Author of quotes: Max Stirner. Page 3

There are madmen who imagine that they are the Lord God, the God-man or the man in the moon, and everywhere else is crawling with fools who believe themselves sinners; but as those are not people from the moon, and those - not sinners. Their sin is imaginary.
But cleverly will object to me - all their madness or obsession is a sin. Their obsession is that they were able to do what they could reach, the result of their development, as the faith of Luther in the Bible was what he had power. Development leads one to a madhouse, the other in the Pantheon or Valhalla.
No sinner and no sinful selfishness!

If religion is put in the position that we are all sinners, I will put up against her a different position: that we are all too perfect! For in every given moment we all we can be, and we don't have to be big. As in no one fault, it is impossible to speak about sin. Show me one sinner in the world when no one will have to serve something higher! If you need to satisfy only yourself, then I won't be a sinner if you don't do as it should, because I'm not insulting anything "Holy"; if, on the contrary, I should be pious, then I must please God, if I have to act like a human being, I have to cater to human nature, the idea of mankind, etc Whom religion calls the "sinner", that humanism calls "selfish". But, again, if I don't have to stay for someone else, then wouldn't it be "selfish", in which humanity has found a new devil, is simply nonsense? Selfish, which denies humanists - such as Ghost, like the devil: he exists only as a Scarecrow and a fantastic image in their brain. If they were not imbued with the naive staropavlovskoy the antithesis of good and evil, to whom they gave the modern name "human" and "egoistic," they would not turn to the obsolete "sinner", transforming it into a "selfish" and not sewed new patches on old clothes. But they couldn't, because he considered their task to be "people".

Therein lies the humor. To laugh at the pettiness of people can just have "higher feelings"; but to laugh at all the great thoughts, sublime feelings, noble inspiration, and sacred faith - it suggests that I am the owner of all.

Consciously or unconsciously, but we all strive for distinctiveness, and are unlikely to find among us at least one who would not refuse Holy feelings, Holy thoughts, Holy faith, Yes, we have not met one person who could be exempted from some Holy thoughts. Our struggles against convictions starts from the opinion that we are able to expel the enemy from his strongholds of thought. But what I do unconsciously I half-do, and therefore after every victory over any faith I become again the prisoner (possessed) of a new faith, which is then again completely takes over my me and makes me a fanatic mind, after I stopped being a fanatic of the Bible or the fanatic ideas of humanity after I have fought for Christianity.

As the world becomes my property, became a material with which I do what I want and the spirit, becoming the property should descend to the level of material that I know of no more sacred fear. First of all, I will not tremble before any thought, whatever it was daring and "diabolical", because if she's threatening me to be uncomfortable and not satisfying me, in my power to put an end to it; but I will not recoil and before any act, if there dwelt a spirit of godlessness, immorality, illegality, like St. Boniface, who did not stop before going to cut down the sacred oak of the heathens for religious reasons. If the things of the world are vanity and the thoughts of the spirit must also become vain. No one thought is not sacred, for no one before thought I can't feel "reverence"; no feeling is sacred (no sacred feeling of friendship, mother's feelings, etc.), no belief is not sacred. They disposed of all my property alienated, and they are destroyed and created me.

But I was - Christian if I think and act? Whether human, liberal, humane, inhumane, illiberal, inhumane - I don't care. Let alone what I'm doing will lead me to my purpose and the purpose of the adopt me, call me for this, as you wish: I don't care.

Free criticism is ideas, and because it is still only in the theory. No matter how it struggled with ideas, she can never get rid of them. She is busy with ghosts, but she can do so, only believing them to be ghosts. The ideas with which it deals, do not disappear completely: the coming dawn of a new morning they are not scatters.
The critic can reach Ataraxia in relation to ideas, but never get rid of them, that is, he will never be able to comprehend that above the bodily man there is nothing higher (no humanity, no freedom). He is always the idea of "calling" a man of "humanity." And this idea of humanity remains unrealized, because it is and remains an "idea" and should remain so.

Like criticizing an animal, I think only about myself. I am the criterion of truth, but I'm not an idea but more than an idea, that is unspeakable. My criticism is not "free" criticism, not free from me, and nothing "is", is not and idea, it is my own criticism.

But to serve the truth was never my intention; it is only a means of food for my thoughts, as the potatoes - my stomach, and the other - to my heart. While I have the desire and the power to think, until then, I is one truth only in order to recreate it according to my abilities. The truth to me as "worldly and temporal" as for a Christian reality or all the world. It exists in the same way as the things of the world, although the Christian has proved their nothingness, but it is vain, for its value lies not in itself, in me; in itself it has no value. Your activity creates countless things you change even the face of the earth and raise up everywhere human beings; similarly, you open countless of the truths, and we welcome this wholeheartedly. But just as I will never agree to become the slave of your machines and only want to help you for your own sake, to bring them to the course, and your truths I want to use only when I have to serve them and obey their demands. All truths beneath me - to me; but the truth me, truth to which I must adapt, I don't want to know. For me there is no truth, for nothing stands above me. Even my essence and the essence of man does not stand me. Yes, I, this "drop in the sea," this "insignificant man"!
Each age has had its "truth of faith" and in fact, never has there been a era that does not recognize any "higher truth", truth, which is considered necessary to comply as a "sovereign." All truths of any era - its fixed idea, and if later he found a new truth, because it was looking for; stupidity only modified and dressed in fancy clothes, for wanted after all-who could doubt the legality of this? - "inspiration idea." Wanted to be ruled by some thought to be afflicted by it. The last ruler of this kind is "our essence" or "person".

Only when they become my property, all these spirits, the truth has to retire, and only then they become real when they have taken their independent existence and they become my property when it is no longer possible to tell the truth develops, dominates, it is argued, history (also a concept) wins, etc., have Never triumphed truth - she was always my means to the victory, like the sword ("the sword of truth"). Dead truth, it is a letter, a word, a material that I can use. All truth in itself is dead, all truth is dead; live it just the way my lungs are alive, that is depending on my own life. The truth is the material as a useful grasses and weeds. Are they useful grasses or weeds? Only I can solve it.

But does "person" as an abstract concept - not a "spirit"? The core of the state is the "human concept", then there is something unreal, and the state itself is only "human society". The world creates the believer (believing spirit), is called the Church and the world creates man (human or humane spirit) is called the state. But it's not my world. I never do anything abstractly human, and always make your own, that is my personal Case differs from all other human Affairs, and that difference makes it really mine, I owned a business. Human in it is an abstraction, and as such the spirit, that is, an abstract being.

Thus, the state manifests his hostility towards me that requires me to be human, this implies that I can be and not a man, and to seem to him "non-person": it imposes on me a duty, "to be human". Further, it requires that I do nothing that overthrew him; his existence must therefore always be sacred to me. Next, I must not be selfish, and "honest and decent", that is, a moral person. In short, I should be towards him and his existence powerless, respectful, etc.

Morality does not condone selfishness because it recognized not me, but only of a person. If, however, the state - a society of people, and not a collection of many "I's", each of which thinks only of itself, it cannot exist without morality, and must stick to it. So we both, the state and I are enemies. Me, the selfish, the benefit of this "human society" is no interested in: I never donate, but only use it by turning it into my property and my creation, that is, I destroy it and create instead a Union of egoists.

This religion plays in the state the same role as the respect for the family beginning at the family. In order for the family are recognized and preserved for what it is, for all its members blood relationship should be sacred, each family member should feel awe by ties of consanguinity to each relative was in his eyes sacred. Similarly, a member state of the community should be considered a relic of this community, and the concept for the state - the most high must be higher and for him.