首页>> 文学论坛>> 哲学思考>> 弗里德里希·威廉·尼采 Friedrich Nietzsche   德国 Germany   德意志帝国   (1844年10月15日1900年8月25日)
查拉图斯特拉如是说 Thus Spake Zarathustra
  《查拉图斯特拉如是说》是尼采的里程碑式的作品,几乎包括了尼采的全部思想。全书以汪洋恣肆的诗体写成,熔酒神的狂醉与日神的清醒于一炉,通过“超人”查拉图斯特拉之口宣讲未来世界的启示,在世界哲学史和诗歌史上均占有独特的不朽的地位。
  这本以散文诗体写就的杰作,以振聋发聩的奇异灼见和横空出世的警世智慧宣讲“超人哲学”和“权力意志”,横扫了基督教教条造威的精神奴性的方方面面,谱写了一曲自由主义的人性壮歌。在本书中,“上帝死了”, “超人”诞生了,于是近代人类思想的天空有了一道光耀千年的奇异彩虹。令尼采饱受非难的言论“去女人那里吗?别忘了你的鞭子”,便是出自此书。只有深入理解了尼采的精神实质,才能真正理解这样的怪论。
    面对一座万仞高山,我们往往说不出多少话来,感到赞辞是多余的。面对弗里德里希·威廉·尼采 (1844—1900),这位德国近代大诗人、大哲学家,我们也有同样的感觉。
    这个尼采,他宣告:“上帝死了!”曾经使整个西方世界震撼。这个尼采,他的“超人哲学”只有极少数人能够真正理解。深受他影响的思想文化巨人有:里尔克、弗洛伊德、加缪、萨持、海德格尔、萧伯纳、梁启超、鲁迅,等等。
    尼采一生饱受漂泊和病痛之苦,最后是在精神错乱中了却残生,更为不幸的是,他的学说常常受到误解和歪曲。德国纳粹分子曾把他的学说肆意曲解为法西斯的理论支柱。希特勒曾亲自去拜谒尼采之墓,并把《尼采全集》作为寿礼送给墨索里尼。
  《查拉图斯特拉如是说》-作者简介
  
   弗里德里希·威廉·尼采(1844—1900),德国近代诗人、哲学家。他宣告:“帝死了!”彻底动摇了西方思想体系的基石,他高蹈的“超人哲学”与酒神精神产生了巨大影响。他的主要著作有《悲剧的诞生》、《查拉图斯特拉如是说善恶之彼岸》、《论道德的谱系》、《快乐的科学》、《曙光》、《权力意志》等。尼采既有哲学家的深遂洞见,又有诗人的澎湃激情。深受他影响的思想文化巨人,有里尔克、萧伯纳、弗洛伊德、加缪、萨特、海德格尔,粱启超、鲁迅等。
  尼采和马克思,牛顿、爱因斯坦、达尔文等同时荣获“千年十大思想家”的盛誉。
  《查拉图斯特拉如是说》-《查拉图斯特拉如是说》中的历史观
  
   尼采在他的代表作《查拉图斯特拉如是说》中站在一元论的立场上向世人展示了一种发展的辩证的历史观,下面我想从四个方面来谈谈这个问题。
  
  (一)发展的思维方式
  
   查拉图斯特拉在山上度过了十年节制生活之后,在人类面前发表了第一次演讲,陈述了从植物到超人的过程:植物→虫子→猴子→人类→超人。“你们经历了从虫子到人的道路,在你们身上多少有点像虫子。你们以前是猴子,在现在人也比任何一只猴子更象猴子。”1尼采认为在生物界中始终存在一种更高的发展,目前的阶段绝非最终阶段。人这个阶段也是发展中的过渡阶段,还会超过人这个阶段,向下一个阶段——超人的阶段发展。查拉图斯特拉断言:“到目前为止,所有生物都创造了一些超过自己的东西。”2“创造”这个概念表明,查拉图斯特拉并不将生物进化理解为一种机械的因果过程,而认为这些生物自身就是发展动力,他(它)们自身创造超出自己的事物并因此而超越自己。遗憾的是存在一种错误观点,这种观点根深蒂固地左右着人类的思维:人类自以为自己就是宇宙发展的最高阶段,人类判定自己是进化结束的最终成果。由于没有什么可再发展了,于是乎人类停止不前甚至退回到已经超越的阶段。为此查拉图斯特拉提醒道:“你们想要成为汹涌潮水中的落潮同时宁可返回到动物也不愿超越人类吗?”3要知道人类是生物中唯一不靠本能在进化潮流中进行创造活动的,而且可以按照自己的意志对抗或顺应进化潮流。但是按照查拉图斯特拉的观点,即便是人类为了使自己保持为人也必须在极端的对立面之间来回跑。换句话说为了当落潮必须先当涨潮,只有体验了落潮的失落才能享受涨潮的喜悦。假若人类停滞不前就会退到早已被超过了的阶段——动物预备阶段。“对于人来说,猴子是什么?一种大笑或者是一种痛苦的羞辱。而人类对于超人来说正是如此:一种嘲笑或者是一种痛苦的羞辱。”4当人类回顾自己的历史时,他看到了成为人之前的全部发展阶段。一方面他发现自己在一定程度上已经在猴子中显现同时猴子又颇具人性,这时他会哈哈大笑;另一方面当他想起自己的祖先曾是猴子时,又会面红耳赤。有朝一日超人也会产生这样两方面的感觉。对此赫拉克立特也有同感:“最漂亮的猴子与人相比也是丑陋的。最聪明的人在上帝身边看起来如同一只猴子,这涉及到智慧,美丽和其它的一切。”5
  
   查拉图斯特拉在爱听耸人听闻消息的观众面前做了他的第一次演讲,但是他的听众不理解他的演说,因为这些人甚至还未达到人的阶段“你们之中最聪明的人也只是植物和魔鬼的一种矛盾的混种。但是我教你们成为魔鬼或植物了吗?/你们看哪,我教你们什么是超人:/超人是大地的意义。你们的意志说:超人是大地的意义!”6在尼采笔下的查拉图斯特拉看来,由于人类还算不上一个完整出色的整体,只是两个相互矛盾的部分的组合,这两部分之间密不可分的关系还未被认识到,所以在从猴子到人的过渡期间就出现了物质和精神的分离。
  
   很显然,尼采不想在进化论的狭隘的意义中去展示人类的生物进化史而想从生物遗传学方面来演示植物→虫子→猴子→从→超人的整个发展史。在此清楚地显示了尼采的历史观(1)是发展的而不是停止的,(2)既不是简单的机械的因果过程也不同于达尔文的进化论。尼采始终认为达尔文的观点是片面的,达尔文在生存斗争中忽略了精神,没有黑格尔就没有达尔文,因此尼采强烈反对把他当作达尔主义者,“受过训练的有角动物使我对达尔文主义产生了怀疑”。7
  
   下面让我们再看看尼采笔下的精神的三个发展阶段。查拉图斯特拉对众人说:“我告诉你们精神的三种变形:精神是如何变成骆驼,骆驼是如何变成狮子,最后狮子如何变成小孩。”8这精神的历史经历了“物质化”的三个阶段。第一个阶段即骆驼的阶段,刻画了西方传统观念中自我悟性的特征。在第二阶段即狮子的阶段,查拉图斯特拉扮演了传统价值的批判者的角色。在第三阶段即小孩阶段指明超人还没有诞生。乍一看起来似乎精神的三种变形与黑格尔的三段论:正题、反题、综合很相似。但这仅仅是在一定条件下。在第一阶段,精神以骆驼的外形出现,扮演了屈服顺从的角色,一个外在的、来世的、永远固定的超精神强加于它。在第二阶段,它认识到了骆驼是一种自鄙的形式,因而彻底否认了骆驼的行为,它自己宣告了自己的死亡,并为自己的新生做好了准备,这是一次凤凰涅盘,于是精神发展到了第三阶段:小孩阶段。“小孩是天真与遗忘的”9表明精神通过产生自己的第二个起点而忘记了以前的失败和过失。精神在超越了狮子阶段以后就把自己的往事忘得一干二净,因为在当年它不是自觉自愿,而是被外来力量强制的物化的魔鬼精神,只有在小孩阶段才恢复了自我,才有了创造性“一个自转的轮”。“是的,为了创造的游戏,我的弟兄们,一个神圣的肯定是必要的:精神现在要有它的意志力,失去世界者赢得了他的世界。”10总之,在精神发展的第三阶段,只有在这个阶段,世界做为精神活动的真正产物才诞生了。顺便说一句,尼采在此对精神系列的三种变化的描绘与基督教教义中上帝从虚无中创造了世界的情形很相似。看来坚决反对基督教神学的尼采也无法摆脱时代与环境对他的潜移默化的影响。
  
