old
values or creation of something new. And we can resolve such a problem
only acting as Homo mortem. So, we must remain ourselves. The ruined
history helps us [be] aware of some truth, but it helps only those who
want to be sincere and really want to act in the new history. It is
very easy to think over the death and there is the good place for such
speculations - I am sure that Russian kitchen will replace the cathedrals
and other miracles of Russian culture. The soul and consciousness of
Russian people exist in the Russian kitchen. The grief and sorrow concerning
one's death emerge at the kitchen. Let's greet the Russian kitchen!
Pure western people come to Russian museums and universities and they
never get to know where is the nerve of Russian culture. I would like
to act in some or other way beyond Russian kitchen. The ruined history
is not the history where there are only grief and sorrow or the mad
stream of new life. I mustn't leave this mad stream for any purpose
like I'll leave this earth word some day. I cannot leave the presence.
I am a common man like many others...
We enter the world of non-being. The non-being of Homo mortem is not
only given for us but we actually exist, act, deed in the history of
non-being. We have created all possible miracles, yet we needn't create
another miracles for that purpose. The human being is the human being
only. We have one life and one death; we really create one earth being
and one possible understanding of this being and nothing more. I may
be late.
We enter the world of non-being. What does it mean for us "to
enter the world of non-being"? What does it mean for me "to
enter the world of my non-being"? The crushing stream of russian
history helps me and at the same time it crushes others. When I was
godman or, in other words, the habitant of the common cultural realm,
I could explain everybody--how they must live and understand each other
or something else. But now I wouldn't like to run the risk of being
spoken about as a witty and insightful human being, I wouldn't like
to offend people and turn them into some unreal being. The huge universe
of human relations allows me to remain as a sincere man and to reveal
the huge universe of my inner world to those people, which would like
to accept it. There are not any griefs and sorrows for me now because
I must to be in time for my existence. I must enter non-being to stay
in itself, to stay in my earth universe and keep my world till I finish
my earth way. So as my inner world is not the earth eternity for the
coming future, I cannot avoid keeping it, first of all, for myself.
This world is only the human world and it demands my own assistance
to exist among earth beings. I think everybody admits such a position,
no matter whether they are aware of this one or not. People are not
aware of its acts but, as Marx said, they act in spite of their unawareness.
As to me, I have made my choice, I only get to know that I am aware
this entrance. Nothing more. I try to look closely at my non-being and
reveal that this entrance may be more important than one may think and
maybe it is important for someone to enter together, or precisely speaking,
to be aware that we have entered the world of our non-being. Only now
history may come to an end - my history can do this too. To keep one's
world is to allow it to finish all its fundamental possibilities.
8.
My owl of Minerva flies in the twilight of my earth way. I always thought
that my death would be something solemn and [of] interest, but really
it happened as a prosaic event, and as people don't note the death of
somebody at once and must get accustomed to the "dead" body
of relatives or friends, so I don't get accustomed to my own death at
once. When I wrote the book The Gospel from Godman. Posthumously.
Personally. I fully understood that I was dead. I got the possibility
to speak clearly, to listen attentively to each person. Our century
looks at death as if death is the way to another world - it is not the
matter how we understand that other world, and for many people of our
millennium death itself remains as the door to another order. I would
like to follow my own earth way - to die with my own brain and hands
or, in other words, to create the history of my own non-being, my death
and to try look at the human world when I follow my own way as a dead
person yet. And as a dead man I can sincerely speak to others and I
can reveal my own world for others.
People don't know their death yet. The image of human death remains
intact. Instead of the eternal question "Who is right?" I
should seek for the death of my own realm. Only then, when I come to
contradictions, to deadlock of my own understanding, I can be sure that
I am right, because my point of view vanishes like I'll vanish finally
(but only after my earth way, after my Christian death). The scheme
of my earth way is revealed only to me and nobody can penetrate my inner
word. One may interpret it in some or other way, but nobody can borrow
or steal my realm, my generation and my epoch. All text that I leave
for others is only a reflection of my earth way.
Cultural development becomes a play on the cemetery long ago. No sooner
than the epoch dies than newly born prophets immediately appear, sunk
its skilled hands in a cooling cadaver of history and find there - you
would never believe that - a multitude of eternal youth's recipes for
the future generation. The death of god gave way to the death of man
(if you prefer - the death of communism, language and so on). Everybody
knows that the new world starts development when the old one is dead.
But there will not be any development without the death of any development,
so we always deal with processes. Any god will die regardless our eager
interest in such great theater.
We know only the man, which exists only in our consciousness. Let it
be. Maybe only such an image allows us to understand itself. Let it
be. I agree to adopt any point of view now and as our modern history
teaches us, any point of view can exist as any nation, school of thought,
culture and so on. Let it be. But when we begin a new historic epoch
or human life, we must remember that we can't keep our ground. The being
is only being. But we say now about man: Only the man can keep both
being and non-being and only in such way can he come true. Death allows
man to keep itself and this history of human death can develop only
when man destroys himself.
