True Nihilism and Sanctity?

[Qoeleth]

Let’s imagine a true nihilist- someone who sincerely (to the extent that sincereity means anything) places no value on the esteem of others, does not wish to convert anyone or to make any point, does not distinguish between enemy or friend, values nothing and therefore is immune to sadness or happiness, sees a lump of gold as being of no more value than a lump of rock, a human body as no more than a clod of earth, could not care less if he lives or dies, repeats to himself the formula “Vanitas vanitatum” with every breathe, until it, like everything, means less than nothing, would happily commit suicide, but could not be bothered to make the effort and upset others, and, since time means nothing to them, will just wait out their time.

Such a person would never experience greed, lust, envy, wrath, would have no preferences or prejudices. They would embody what the classical spiritual writers call the virtues of Christian life- humility, silence, indifference, detachment, they would, have passed every dark night of the soul (cf. John of the Cross), and arrived at the radiant light of darkness (cf. St. Dionysius), the purity of the absolute void. For them, life would be ‘less than a cobweb’ (cf. St. John Chrysostom)

Does it not seem that such a person, the TRUE nihilist, would necessarily also be approaching sanctity?

 

[Trishie]

No because such a person might hardly be human.
There is nothing saintly about being devoid of all human emotion.
Holiness is attained as we overcome selfish attitudes and feelings to be compassionate and to live in practical kindness, according to the need of those around us.

Your definition would determine Jesus Christ as not holy because He has human feelings.
It just happens that I was looking at a thought I wrote down a few years ago:

Regarding holiness

Dear Jesus, please reveal brilliantly to all, that You do not require that individuals need to be regarded as Saints, in order to be Your saints. Assure them that holiness is Your action, not ours!

Let them read the gospels and reflect on what they read, discovering that You were truly human, that you wept, felt pain, joy, and exasperation, “How long do I have to put up with this faithless generation!”) [Mark 9:19]

You became righteously angry [in the Temple]. You were sometimes disappointed, sometimes weary. You who spent so much time teaching and ministering to others, sometimes felt the need to be alone, and the desire to escape a dreadful ordeal (“let this cup pass from me”). [Luke 22:42]

Then in the depths of suffering, You found faith difficult, (“My God, why have You abandoned me?”) [Psalm 22:1] Yet humbly Your cried out “Not my will, Your will be done!” and “Into Your hands I commend my Spirit”.

Why did not the evangelists record Your laughter! How sober of them! However, they do record as Your lyrical delight over little children, (“Blessed are You, Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth! You have revealed to little ones, the mysteries of Your Kingdom!” [Matthew 11:25]

Jesus, ask Your people to observe that You lived the ordinary life for about thirty years. If You had not wanted to make such an issue about being vulnerably human, You could have come as a glorious, fully developed human Personage.

Jesus, truly human, truly God, help us to become fully human, fully whole, created as we are in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26)

Your hypothesis, if taken as reality, would claim that God incarnate, because He experienced many human emotions right up to His death on the Cross therefore wasn’t/isn’t truly holy…and I don’t think you would intend this!

Holiness, sanctity, in in being human in the true sense of the word, given that we, as human, are created in God’s image and likeness.
“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:27

Kind wishes,

Trishie

 

[ProdglArchitect]

No because such a person might hardly be human.
There is nothing saintly about being devoid of all human emotion.
Holiness is attained as we overcome selfish attitudes and feelings to be compassionate and to live in practical kindness, according to the need of those around us.

Your definition would determine Jesus Christ as not holy because He has human feelings.
It just happens that I was looking at a thought I wrote down a few years ago:

Regarding holiness

Dear Jesus, please reveal brilliantly to all, that You do not require that individuals need to be regarded as Saints, in order to be Your saints. Assure them that holiness is Your action, not ours!