   从以上我们可以看出,尼采认为精神和物质在极端对立中相互依存,并因此形成了一个又一个超越自己又回归自己的向高级发展的运动。
  
  (二)辩证的一元论观点
  
   尼采用查拉图斯特拉的名义从植物和魔鬼的情形入手来研究肉体和灵魂这个古老的问题。按照查拉图斯特拉的观点,尽管传统哲学将人类视为肉体——灵魂、物质 ——精神所组成的整体,但在事实上已经将精神物化了,精神变成了可以脱离物质单独存在的实体。因此就有了查拉图斯特拉的反问:“我教人们成为魔鬼和植物吗?”11唯心主义和唯物主义同样都是人类自我悟性的片面形式,在这其中或者是人的肉体的那一面或者是人的精神的那一面被否定了。在查拉图斯特拉一开始演讲时我们就听到了人类应该是被超越的。现在当人类被分裂成肉体与灵魂两部分时我们再次听到他的声音:“你们看哪,我教人们什么是超人!”12当我们思考超越人——这个前进中的质的飞跃时,让我们再回忆一下人类已经超越的那些阶段,以便更好地理解从猴子到人的过程中如何出现了灵魂和肉体的分离。首先要回忆的是从植物→虫子→猴子→人的发展过程中被描绘为在两个平面上发生的过程。其一是空间的平面:活动半径由植物到人递增,因而活动余地和生活空间变大了变广了。为了适应扩展了的生活空间带来的多样性,就必须在思想这第二个非空间的平面上加工出新的东西来。生活空间愈是色彩斑斓,思想活动就愈是抽象枯燥。这思想活动不得不把各种秩序、条理带入生存所必须的繁杂的多样性中,并以这种方式形成了与生活空间相关联的意识。这样一来在猴子阶段就逐渐现出了猴子和世界的二元不同性的绉形,尽管还没有达到人类所特有的反省、抽象那样高级的程度。人类不仅在与世界的联系中而且在自身中也发现了我与非我的二元性。这样一来人类将自身也作为客体对立起来,并用这种方式与自己拉开了距离,于是乎意识的我与肉体的我撕裂了,势不两立地对立了。人类出现的这个错误已被尼采在《真实的世界究竟是如何成为寓言的》这篇文章中讨论过。人类的这个错误在于:意识到了自身却忘记了出身,忘记了从植物一直到人类的整个发展史,所以才使精神和物质相脱离。假如人类从生物发展史的起源阶段就正确理解自身意识,那么人类就会自然而然地在自身中找到自己超越过的每一个阶段,发展成人类的这个生物进程就会被描绘成肉体和精神辩证关系的自然延续。而西方人在很长时间里却不是这样。他们使灵魂和肉体相互脱节,他们为精神杜撰了一个完全不同的、更高级的起源并因此发明了一个非感官所能感觉到的、超自然的世界。物质和精神的彻底分裂在肉体和灵魂这个问题上清清楚楚地表现出来了。当人类由如此相相互对立的、老死不相往来的两部分组成时又该如何想象作为一种自身统一的生物的人呢?灵魂和肉体之间的脱节问题在这个疑问中得到了最高体现。这些僵化的规则希望将关于两个世界的二元论以及物质和精神的鸿沟最终地永久地固定下来,而尼采笔下的查拉图斯特拉却用具有大地意义的超人的理念来与之相对抗。尽管这是用一种唯心主义来对抗另一种唯心主义,但查拉图斯特拉的对抗显然技高一筹,这对抗产生了新事物,因为它使两个对立面之间有了即使是瞬间统一的可能性,正如在彩虹中可以看出它是光与水等等元素共同作用的结果一样,从物质与精神、肉体与灵魂的相对抗中就产生了超人。总而言之,尼采笔下的查拉图斯特拉把传统的灵魂和肉体对立分裂的二元论思想理解为人类一种自我误解的结果,这正是尼采的高明过人之处。一旦人类消除了这种误解,那么灵魂和肉体相互撕裂的问题就解决了,这就意味着人类阶段被超越了,那么随之而来的就是超人阶段。无论如何对于人类来说有一点是可以肯定的,即大地的意义和生活的意义不存在于一个静止的、物化了的精神产物中,不存在于魔鬼、上帝、理念式的理性中,而只存在于对立面的对立统一的辩证关系之中。
  
   从以上分析人们不难看出,尼采用一元论克服了二元论,尽管尼采的出发点仍是唯心主义,但是他用发展的辩证的唯心主义来取代僵化的静止的唯物主义,这无疑是一种进步。
  
   在《查拉图斯特拉如是说》中,尼采还拟人化地讽刺揭露了当时灵魂和肉体之间的错误关系:“从前灵魂蔑视肉体,这种蔑视在当时被认为是最高尚的事:——灵魂要肉体枯瘦、丑陋并且饿死。它以为这样便可以逃避肉体,同时也逃避了大地。/啊,这灵魂自己还是枯瘦、丑陋、饿死的,残忍就是它的淫乐!”13对于查拉图斯特拉来说,肉体在传统的形而上学和基督教那儿所受到的贬低是一种谬论。这种谬论认为,人应该抛弃一切感官的感受,抛弃人类的以往的动物的历程而只通过关注精神就能向更高阶段发展。这种谬论只承认精神的积极因素和肉体的消极因素。查拉图斯特拉的看法正相反,如果灵魂能够作为肉体的灵魂而存在,那么它试图从肉体中独立出来的每一次尝试都是胡闹;如果灵魂贬低肉体,那无异于贬低灵魂自己,灵魂和肉体永远相辅相成不可分离。查拉图斯特拉还认为,灵魂对肉体的评价恰恰等于肉体对灵魂的判断:“你们的肉体是怎样说明你们的灵魂呢?你们的灵魂难道不是贫乏、污秽与可怜的自满吗?”14灵魂为自己创造了一个虚幻的世界,它臆想着战胜肉体的辉煌胜利,但这只是可怜又可笑的精神胜利法。只有与肉体同时存在,灵魂才能越来越丰富;只有当精神和物质相互终结并产生于对方之中时才会出现“贫乏、污秽与可怜的自满”的反面。查拉图斯特拉的结束语是:“不是你们的罪恶,而是你们的节制向天呼喊!/那道用舌头舔你们的闪电何在?那个应当向你们注射的疯狂何在?/现在我教你们什么是超人:他就是这闪电,他就是这疯狂!”15查拉图斯特拉在这儿抨击的正是被基督教深恶痛绝的“罪恶意识”:如果人们满足了肉体的欲望就意味着背叛精神,就意味着有罪。查拉图斯特拉公然与基督教教义背道而驰,他认为原罪不存在于违背精神的罪恶中而存在于违背肉体的罪恶中,当人类真的因为有罪过要受到惩罚时,肉体首当其冲在劫难逃。为了彻底摧毁基督教教义,需要电闪雷鸣,以便让二元论人物及其观点彻底暴露,以便让千百年来僵化凝固的教条都活动运转起来。
  
   与此同时,尼采以圣者来反衬突出查拉图斯特拉的发展、运动的一元论观点。圣者追求尽善尽美。他将自己对人类的爱当作这个世界上最完美的事情,可惜,这个爱永远不可能从理想变为现实。因为人类存在的有限性从原则上禁止他们去达到那位圣者所要求的完美。持有这种看法的圣者让自己孤立于人类之外而转向唯一能满足这个要求的生物:上帝。谁要是象这位圣者一样在对上帝的爱中找到了自己的满足,那他就实在无法理解为什么查拉图斯特拉背离完美的事物而去寻找不完美的事物。
  
   圣者的这种观点是由他的以宗教为基础的生活方式决定的。圣者崇尚完美,并因此而完全脱离并不完美的人类世界。他独居在森林中每天赞美上帝。圣者所理解的完美是自身封闭的、不变的、无法超越的,因此可以说圣者为自己选择的生活方式是静止不变的,这一点,从尼采的笔下可以清楚地看出。查拉图斯特拉跳舞,圣者唱歌、谱曲、作词。他的歌声表达了他对尽善尽美的执着的追求。通过歌唱他不断地接近完美并与之越来越相似。前面已经谈到当查拉图斯特拉跳舞时,圣者唱歌。他伴着歌声在原地动,可以说他始终停留在圆周的中心点上,所有的半径从此开始,所有的直径通过此处,圣者围绕自身绝对旋转。他的生活方式凝固成油画般的静态的完美,在其内部所有的运动都消失贻尽。
  
   上帝之死的想法对于圣者来说是不堪设想的。因为死亡意味着一种由活转变为死的变化过程。圣者之所以爱上帝是因为上帝是至高无尚的完美无瑕的化身的体现,是一成不变的无比至尊的代表的体现,也就是说排除了任何运动变化的可能性,上帝绝不可能变成别的什么,也绝不可能死去,上帝必须永远是上帝,永远是尽善尽美、完美无瑕的化身。对于圣者来说这个永远的存在象征性地固定在他停留的那个中心点,使他也成为完美与永恒。对于查拉图斯特拉来说,在现实世界中不存在永恒不变的事物,在现实世界中万事万物都在诞生、变化和终结,而绝不可能超时空而存在。如果在我们这个唯一的真实世界里谈论上帝,那么上帝就必须被认为和其它的万事万物一样是发展变化的,而不是凝固不变的,那么上帝也会和其它的万事万物一样存在着产生和终结,对于已经终结的上帝,人们可以如此这般地说,上帝死了!圣者是个典型的二元论者,象其他的二元论者一样在他那里真实的世界与想象的世界被相互颠倒,真实的世界被歪曲成了表象的世界,而想象的世界却被称之为真实的世界,所以尼采才针锋相对地写了那篇教育戏剧《真实的世界究竟是如何变成寓言的》。我们可以举个通俗的例子,在想象中人们总是把现实世界描绘为一汪静止不动的清泉,这汪清泉总是被描绘成无比纯、无比净、无比透明。但事实上真实的世界是一个肮脏的池沼。柏拉图认为真实的世界代表了昏暗的洞穴,而这昏暗的洞穴又被看作人类肉体的象征。而对于苏格拉底来说最艰难的就是从上面的大地回到下面的洞穴中,即从明亮的精神那里返回污秽的肉体中。这一上一下、一个天堂一个地狱活生生地将一个完整的生物的人撕裂成两部分。总而言之尼采通过塑造这个追求尽善尽美的二元论者——圣者,反衬了查拉图斯特拉辩证、发展的一元论观点。
  