Eternity perishes us. We would like to seek for the eternal beauty of
our divine consciousness as if we don't want to say something useful
to our children. We still think that the death of god or the death of
any old historic world is the death of god personally or the death of
representatives of old generations. Then the murder is very comfortable
to rebirth new values and goals!
We mustn't now seek for new words or theories on the threshold of a
new century. I think we are tired from new words. We mustn't struggle
with the old world - we must understand its own history of earth death
and understand how we can start our way [to] the future, understand
the history of our becoming, and understand that we can't start without
the death of the old culture or, precisely speaking, our new history
can start only when starts the history of the old word's death. The
Old World can die with its own efforts as we will die, or in other way,
as eternal beings, we can't re[t]ain any culture for our children.
We mustn't now seek for new theories, and as to me, I must think over
the death of my own theory, of my own point of view like my own personal
death. That is only my own deed: otherwise I never can say something.
We always seek for the end of something and the right-put-to-an-end
belongs to human beings and people very proud of their ability put to
an end to something. Murder is really a very easy act for anybody. I
can't find any differences between murder of a person and murder of
a cultural tradition. In any case you remain a mad godman. You still
think that this deed helps you to become a new person of s new history,
and many children from culture play with the death of traditions. Traditions
can die without your help; in other case, they couldn't be the real
human tradition. Human traditions like human history differs from the
divine scheme. They can die to become a real tradition.
We should agree that nobody is surprised looking at any new system
of thought. So, it is not the matter what way of thought we choose,
and as a matter of fact, history has invented everything for human usage.
Only a shy thinker can continue to seek for answers on common questions
in the past, and when he succeeds he starts to teach the future generation
as if the future will not be able to decide everything and start to
teach its own future.
"To die" means for us the common sense of the earth way.
We must create not only a new step in any fields of knowledge or in
any direction of human life but to stay in our creation, in itself,
ruining at the same time any other human possibilities, and only then
we will be able to expose some real one. I wouldn't like to say something
unusual for initiated prophets. All I can say is very familiar to everybody,
and all I want is to hear from others the same.
Earth being of death or earth human non-being will allow us to avoid
murder as the universal instrument of the human world.
Death is said to be the simplest thing, but not for those which must
realize the history of death as life is not the simplest thing and one
must realize it.
No matter how I could reveal for itself this great truth. Ask every
person and [we] all of us know that. The more people know about truth
the better truth is. Such great truth may exist on the peaks of human
history only, for common people this is a simple thing and one mustn't
even think over this problem. But habitants of the peaks need to teach
everybody and cry from the heaven of divine order.
You may enter the new world as a mortal being. And only as a mortal
being you can make the first steps, and only as a mortal being who can
become mortal you can understand yourself. Who doesn't know such great
truth? Don't trouble, people often start the struggle for the new order
of human being but often come to an end with such "gospels"
for human beings.
The future belongs to Homo mortem. The ethics for the new millennium
may be only a new approach to the understanding of earth human death.
The world has been altered now. Not only the old humanism is dead, but
the death of the lonely man in the shadow of Unity is dead too. If I
shouldn't die, should I live? Right-to-death belongs not only to ill
human being but also to every earth person now. We can't build the New
World among many nations, states and religions if we forget how we can
die. Without death we fail to understand each other. The future belongs
to Homo mortem yet.
Oh, what a beautiful speech for godman! Truly speaking, the future
always belongs to Homo mortem as the past always belongs [to him]. One
may find here something new to offer to somebody at the cultural market.
Only the present exists for us, for Homo mortem too. Mortal eternity
- earth people make only the first steps to the understanding of their
dearth, the place of death in world history and in the history of every
person. Earth being of human death is really a non-being of a murder,
of ruthless revolutions, of terrorism.
This is only my decision, or, truly speaking, the decision of my generation
entering a new stage of Russian history. If I would be the representative
of the modern cultural realm, I rush into other continents and nations
and offer to rebuild the world or realm of culture. And I am afraid
very much that such a mortal being can start its way on the peaks of
human history. Let's study the science of death; let's kill those which
don't study this science. Moreover, other religions aren't dead yet
and nobody can say when and in what way they will die. We only start
to think over the way in the third millennium. And our first task is
to complete our way.
9.
After being as godman
I wouldn't like to appeal to cultured world, or, in other words, to
the history of men and women. There always exists only the family. Real
family is earth non-being of love. Only family knows the answers. They
know how to follow the history of the earth world. The necessity of
death still rules the human world and will rule till we encounter the
simple problem - how can we live in the present, not in the future or
past? Families - earth's multitude of human beings demands both the
starting point and finish. They have only one future - their children,
their actual present. Only lonely men and women can cry out in the future
and in the past "Give us eternity, give us eternity!!" (for
what?!) and only families know how to follow silently [their] earth
way in the eternal present. When the great history tried to conquer
the peaks it got into the family where human history really contemplates,
emerges and starts its way into heaven. It is family, which saves the
world and opens the door to and for other worlds. I don't know what
the future will remember, deed, dream but there will not be any new
heaven for us. In any case, I hope on such a miraculous way of history.