  (三)超人模式
  
   查拉图斯特拉说:“人类是一根系在动物和超人之间的绳索,一根悬在深谷上的绳索。/往彼端去是危险的,停在半途是危险的,向后望也是危险的,战栗或者不前进,都是危险的。”16查拉图斯特拉的意思是说,人类刚好处在猴子阶段和超人阶段的过渡中。如果他回首自己的历史,那他就面临遵循早已无效的规则的危险;如果他踌躇不前,他就会发现自己的脚下是万丈深渊,这样他就会因惧怕跌落而战甚至坠落。与回首、前瞻和停止相联系的这三种危险给人的印象是,查拉图斯特拉将人类与一个走绳者相比较,后者随着他在绳上迈出的每一步都会陷入一种死亡的危险之中,而人类却是绳索和走绳者的合二而一。这就是说并不存在一条现成的路 (绳索)和某个在这条路上行走的人(走绳者),而是如果没有走路的人,也就不存在这条路。路是由于有了那个在路上行走的人才产生的。此人知道自己曾经是谁,也知道他将会是谁,但是不肯定自己能否够成为他将是的人。超越自己要冒很大的风险,因为人们为此必须将习惯的、久经考验的、安全的事物抛开,以便朝着一个未知的目标前进。绝没有现成的道路通往这个目标,人们要在奔向目标的过程中自己创造出路来。路途中的每次怀疑和犹豫都会产生灾难性的后果,因为只要人们一停止前进,脚下的路和远处的目标就消失了;行者脚下若踩空同样也就跌入了未知和虚无的深渊。人类只有永无止境地向前走,才会脚踏实地,即脚踩绳索。换句话说,人类通过行走自己创造出支撑自己走路的支架,最终目的也不再会同路脱离开,因为目的不是别的,正是走路本身。随着每一步的迈出,就意味着不断的离开和到达。这条直直的绳索,从固定的一端伸展到另一端,可以理解成绕圆周行走的辩证法。这行走代表了生命,代表了超越自己的强烈追求。在走这条路时,人类产生出了作为绳索的超人。人类走在这根绳索上,与此同时,人类就是这根绳索。
  
   查拉图斯特拉继续说:“人类的伟大之处,在于他是一座桥梁而不是一个目的。人类的可爱之处,在于他是一个过程和一个终结。”17桥梁以及前面提到的绳索都可以理解为走过去,朝着人类还不曾是的情形前进。而人类本身也正因为是一座承前启后的桥梁而不是一个目标才变得伟大。如果人类是目的,那他就不能自己设定目的,他就无法将自己设计为他将要成为的情形,而会受到他的内在的目的性的限制,那么人类所做的一切努力最终不外乎仅仅是去实现他无需去做就已经存在的目的了。被视为目的的人类显然不能通过自我超越而向更高层次发展,因为他就是他自己的最高层次。但是,假如人类将自己视为一个通向最高层次的阶段,通过一次次的自我超越,建立起连接现在的他和将来的他的桥梁,那么人类的这个事业就比人类将自己本身当作目标的事业要伟大得多。只有当人类走出现在的自我以后才决定自己要成为谁和要干什么时,那么在最初的意义中人类就是自由的。这时,只有在这时,人类的目标才不再是人类,而是超越了人类的超人。因此查拉图斯特拉才说,人类的伟大和可爱之处在于,他是一个过程和终结。过程表示超越作为人的自我运动;终结表示通过这个运动人类阶段消失了,超人阶段来临了,如同涓涓细流汇入奔腾咆哮的无边大海。
  
   对于人类之后的超人阶段,查拉图斯特拉用散文诗的形式抒发了自己对其的热爱“我爱那些只知道为终结而生活的人。因为他们是跨过桥者。”18谁作为人类而终结,谁就跨过了桥,就迈向了超人。“我爱那些伟大的轻蔑者,因为他们是伟大的崇拜者,是射向彼岸的渴望之箭。”19渴望之箭意味着渴望超越自己的努力,这种努力鄙视人间的一切目的,唯独想要到达彼岸世界。“我爱那些人,他们不先到星星后面寻找某种理由去终结、去牺牲,他们为大地牺牲,使大地有朝一日能属于超人。”20任何一个能正常思维的人都不会为一个虚无飘渺的来世作出牺牲。地球,我们生活的大地,有足够的理由让人类为它做出超越自我的牺牲。
  
   人类向超人超越的过程是一个极其艰难曲折危机四伏的过程,随时可能付出生活的代价。走绳者无疑代表人类,他想建立一座由动物通向超人的桥梁。走绳者是查拉图斯特拉所喜爱的人们中的一个。这些人蔑视末人的理想社会,敢于进行危险的超越,勇敢地向着超人的理想前进。超人的事业是前所未有的事业,必将受到旧势力的疯狂攻击,走绳者的坠落就标志着基督教教义的胜利,这教义抨击所有违背基督教教义的事为原罪并对触犯原罪的人处以死刑。走绳者在其过去(顺从的羔羊)和未来(独立的个体)之间被拉来扯去,最终过去获胜了,未来被放弃了,魔鬼战胜了超人。但是这一结局并不是最终结局,每个作为走绳者的个体都必须在从动物到超人的过渡中经受多次这样的死亡(“原罪”),直到有一天他成功地在自身内超越人类这个阶段。我们在前面已经谈到绳索和走绳者是不可分的,绳索这条路的存在正是由于人们在它上面行走,随着迈出的每一步超越自己的行为都重新进行,这种行为的总和就是超人。换句话说超人是走绳者、绳索和目标交织在一起向前进的一个整体。遗憾的是走绳者没有能够将这个统一体坚持到底,他在行进中失去了冷静和平衡,摔了下去。在某种程度上人们可以说走绳者掉进了肉体和灵魂的二元论中,坠进了他想超越的物质和灵魂之间的鸿沟中。这坠落使由走绳者、绳索、目标三方面组成的统一体破裂了,解体了。如果一个人让宗教或形而上学的偏见主宰着自己,那他就会被它(们)所超越,走绳者的悲惨结局就是一个最好的例子。查拉图斯特拉试图让走绳者在临死前明白,他(走绳者)本来已经超越了基督教关于魔鬼和地狱的教义,只是他还未来得及做出不存在灵魂不死的结论。要知道肉体和灵魂始终相依相存;肉体是经济基础,灵魂是上层建筑,肉体终结了,灵魂也就不存在了。走绳者虽然没有走到绳索的那一端,但他用自己宝贵的生命向世人展示他是一位勇敢者、创新者,是一位向着超人理想奋勇直前者。从这个意义上说,他是一位大无畏的先驱。
  
   查拉图斯特拉在其演讲的结尾谈到了自己所扮演的角色——超人的宣告者。“我爱所有那些人,他们象沉重的雨点,一滴一滴地从人们头顶上的乌云中落下;它们预告着闪电的到来,并作为预告者而终结。/看吧,我是一道闪电的预告者,一滴自云中落下的重雨点:但是这道闪电便是超人。——”21查拉图斯特拉不是超人,也不是超人的代表,而是超人的宣告者。他要将人们的注意力吸引到预示着超人的闪电事件中。这闪电将旧世界突然间照亮,撕掉了它的全部伪装,展露出狰狞的本来面目,并宣告了它的末日。这闪电表明了旧的思维方式和旧的历史观的终结,这闪电预示了新的质的飞跃的来临。随着这闪电的到来,作为宣告者的查拉图斯特拉就终结了。因为闪电、雷鸣、暴风雨过后,人类就成功地过渡到了超人,作为超人的宣告者就成为多余的人了。人类自身超越了传统的人物形象,并把这个新形象放到恰当的位置上。一旦超人的理念直接进入到人类的意识中,查拉图斯特拉的使命就完成了,那时他将同其他人一样,把所有的力量集中在更新自己,全力以赴地创造一座由动物向超人过渡的桥梁。
  
   非常遗憾,查拉图斯特拉的演讲超出了人类理解水平的地平线。所以,当查拉图斯特拉结束演讲时,听众大声轰笑、怪叫、咂舌头。人们嘲笑他,就象当年苏格拉底向洞穴人解释他的理念时受到的嘲笑一样。即便在那儿,洞穴人也向苏格拉底嚎叫:让我们看看你的理念吧!接着他们指向每一堵有阴影的墙,在这些洞穴人看来,这些阴影就是真理的化身。苏格拉底无法向他们展示什么是理念,并不仅仅因为他从阳光普照的世界回到昏暗的洞穴中感到头晕目眩,还因为而且首先是因为理念表达的方式和墙上阴影表达的方式截然不同,理念是无论如何无法以阴影的形式出现的。查拉图斯特拉和苏格拉底的遭遇如此相似,听众想看见他宣扬的超人,但人们没有搞明白,超人是无法看见的,只能做出来。遗憾的是,按照人类的传统悟性,人类只能理解物化了的、客观上触摸得到的形体,而恰恰在这种意义上既不存在超人,也不存在理念。超人就不是人,更不是那种超级人。超人不是个体,而是个体一项活动的总称。这项活动的特点是既超越出去又在更高的程度上回归自己。所以,只有当我们去做这件事时,只有当我们去超越人类自身时才会有超人。由于世人的不理解,查拉图斯特拉下山后的第一次演讲失败了。人们用旧的思维方式来理解查拉图斯特拉的超人学说,似乎他要宣布一个新的救世主的降临。按照传统观念这个新的救世主是特定的个体的人,他以说教者的身份来此地教训人类,人们想看的就是这种人。回顾人类的思想史,人类对于超出了自己理解力的改革者通常都采取从肉体上消灭的解决办法。到目前为止查拉图斯特拉是第一个幸免于难的人,这也许得益于人类的误解。在世人看来,查拉图斯特拉是个难得的白痴,一个令人捧腹大笑的丑角,但恰恰是这个丑角向旧世界的尊贵无比的人物形象和至高无上的理性观念宣战。
  
  (四)对立统一体的圆周运动
  
   尼采在《查拉图斯特拉如是说》中塑造了查拉图斯特拉的两个动物形象:鹰与蛇。这两只动物象征着一个对立同一体。在这个统一体中对立面既相互对立又相依相存。鹰这个高傲的动物盘旋在高空,它代表了理智与精神。蛇这个聪明狡猾的动物生活在地面,它代表了肉体与物质。尽管这两种动物向前运动的方式不同,但是其共同点是都做圆周运动:鹰在空中画圈,蛇在地上圈曲前进。蛇缠绕在飞翔的雄鹰的颈上的情影直观地表现了对立面的统一。鹰与蛇,精神与物质是如此的不同,只有圆周运动才将二者联系在一起。对于尼采来说超越自我的行为就是向高层次发展的原则,它既超越自己,又在超越后回归自我,只不过是在更高的层次上。鹰与蛇尽管相互对立,截然不同,可它们二者之间没有敌意,它们在友好的合作中完成圆周运动。同样的,精神和物质不是相互抵毁,而是相互依存、相互补充,精神通过物质来实现,物质通过精神来提高。蛇在与鹰的共同飞翔中离开了它在地上的居留地升跃到了它依靠自己的力量无法达到的层次,同样的物质作为精神的实现者进入了它通过自己的努力无法涉足的领域。精神中有物质,物质中有精神,不论物质还是精神都存在向更高层次发展的要求。这种要求作为权力意志的原则在共同的又存在差异的圆周运动中表现出来。
  
   人类好比鹰与蛇的统一体。因此查拉图斯特拉乞求高傲(鹰)永远伴随他的智慧(蛇),因为只有这样才能保证人类永远以圆周运动的方式前进。在这圆周运动中人类存在的对立面辩证地统一在一起,相互斗争,相互依存,就象查拉图斯特拉的鹰与蛇一样。它们各是不同种的生物,但是缠绕在一起共同做圆周运动。在现实世界中精神(灵魂)既要紧跟物质(内体),以便不与物质脱节并随时汲取生活的活力,同时精神还要反作用于物质,发挥其独特的能动作用。
  
   最后,让我们分析一下查拉图斯特拉的终结。从表面意义上看,这首先是指查拉图斯特拉本人。他在十年前走了自下而上之路——复活,现在走的是自上而下之路 ——终结。从一个非表面的意义上看,查拉图斯特拉在进行这两种相反的运动中执行的是权力意志的原则,这一点在形成过程中表现得非常直观。传统的二元论观点把对立面不是看作既矛盾又统一的,而是看成极端相反、水火不相容的。恰好在这一点上尼采与传统的二元论者分道扬镳。西方哲学界的普遍错误在于他们把对立面作为誓不两立的二元论固定、延袭下来了,其实质问题为如何看待对立面之间的关系。在真实世界(即西方传统观念中所说的表象的世界)中立面之间的关系是对立统一的辩证关系,二者既极端对立又相互依存,并在一定条件下相互转化,尼采一针见血地指出了这一点。在《查拉图斯特拉如是说》中,尼采表达了清晰明确的一元论思想。二元论的思想渊源流长,无论是在人类早期哲学的璀璨明珠希腊哲学中还是在人类宗教史上历史最长分布最广影响最大的基督教教义中同样存在着两个世界的学说——真实的世界和表象的世界。这两个世界之间的关系被绝对化了。形象地说,好比人们设定了圆周的直径,却忘记了圆周本身。这样一来势必给人造成一种错误印象:这是一对无法调节、无法统一的对立面,人们只能或者选择这一面或者那一面;或者向上到精神,踏上通往所谓的真实的、美妙的世界之路,或者是向下到物质,坠入所谓的表象的邪恶的世界之中,二者之间是一道无法逾越的鸿沟。尼采力图超越二者之间的鸿沟,他用形象的比喻和散文诗的语言生动地表述了二者之间的对立统一关系以及圆周式的前进方式。超人的思想是尼采超现实的想象,超人的理论无疑应归入唯心主义的体系。但是这里面所包含的一元论的思想和辩证发展的历史观是无论如何应该肯定的。另外尼采的唯心主义体系里所包含的异常生动的辩证法思想,此起当时在欧洲大陆广为流行的庸俗唯物主义机械唯物主义和拜物教不知要高明多少倍。马克思主义以前的唯物论,由于其机械的、形而上学的性质,没有在强调思维依赖于存在,精神依赖于物质的前提下,充分估价意识、精神、主观的巨大能动作用,人类这方面的正确认识首先是在唯心主义哲学范畴中被体现出来了。尼采在《查拉图斯特如是说》中所提出的超人理论和永恒轮回的思想就是出类拔萃的例证。
  《查拉图斯特拉如是说》-目录
  
  代总序尼采,一位应该被超越的伟人
  译者前言尼采最具轰动效应的扛鼎之作
  第一卷
  查拉图斯特拉前言
  查拉图斯特拉的演说
  论三种变形
  论道德讲坛
  论信仰彼岸世界的人
  论蔑视肉体者
  论快乐和激情
  论苍白的罪犯
  论阅读和写作
  论山旁之树
  论死之说教者
  论战争和战士
  论新偶像
  论市场的苍蝇
  论贞洁
  论朋友
  论一千零一个目标
  论爱邻人
  论创造者的道路
  论老妪和少妇
  论毒蛇的咬啮
  论孩子和婚姻
  论自由之死
  论馈赠的道德
  第二卷
  持镜的小孩
  在幸福岛上
  论同情者
  论牧师
  论道德家
  论流氓无赖
  论毒蜘蛛
  论著名的智者
  夜歌
  舞蹈之歌
  坟墓之歌
  论超越自我
  论高尚者
  论教化的国度
  论纯洁的知识
  论学者
  论诗人
  论伟大事件
  预言家
  论解救
  论人的智慧
  最寂静的时刻
  第三卷
  漫游者
  论相貌和谜
  论违背意志的幸福
  日出之前
  论逐渐变小的道德
  橄榄山上
  离弃
  背叛者
  归家
  论三件恶事
  论沉重的思想
  论新旧招牌
  痊愈者
  论伟大的渴望
  另一支舞曲
  七个印章
  第四卷
  蜂蜜祭品
  痛苦的呼号
  与两位国王的谈话
  水蛭
  魔术家
  逊位
  最丑陋的人
  自愿行乞者
  影子
  正午
  欢迎
  晚餐
  更高级的人
  忧郁之歌
  论科学
  在沙漠的女儿们中间
  觉醒
  驴节
  沉醉之歌
  征兆


  Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for All and None (German: Also sprach Zarathustra: Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen) is a philosophical novel by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, composed in four parts between 1883 and 1885. Much of the work deals with ideas such as the "eternal recurrence of the same", the parable on the "death of God", and the "prophecy" of the Overman, which were first introduced in The Gay Science.
  
  Described by Nietzsche himself as "the deepest ever written," the book is a dense and esoteric treatise on philosophy and morality, featuring as protagonist a fictionalized prophet descending from his recluse to mankind, Zarathustra. A central irony of the text is that Nietzsche mimics the style of the Bible in order to present ideas which fundamentally oppose Christian and Jewish morality and tradition.
  
  Genesis
  
  Thus Spoke Zarathustra was conceived while Nietzsche was writing The Gay Science; he made a small note, reading "6,000 feet beyond man and time," as evidence of this. More specifically, this note related to the concept of the Eternal Recurrence, which is, by Nietzsche's admission, the central idea of Zarathustra; this idea occurred to him by a "pyramidal block of stone" on the shores of Lake Silvaplana in the Upper Engadine, a high alpine region whose valley floor is at 6,000 ft. Nietzsche planned to write the book in three parts over several years. He wrote that the ideas for Zarathustra first came to him while walking on two roads surrounding Rapallo, according to Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche in the introduction of Thomas Common's early translation of the book.
  
  While developing the general outlook of the book, he subsequently decided to write an additional three parts; ultimately, however, he composed only the fourth part, which is viewed to constitute an intermezzo.
  
  Nietzsche commented in Ecce Homo that for the completion of each part: "Ten days sufficed; in no case, neither for the first nor for the third and last, did I require more" (trans. Kaufmann). The first three parts were first published separately, and were subsequently published in a single volume in 1887. The fourth part remained private after Nietzsche wrote it in 1885; a scant forty copies were all that were printed, apart from seven others that were distributed to Nietzsche's close friends. In March 1892, the four parts were finally reprinted as a single volume. Since then, the version most commonly produced has included all four parts.
  
  The original text contains a great deal of word-play. An example of this exists in the use of the words "over" or "super" and the words "down" or "abyss/abysmal"; some examples include "superman" or "overman", "overgoing", "downgoing" and "self-overcoming".
  Synopsis
  
  The book chronicles the fictitious travels and pedagogy of Zarathustra. The name of this character is taken from the ancient prophet usually known in English as Zoroaster (Avestan: Zaraθuštra), the Persian founder of Zoroastrianism. Nietzsche is clearly portraying a "new" or "different" Zarathustra, one who turns traditional morality on its head. He goes on to characterize "what the name of Zarathustra means in my mouth, the mouth of the first immoralist:"
  
   [F]or what constitutes the tremendous historical uniqueness of that Persian is just the opposite of this. Zarathustra was the first to consider the fight of good and evil the very wheel in the machinery of things: the transposition of morality into the metaphysical realm, as a force, cause, and end in itself, is his work. […] Zarathustra created this most calamitous error, morality; consequently, he must also be the first to recognize it. […] His doctrine, and his alone, posits truthfulness as the highest virtue; this means the opposite of the cowardice of the "idealist” who flees from reality […]—Am I understood?—The self-overcoming of morality, out of truthfulness; the self-overcoming of the moralist, into his opposite—into me—that is what the name of Zarathustra means in my mouth.
  
   – Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, "Why I Am a Destiny", §3, trans. Walter Kaufmann
  
  Zarathustra has a simple characterisation and plot, narrated sporadically throughout the text. It possesses a unique experimental style, one that is, for instance, evident in newly invented "dithyrambs" narrated or sung by Zarathustra. Likewise, the separate Dithyrambs of Dionysus was written in autumn 1888, and printed with the full volume in 1892, as the corollaries of Zarathustra's "abundance".
  
  Some speculate that Nietzsche intended to write about final acts of creation and destruction brought about by Zarathustra. However, the book lacks a finale to match that description; its actual ending focuses more on Zarathustra recognizing that his legacy is beginning to perpetuate, and consequently choosing to leave the higher men to their own devices in carrying his legacy forth.
  
  Zarathustra also contains the famous dictum "God is dead", which had appeared earlier in The Gay Science. In his autobiographical work Ecce Homo, Nietzsche states that the book's underlying concept is discussed within "the penultimate section of the fourth book" of The Gay Science (Ecce Homo, Kaufmann). It is the Eternal recurrence of the same events.
  
  This concept first occurred to Nietzsche while he was walking in Switzerland through the woods along the lake of Silvaplana (close to Surlei); he was inspired by the sight of a gigantic, towering, pyramidal rock. Before Zarathustra, Nietzsche had mentioned the concept in the fourth book of The Gay Science (e.g., sect. 341); this was the first public proclamation of the notion by him. Apart from its salient presence in Zarathustra, it is also echoed throughout Nietzsche's work. At any rate, it is by Zarathustra's transfiguration that he embraces eternity, that he at last ascertains "the supreme will to power". This inspiration finds its expression with Zarathustra's Roundelay, featured twice in the book, once near the story's close:
  “ O man, take care!
  What does the deep midnight declare?
  "I was asleep—
  From a deep dream I woke and swear:—
  The world is deep,
  Deeper than day had been aware.
  Deep is its woe—
  Joy—deeper yet than agony:
  Woe implores: Go!
  But all joy wants eternity—
  Wants deep, wants deep eternity." ”
  
  Another singular feature of Zarathustra, first presented in the prologue, is the designation of human beings as a transition between apes and the "Übermensch" (in English, either the "overman" or "superman"; or, superhuman or overhuman. English translators Thomas Common and R. J. Hollingdale use superman, while Kaufmann uses overman, and Parkes uses overhuman). The Übermensch is one of the many interconnecting, interdependent themes of the story, and is represented through several different metaphors. Examples include: the lightning that is portended by the silence and raindrops of a travelling storm cloud; or the sun's rise and culmination at its midday zenith; or a man traversing a rope stationed above an abyss, moving away from his uncultivated animality and towards the Übermensch.
  
  The symbol of the Übermensch also alludes to Nietzsche's notions of "self-mastery", "self-cultivation", "self-direction", and "self-overcoming". Expostulating these concepts, Zarathustra declares:
  
   "I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?
  
   "All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. You have made your way from worm to man, and much in you is still worm. Once you were apes, and even now, too, man is more ape than any ape.
  
   "Whoever is the wisest among you is also a mere conflict and cross between plant and ghost. But do I bid you become ghosts or plants?
  
   "Behold, I teach you the overman! The overman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so let them go!"
  
   – Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue, §3, trans. Walter Kaufmann
  
  The book embodies a number of innovative poetical and rhetorical methods of expression. It serves as a parallel and supplement to the various philosophical ideas present in Nietzsche's body of work. He has, however, said that "among my writings my Zarathustra stands to my mind by itself" (Ecce Homo, Preface, sec. 4, Kaufmann). Emphasizing its centrality and its status as his magnum opus, it is stated by Nietzsche that:
  
   With [Thus Spoke Zarathustra] I have given mankind the greatest present that has ever been made to it so far. This book, with a voice bridging centuries, is not only the highest book there is, the book that is truly characterized by the air of the heights—the whole fact of man lies beneath it at a tremendous distance—it is also the deepest, born out of the innermost wealth of truth, an inexhaustible well to which no pail descends without coming up again filled with gold and goodness.
  
   – Ecce Homo, Preface, §4, trans. Walter Kaufmann
  
  Since, as stated, many of the book's ideas are also present in his other works, Zarathustra is seen to have served as a precursor to his later philosophical thought. With the book, Nietzsche embraced a distinct aesthetic assiduity. He later reformulated many of his ideas, in his book Beyond Good and Evil and various other writings that he composed thereafter. He continued to emphasize his philosophical concerns; generally, his intention was to show an alternative to repressive moral codes and to avert "nihilism" in all of its varied forms.
  
  Other aspects of Thus Spoke Zarathustra relate to Nietzsche's proposed "Transvaluation of All Values". This incomplete project began with The Antichrist.
  Themes
  
  Nietzsche injects myriad ideas into the book, but there are a few recurring themes. The overman (Übermensch), a self-mastered individual who has achieved his full power, is an almost omnipresent idea in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Man as a race is merely a bridge between animals and the overman. Nietzsche also makes a point that the overman is not an end result for a person, but more the journey toward self-mastery.
  
  The eternal recurrence, found elsewhere in Nietzsche's writing, is also mentioned. The eternal recurrence is the idea that all events that have happened will happen again, infinitely many times. Such a reality can serve as the litmus test for an overman. Faced with the knowledge that he would repeat every action that he has taken, an overman would be elated as he has no regrets and loves life.
  
  The will to power is the fundamental component of human nature. Everything we do is an expression of the will to power. The will to power is a psychological analysis of all human action and is accentuated by self-overcoming and self-enhancement. Contrasted with living for procreation, pleasure, or happiness, the will to power is the summary of all man's struggle against his surrounding environment as well as his reason for living in it.
  
  Copious criticisms of Christianity can be found in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, in particular Christian values of good and evil and its belief in an afterlife. Nietzsche sees the complacency of Christian values as fetters to the achievement of overman as well as on the human spirit.
  Style
  
  Harold Bloom calls Thus Spoke Zarathustra a "gorgeous disaster", adding that its rhapsodic fiction is "now unreadable".
  
  Noteworthy for its format, the book comprises a philosophical work of fiction whose style often lightheartedly imitates that of the New Testament and of the Platonic dialogues, at times resembling pre-Socratic works in tone and in its use of natural phenomena as rhetorical and explanatory devices. It also features frequent references to the Western literary and philosophical traditions, implicitly offering an interpretation of these traditions and of their problems. Nietzsche achieves all of this through the character of Zarathustra (referring to the traditional prophet of Zoroastrianism), who makes speeches on philosophic topics as he moves along a loose plotline marking his development and the reception of his ideas. One can view this characteristic (following the genre of the bildungsroman) as an inline commentary on Zarathustra's (and Nietzsche's) philosophy. All this, along with the book's ambiguity and paradoxical nature, has helped its eventual enthusiastic reception by the reading public, but has frustrated academic attempts at analysis (as Nietzsche may have intended). Thus Spoke Zarathustra remained unpopular as a topic for scholars (especially those in the Anglo-American analytic tradition) until the second half of the twentieth century brought widespread interest in Nietzsche and his unconventional style that does not distinguish between philosophy and literature. It offers formulations of eternal recurrence, and Nietzsche for the first time speaks of the Übermensch: themes that would dominate his books from this point onwards.
  
  A vulnerability of Nietzsche's style is that his nuances and shades of meaning are very easily lost — and all too easily gained — in translation. The Übermensch is particularly problematic: the equivalent "Superman" found in dictionaries and in the translations by Thomas Common and R.J. Hollingdale may create an unfortunate association with the heroic comic-character "Superman", while simultaneously detracting from Nietzsche's repeated play on "über" as well as losing the gender-neutrality of the German.
  
  The "Übermensch" is the being that overcomes the "great nausea" associated with nihilism; that overcomes that most "abysmal" realization of the eternal return. He is the being that "sails over morality", and that dances over gravity (the "spirit of gravity" is Zarathustra's devil and archenemy). He is a "harvester" and a "celebrant" who endlessly affirms his existence, thereby becoming the transfigurer of his consciousness and life, aesthetically. He is initially a destructive force, excising and annihilating the insidious "truths" of the herd, and consequently reclaiming the chaos from which pure creativity is born. It is this creative force exemplified by the Übermensch that justifies suffering without displacing it in some "afterworld".
  Translations
  
  The English translations of Zarathustra differ according to the sentiments of the translators. The Thomas Common translation favors a classic English approach, in the style of Shakespeare or the King James Version of the Bible. Common's poetic interpretation of the text, which renders the title Thus Spake Zarathustra, received wide acclaim for its lambent portrayal. Common reasoned that because the original German was written in a pseudo-Luther-Biblical style, a pseudo-King-James-Biblical style would be fitting in the English translation.
  
  The Common translation, which improved on Alexander Tille's earlier attempt, remained widely accepted until the more critical translations, titled Thus Spoke Zarathustra, separately by R.J. Hollingdale and Walter Kaufmann, which are considered to convey more accurately the German text than the Common version. Kaufmann's introduction to his own translation included a blistering critique of Common's version; he notes that in one instance, Common has taken the German "most evil" and rendered it "baddest", a particularly unfortunate error not merely for his having coined the term "baddest", but also because Nietzsche dedicated a third of The Genealogy of Morals to the difference between "bad" and "evil". This and other errors led Kaufmann to wondering if Common "had little German and less English". The translations of Kaufmann and Hollingdale render the text in a far more familiar, less archaic, style of language, than that of Common.
  
  Clancy Martin's 2005 translation opens with criticism and praise for these three seminal translators, Common, Hollingdale, and Kaufmann. He notes that the German text available to Common was considerably flawed, and that the German text from which Hollingdale and Kaufmann worked was itself untrue to Nietzsche's own work in some ways. Martin criticizes Kaufmann for changing punctuation, altering literal and philosophical meanings, and dampening some of Nietzsche's more controversial metaphors. Kaufmann's version, which has become the most widely available, features a translator's note suggesting that Nietzsche's text would have benefited from an editor; Martin suggests that Kaufmann "took it upon himself to become his editor".
  
  Graham Parkes describes his own 2005 translation as trying "above all to convey the musicality of the text (which was not a priority for Walter Kaufmann or R.J. Hollingdale, authors of the best English translations so far)."
  Musical adaptation
  
  The book inspired Richard Strauss to compose the tone poem Also sprach Zarathustra, which he designated "freely based on Friedrich Nietzsche." Zarathustra's Roundelay is set as part of Gustav Mahler's Third Symphony (1895-6), originally under the title What Man Tells Me, or alternatively What the Night tells me (of Man). Frederick Delius based his major choral-orchestral work A Mass of Life (1904-5) on texts from Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The work ends with a setting of Zarathustra's Roundelay which Delius had composed earlier, in 1898, as a separate work. Carl Orff also composed a three-movement setting of part of Nietzsche's text as a teenager, but this work remains unpublished.
  Editions of Thus Spoke Zarathustra
  
   * 1st - 1909 - (limited to 2,000)
   * 2nd - 1911 - (limited to 1,500)
   * 3rd - 1914 - (limited to 2,000)
   * 4th - 1916 - (limited to 2,000) of Friedrich Nietzsche's Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None translated by Thomas Common, published by the MacMillan Company in 1916, printed in Great Britain by The Darwien Press of Edinburgh.
   * Also sprach Zarathustra, edited by Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari, Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag (study edition of the standard German Nietzsche edition)
   * Thus Spoke Zarathustra, translated by Walter Kaufmann, New York: Random House; reprinted in The Portable Nietzsche, New York: The Viking Press, 1954 and Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1976
   * Thus Spoke Zarathustra, translated by R. J. Hollingdale, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1961
   * Thus Spoke Zarathustra, translated by Graham Parkes, Oxford: Oxford World's Classics, 2005
   * Thus Spoke Zarathustra, translated by Adrian del Caro and edited by Robert Pippin, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006
  
  Commentaries on Thus Spoke Zarathustra
  
   * Gustav Naumann 1899-1901 Zarathustra-Commentar, 4 volumes. Leipzig : Haessel
   * Higgins, Kathleen. 1990. Nietzsche's Zarathustra. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
   * Lampert, Laurence. 1989. Nietzsche's Teaching: An Interpretation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   * Rosen, Stanley. 2004. The Mask of Enlightenment: Nietzsche's Zarathustra. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   * Seung, T. K. 2005. Nietzsche's Epic of the Soul: Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  
  Introduction to Thus Spoke Zarathustra
  
   * Rüdiger Schmidt Nietzsche für Anfänger: Also sprach Zarathustra - Eine Lese-Einführung (introduction in German to the work)
  
  Essay collections on Thus Spoke Zarathustra
  
   * Essays on Thus Spoke Zarathustra: Before Sunrise, edited by James Luchte, London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2008. ISBN 1847062210
  HOW ZARATHUSTRA CAME INTO BEING.
   "Zarathustra" is my brother's most personal work; it is the history of his most individual experiences, of his friendships, ideals, raptures, bitterest disappointments and sorrows. Above it all, however, there soars, transfiguring it, the image of his greatest hopes and remotest aims. My brother had the figure of Zarathustra in his mind from his very earliest youth: he once told me that even as a child he had dreamt of him. At different periods in his life, he would call this haunter of his dreams by different names; "but in the end," he declares in a note on the subject, "I had to do a PERSIAN the honour of identifying him with this creature of my fancy. Persians were the first to take a broad and comprehensive view of history. Every series of evolutions, according to them, was presided over by a prophet; and every prophet had his 'Hazar,'--his dynasty of a thousand years."
   All Zarathustra's views, as also his personality, were early conceptions of my brother's mind. Whoever reads his posthumously published writings for the years 1869-82 with care, will constantly meet with passages suggestive of Zarathustra's thoughts and doctrines. For instance, the ideal of the Superman is put forth quite clearly in all his writings during the years 1873-75; and in "We Philologists", the following remarkable observations occur:--
   "How can one praise and glorify a nation as a whole?--Even among the Greeks, it was the INDIVIDUALS that counted."
   "The Greeks are interesting and extremely important because they reared such a vast number of great individuals. How was this possible? The question is one which ought to be studied.
   "I am interested only in the relations of a people to the rearing of the individual man, and among the Greeks the conditions were unusually favourable for the development of the individual; not by any means owing to the goodness of the people, but because of the struggles of their evil instincts.
   "WITH THE HELP OF FAVOURABLE MEASURES GREAT INDIVIDUALS MIGHT BE REARED WHO WOULD BE BOTH DIFFERENT FROM AND HIGHER THAN THOSE WHO HERETOFORE HAVE OWED THEIR EXISTENCE TO MERE CHANCE. Here we may still be hopeful: in the rearing of exceptional men."
   The notion of rearing the Superman is only a new form of an ideal Nietzsche already had in his youth, that "THE OBJECT OF MANKIND SHOULD LIE IN ITS HIGHEST INDIVIDUALS" (or, as he writes in "Schopenhauer as Educator": "Mankind ought constantly to be striving to produce great men--this and nothing else is its duty.") But the ideals he most revered in those days are no longer held to be the highest types of men. No, around this future ideal of a coming humanity--the Superman--the poet spread the veil of becoming. Who can tell to what glorious heights man can still ascend? That is why, after having tested the worth of our noblest ideal--that of the Saviour, in the light of the new valuations, the poet cries with passionate emphasis in "Zarathustra":
   "Never yet hath there been a Superman. Naked have I seen both of them, the greatest and the smallest man:--
   All-too-similar are they still to each other. Verily even the greatest found I--all-too-human!"--
   The phrase "the rearing of the Superman," has very often been misunderstood. By the word "rearing," in this case, is meant the act of modifying by means of new and higher values--values which, as laws and guides of conduct and opinion, are now to rule over mankind. In general the doctrine of the Superman can only be understood correctly in conjunction with other ideas of the author's, such as:--the Order of Rank, the Will to Power, and the Transvaluation of all Values. He assumes that Christianity, as a product of the resentment of the botched and the weak, has put in ban all that is beautiful, strong, proud, and powerful, in fact all the qualities resulting from strength, and that, in consequence, all forces which tend to promote or elevate life have been seriously undermined. Now, however, a new table of valuations must be placed over mankind--namely, that of the strong, mighty, and magnificent man, overflowing with life and elevated to his zenith--the Superman, who is now put before us with overpowering passion as the aim of our life, hope, and will. And just as the old system of valuing, which only extolled the qualities favourable to the weak, the suffering, and the oppressed, has succeeded in producing a weak, suffering, and "modern" race, so this new and reversed system of valuing ought to rear a healthy, strong, lively, and courageous type, which would be a glory to life itself. Stated briefly, the leading principle of this new system of valuing would be: "All that proceeds from power is good, all that springs from weakness is bad."
   This type must not be regarded as a fanciful figure: it is not a nebulous hope which is to be realised at some indefinitely remote period, thousands of years hence; nor is it a new species (in the Darwinian sense) of which we can know nothing, and which it would therefore be somewhat absurd to strive after. But it is meant to be a possibility which men of the present could realise with all their spiritual and physical energies, provided they adopted the new values.
   The author of "Zarathustra" never lost sight of that egregious example of a transvaluation of all values through Christianity, whereby the whole of the deified mode of life and thought of the Greeks, as well as strong Romedom, was almost annihilated or transvalued in a comparatively short time. Could not a rejuvenated Graeco-Roman system of valuing (once it had been refined and made more profound by the schooling which two thousand years of Christianity had provided) effect another such revolution within a calculable period of time, until that glorious type of manhood shall finally appear which is to be our new faith and hope, and in the creation of which Zarathustra exhorts us to participate?
   In his private notes on the subject the author uses the expression "Superman" (always in the singular, by-the-bye), as signifying "the most thoroughly well-constituted type," as opposed to "modern man"; above all, however, he designates Zarathustra himself as an example of the Superman. In "Ecco Homo" he is careful to enlighten us concerning the precursors and prerequisites to the advent of this highest type, in referring to a certain passage in the "Gay Science":--
   "In order to understand this type, we must first be quite clear in regard to the leading physiological condition on which it depends: this condition is what I call GREAT HEALTHINESS. I know not how to express my meaning more plainly or more personally than I have done already in one of the last chapters (Aphorism 382) of the fifth book of the 'Gaya Scienza'."
   "We, the new, the nameless, the hard-to-understand,"--it says there,--"we firstlings of a yet untried future--we require for a new end also a new means, namely, a new healthiness, stronger, sharper, tougher, bolder and merrier than all healthiness hitherto. He whose soul longeth to experience the whole range of hitherto recognised values and desirabilities, and to circumnavigate all the coasts of this ideal 'Mediterranean Sea', who, from the adventures of his most personal experience, wants to know how it feels to be a conqueror, and discoverer of the ideal--as likewise how it is with the artist, the saint, the legislator, the sage, the scholar, the devotee, the prophet, and the godly non-conformist of the old style:--requires one thing above all for that purpose, GREAT HEALTHINESS--such healthiness as one not only possesses, but also constantly acquires and must acquire, because one unceasingly sacrifices it again, and must sacrifice it!--And now, after having been long on the way in this fashion, we Argonauts of the ideal, more courageous perhaps than prudent, and often enough shipwrecked and brought to grief, nevertheless dangerously healthy, always healthy again,--it would seem as if, in recompense for it all, that we have a still undiscovered country before us, the boundaries of which no one has yet seen, a beyond to all countries and corners of the ideal known hitherto, a world so over-rich in the beautiful, the strange, the questionable, the frightful, and the divine, that our curiosity as well as our thirst for possession thereof, have got out of hand--alas! that nothing will now any longer satisfy us!--
   "How could we still be content with THE MAN OF THE PRESENT DAY after such outlooks, and with such a craving in our conscience and consciousness? Sad enough; but it is unavoidable that we should look on the worthiest aims and hopes of the man of the present day with ill-concealed amusement, and perhaps should no longer look at them. Another ideal runs on before us, a strange, tempting ideal full of danger, to which we should not like to persuade any one, because we do not so readily acknowledge any one's RIGHT THERETO: the ideal of a spirit who plays naively (that is to say involuntarily and from overflowing abundance and power) with everything that has hitherto been called holy, good, intangible, or divine; to whom the loftiest conception which the people have reasonably made their measure of value, would already practically imply danger, ruin, abasement, or at least relaxation, blindness, or temporary self-forgetfulness; the ideal of a humanly superhuman welfare and benevolence, which will often enough appear INHUMAN, for example, when put alongside of all past seriousness on earth, and alongside of all past solemnities in bearing, word, tone, look, morality, and pursuit, as their truest involuntary parody--and WITH which, nevertheless, perhaps THE GREAT SERIOUSNESS only commences, when the proper interrogative mark is set up, the fate of the soul changes, the hour-hand moves, and tragedy begins..."
   Although the figure of Zarathustra and a large number of the leading thoughts in this work had appeared much earlier in the dreams and writings of the author, "Thus Spake Zarathustra" did not actually come into being until the month of August 1881 in Sils Maria; and it was the idea of the Eternal Recurrence of all things which finally induced my brother to set forth his new views in poetic language. In regard to his first conception of this idea, his autobiographical sketch, "Ecce Homo", written in the autumn of 1888, contains the following passage:--
   "The fundamental idea of my work--namely, the Eternal Recurrence of all things--this highest of all possible formulae of a Yea-saying philosophy, first occurred to me in August 1881. I made a note of the thought on a sheet of paper, with the postscript: 6,000 feet beyond men and time! That day I happened to be wandering through the woods alongside of the lake of Silvaplana, and I halted beside a huge, pyramidal and towering rock not far from Surlei. It was then that the thought struck me. Looking back now, I find that exactly two months previous to this inspiration, I had had an omen of its coming in the form of a sudden and decisive alteration in my tastes--more particularly in music. It would even be possible to consider all 'Zarathustra' as a musical composition. At all events, a very necessary condition in its production was a renaissance in myself of the art of hearing. In a small mountain resort (Recoaro) near Vicenza, where I spent the spring of 1881, I and my friend and Maestro, Peter Gast--also one who had been born again--discovered that the phoenix music that hovered over us, wore lighter and brighter plumes than it had done theretofore."
   During the month of August 1881 my brother resolved to reveal the teaching of the Eternal Recurrence, in dithyrambic and psalmodic form, through the mouth of Zarathustra. Among the notes of this period, we found a page on which is written the first definite plan of "Thus Spake Zarathustra":--
   "MIDDAY AND ETERNITY."
   "GUIDE-POSTS TO A NEW WAY OF LIVING."
   Beneath this is written:--
   "Zarathustra born on lake Urmi; left his home in his thirtieth year, went into the province of Aria, and, during ten years of solitude in the mountains, composed the Zend-Avesta."
   "The sun of knowledge stands once more at midday; and the serpent of eternity lies coiled in its light--: It is YOUR time, ye midday brethren."
   In that summer of 1881, my brother, after many years of steadily declining health, began at last to rally, and it is to this first gush of the recovery of his once splendid bodily condition that we owe not only "The Gay Science", which in its mood may be regarded as a prelude to "Zarathustra", but also "Zarathustra" itself. Just as he was beginning to recuperate his health, however, an unkind destiny brought him a number of most painful personal experiences. His friends caused him many disappointments, which were the more bitter to him, inasmuch as he regarded friendship as such a sacred institution; and for the first time in his life he realised the whole horror of that loneliness to which, perhaps, all greatness is condemned. But to be forsaken is something very different from deliberately choosing blessed loneliness. How he longed, in those days, for the ideal friend who would thoroughly understand him, to whom he would be able to say all, and whom he imagined he had found at various periods in his life from his earliest youth onwards. Now, however, that the way he had chosen grew ever more perilous and steep, he found nobody who could follow him: he therefore created a perfect friend for himself in the ideal form of a majestic philosopher, and made this creation the preacher of his gospel to the world.
   Whether my brother would ever have written "Thus Spake Zarathustra" according to the first plan sketched in the summer of 1881, if he had not had the disappointments already referred to, is now an idle question; but perhaps where "Zarathustra" is concerned, we may also say with Master Eckhardt: "The fleetest beast to bear you to perfection is suffering."
   My brother writes as follows about the origin of the first part of "Zarathustra":--"In the winter of 1882-83, I was living on the charming little Gulf of Rapallo, not far from Genoa, and between Chiavari and Cape Porto Fino. My health was not very good; the winter was cold and exceptionally rainy; and the small inn in which I lived was so close to the water that at night my sleep would be disturbed if the sea were high. These circumstances were surely the very reverse of favourable; and yet in spite of it all, and as if in demonstration of my belief that everything decisive comes to life in spite of every obstacle, it was precisely during this winter and in the midst of these unfavourable circumstances that my 'Zarathustra' originated. In the morning I used to start out in a southerly direction up the glorious road to Zoagli, which rises aloft through a forest of pines and gives one a view far out into the sea. In the afternoon, as often as my health permitted, I walked round the whole bay from Santa Margherita to beyond Porto Fino. This spot was all the more interesting to me, inasmuch as it was so dearly loved by the Emperor Frederick III. In the autumn of 1886 I chanced to be there again when he was revisiting this small, forgotten world of happiness for the last time. It was on these two roads that all 'Zarathustra' came to me, above all Zarathustra himself as a type;--I ought rather to say that it was on these walks that these ideas waylaid me."
   The first part of "Zarathustra" was written in about ten days--that is to say, from the beginning to about the middle of February 1883. "The last lines were written precisely in the hallowed hour when Richard Wagner gave up the ghost in Venice."
   With the exception of the ten days occupied in composing the first part of this book, my brother often referred to this winter as the hardest and sickliest he had ever experienced. He did not, however, mean thereby that his former disorders were troubling him, but that he was suffering from a severe attack of influenza which he had caught in Santa Margherita, and which tormented him for several weeks after his arrival in Genoa. As a matter of fact, however, what he complained of most was his spiritual condition--that indescribable forsakenness--to which he gives such heartrending expression in "Zarathustra". Even the reception which the first part met with at the hands of friends and acquaintances was extremely disheartening: for almost all those to whom he presented copies of the work misunderstood it. "I found no one ripe for many of my thoughts; the case of 'Zarathustra' proves that one can speak with the utmost clearness, and yet not be heard by any one." My brother was very much discouraged by the feebleness of the response he was given, and as he was striving just then to give up the practice of taking hydrate of chloral--a drug he had begun to take while ill with influenza,--the following spring, spent in Rome, was a somewhat gloomy one for him. He writes about it as follows:-- "I spent a melancholy spring in Rome, where I only just managed to live,-- and this was no easy matter. This city, which is absolutely unsuited to the poet-author of 'Zarathustra', and for the choice of which I was not responsible, made me inordinately miserable. I tried to leave it. I wanted to go to Aquila--the opposite of Rome in every respect, and actually founded in a spirit of enmity towards that city (just as I also shall found a city some day), as a memento of an atheist and genuine enemy of the Church--a person very closely related to me,--the great Hohenstaufen, the Emperor Frederick II. But Fate lay behind it all: I had to return again to Rome. In the end I was obliged to be satisfied with the Piazza Barberini, after I had exerted myself in vain to find an anti-Christian quarter. I fear that on one occasion, to avoid bad smells as much as possible, I actually inquired at the Palazzo del Quirinale whether they could not provide a quiet room for a philosopher. In a chamber high above the Piazza just mentioned, from which one obtained a general view of Rome and could hear the fountains plashing far below, the loneliest of all songs was composed--'The Night-Song'. About this time I was obsessed by an unspeakably sad melody, the refrain of which I recognised in the words, 'dead through immortality.'"
   We remained somewhat too long in Rome that spring, and what with the effect of the increasing heat and the discouraging circumstances already described, my brother resolved not to write any more, or in any case, not to proceed with "Zarathustra", although I offered to relieve him of all trouble in connection with the proofs and the publisher. When, however, we returned to Switzerland towards the end of June, and he found himself once more in the familiar and exhilarating air of the mountains, all his joyous creative powers revived, and in a note to me announcing the dispatch of some manuscript, he wrote as follows: "I have engaged a place here for three months: forsooth, I am the greatest fool to allow my courage to be sapped from me by the climate of Italy. Now and again I am troubled by the thought: WHAT NEXT? My 'future' is the darkest thing in the world to me, but as there still remains a great deal for me to do, I suppose I ought rather to think of doing this than of my future, and leave the rest to THEE and the gods."
  The second part of "Zarathustra" was written between the 26th of June and the 6th July. "This summer, finding myself once more in the sacred place where the first thought of 'Zarathustra' flashed across my mind, I conceived the second part. Ten days sufficed. Neither for the second, the first, nor the third part, have I required a day longer."
   He often used to speak of the ecstatic mood in which he wrote "Zarathustra"; how in his walks over hill and dale the ideas would crowd into his mind, and how he would note them down hastily in a note-book from which he would transcribe them on his return, sometimes working till midnight. He says in a letter to me: "You can have no idea of the vehemence of such composition," and in "Ecce Homo" (autumn 1888) he describes as follows with passionate enthusiasm the incomparable mood in which he created Zarathustra:--
   "--Has any one at the end of the nineteenth century any distinct notion of what poets of a stronger age understood by the word inspiration? If not, I will describe it. If one had the smallest vestige of superstition in one, it would hardly be possible to set aside completely the idea that one is the mere incarnation, mouthpiece or medium of an almighty power. The idea of revelation in the sense that something becomes suddenly visible and audible with indescribable certainty and accuracy, which profoundly convulses and upsets one--describes simply the matter of fact. One hears-- one does not seek; one takes--one does not ask who gives: a thought suddenly flashes up like lightning, it comes with necessity, unhesitatingly--I have never had any choice in the matter. There is an ecstasy such that the immense strain of it is sometimes relaxed by a flood of tears, along with which one's steps either rush or involuntarily lag, alternately. There is the feeling that one is completely out of hand, with the very distinct consciousness of an endless number of fine thrills and quiverings to the very toes;--there is a depth of happiness in which the painfullest and gloomiest do not operate as antitheses, but as conditioned, as demanded in the sense of necessary shades of colour in such an overflow of light. There is an instinct for rhythmic relations which embraces wide areas of forms (length, the need of a wide-embracing rhythm, is almost the measure of the force of an inspiration, a sort of counterpart to its pressure and tension). Everything happens quite involuntarily, as if in a tempestuous outburst of freedom, of absoluteness, of power and divinity. The involuntariness of the figures and similes is the most remarkable thing; one loses all perception of what constitutes the figure and what constitutes the simile; everything seems to present itself as the readiest, the correctest and the simplest means of expression. It actually seems, to use one of Zarathustra's own phrases, as if all things came unto one, and would fain be similes: 'Here do all things come caressingly to thy talk and flatter thee, for they want to ride upon thy back. On every simile dost thou here ride to every truth. Here fly open unto thee all being's words and word-cabinets; here all being wanteth to become words, here all becoming wanteth to learn of thee how to talk.' This is MY experience of inspiration. I do not doubt but that one would have to go back thousands of years in order to find some one who could say to me: It is mine also!--"
   In the autumn of 1883 my brother left the Engadine for Germany and stayed there a few weeks. In the following winter, after wandering somewhat erratically through Stresa, Genoa, and Spezia, he landed in Nice, where the climate so happily promoted his creative powers that he wrote the third part of "Zarathustra". "In the winter, beneath the halcyon sky of Nice, which then looked down upon me for the first time in my life, I found the third 'Zarathustra'--and came to the end of my task; the whole having occupied me scarcely a year. Many hidden corners and heights in the landscapes round about Nice are hallowed to me by unforgettable moments. That decisive chapter entitled 'Old and New Tables' was composed in the very difficult ascent from the station to Eza--that wonderful Moorish village in the rocks. My most creative moments were always accompanied by unusual muscular activity. The body is inspired: let us waive the question of the 'soul.' I might often have been seen dancing in those days. Without a suggestion of fatigue I could then walk for seven or eight hours on end among the hills. I slept well and laughed well--I was perfectly robust and patient."
   As we have seen, each of the three parts of "Zarathustra" was written, after a more or less short period of preparation, in about ten days. The composition of the fourth part alone was broken by occasional interruptions. The first notes relating to this part were written while he and I were staying together in Zurich in September 1884. In the following November, while staying at Mentone, he began to elaborate these notes, and after a long pause, finished the manuscript at Nice between the end of January and the middle of February 1885. My brother then called this part the fourth and last; but even before, and shortly after it had been privately printed, he wrote to me saying that he still intended writing a fifth and sixth part, and notes relating to these parts are now in my possession. This fourth part (the original MS. of which contains this note: "Only for my friends, not for the public") is written in a particularly personal spirit, and those few to whom he presented a copy of it, he pledged to the strictest secrecy concerning its contents. He often thought of making this fourth part public also, but doubted whether he would ever be able to do so without considerably altering certain portions of it. At all events he resolved to distribute this manuscript production, of which only forty copies were printed, only among those who had proved themselves worthy of it, and it speaks eloquently of his utter loneliness and need of sympathy in those days, that he had occasion to present only seven copies of his book according to this resolution.
   Already at the beginning of this history I hinted at the reasons which led my brother to select a Persian as the incarnation of his ideal of the majestic philosopher. His reasons, however, for choosing Zarathustra of all others to be his mouthpiece, he gives us in the following words:-- "People have never asked me, as they should have done, what the name Zarathustra precisely means in my mouth, in the mouth of the first Immoralist; for what distinguishes that philosopher from all others in the past is the very fact that he was exactly the reverse of an immoralist. Zarathustra was the first to see in the struggle between good and evil the essential wheel in the working of things. The translation of morality into the metaphysical, as force, cause, end in itself, was HIS work. But the very question suggests its own answer. Zarathustra CREATED the most portentous error, MORALITY, consequently he should also be the first to PERCEIVE that error, not only because he has had longer and greater experience of the subject than any other thinker--all history is the experimental refutation of the theory of the so-called moral order of things:--the more important point is that Zarathustra was more truthful than any other thinker. In his teaching alone do we meet with truthfulness upheld as the highest virtue--i.e.: the reverse of the COWARDICE of the 'idealist' who flees from reality. Zarathustra had more courage in his body than any other thinker before or after him. To tell the truth and TO AIM STRAIGHT: that is the first Persian virtue. Am I understood?...The overcoming of morality through itself--through truthfulness, the overcoming of the moralist through his opposite--THROUGH ME--: that is what the name Zarathustra means in my mouth."
   ELIZABETH FORSTER-NIETZSCHE.
首页>> 文学论坛>> 哲学思考>> 弗里德里希·威廉·尼采 Friedrich Nietzsche   德国 Germany   德意志帝国   (1844年10月15日1900年8月25日)