Let them read the gospels and reflect on what they read, discovering that You were truly human, that you wept, felt pain, joy, and exasperation, “How long do I have to put up with this faithless generation!”) [Mark 9:19]

You became righteously angry [in the Temple]. You were sometimes disappointed, sometimes weary. You who spent so much time teaching and ministering to others, sometimes felt the need to be alone, and the desire to escape a dreadful ordeal (“let this cup pass from me”). [Luke 22:42]

Then in the depths of suffering, You found faith difficult, (“My God, why have You abandoned me?”) [Psalm 22:1] Yet humbly Your cried out “Not my will, Your will be done!” and “Into Your hands I commend my Spirit”.

Why did not the evangelists record Your laughter! How sober of them! However, they do record as Your lyrical delight over little children, (“Blessed are You, Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth! You have revealed to little ones, the mysteries of Your Kingdom!” [Matthew 11:25]

Jesus, ask Your people to observe that You lived the ordinary life for about thirty years. If You had not wanted to make such an issue about being vulnerably human, You could have come as a glorious, fully developed human Personage.

Jesus, truly human, truly God, help us to become fully human, fully whole, created as we are in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26)

Your hypothesis, if taken as reality, would claim that God incarnate, because He experienced many human emotions right up to His death on the Cross therefore wasn’t/isn’t truly holy…and I don’t think you would intend this!

Holiness, sanctity, in in being human in the true sense of the word, given that we, as human, are created in God’s image and likeness.
“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:27

Kind wishes,

Trishie

Quoted for re-emphasis. Excellent post!

 

[fhansen]

Let’s imagine a true nihilist- someone who sincerely (to the extent that sincereity means anything) places no value on the esteem of others, does not wish to convert anyone or to make any point, does not distinguish between enemy or friend, values nothing and therefore is immune to sadness or happiness, sees a lump of gold as being of no more value than a lump of rock, a human body as no more than a clod of earth, could not care less if he lives or dies, repeats to himself the formula “Vanitas vanitatum” with every breathe, until it, like everything, means less than nothing, would happily commit suicide, but could not be bothered to make the effort and upset others, and, since time means nothing to them, will just wait out their time.

Such a person would never experience greed, lust, envy, wrath, would have no preferences or prejudices. They would embody what the classical spiritual writers call the virtues of Christian life- humility, silence, indifference, detachment, they would, have passed every dark night of the soul (cf. John of the Cross), and arrived at the radiant light of darkness (cf. St. Dionysius), the purity of the absolute void. For them, life would be ‘less than a cobweb’ (cf. St. John Chrysostom)

Does it not seem that such a person, the TRUE nihilist, would necessarily also be approaching sanctity?

Christianity is far from being merely the negation of evil; it’s the positive recognition of the existence and supreme value of goodness, i.e. of love, and the Source of this goodness, and of our absolute need for it in order for life to be worth living, in order for existence to be eternally desirable. As St Teresa of Avila came to know and so wisely stated:** “It’s love alone that gives worth to all things.”**

 

[PoliSciProf]

Without going into Nietzsche’s political account of nihilism, I suggest you read Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons. The nihilist Bazarov sees himself as a god who plays with human “bricks” like his friend Arkady. Though I leave this to intellectual historians, I think Turgenev’s novel helped to popularize the term “nihilism.” I suggest you study the great poets and novelists rather than creating arbitrary human constructs. In short, your construct has no passion or desire.

 

[JRKH]

Let’s imagine a true nihilist- someone who sincerely (to the extent that sincereity means anything) places no value on the esteem of others, does not wish to convert anyone or to make any point, does not distinguish between enemy or friend, values nothing and therefore is immune to sadness or happiness, sees a lump of gold as being of no more value than a lump of rock, a human body as no more than a clod of earth, could not care less if he lives or dies, repeats to himself the formula “Vanitas vanitatum” with every breathe, until it, like everything, means less than nothing, would happily commit suicide, but could not be bothered to make the effort and upset others, and, since time means nothing to them, will just wait out their time.

Such a person would never experience greed, lust, envy, wrath, would have no preferences or prejudices. They would embody what the classical spiritual writers call the virtues of Christian life- humility, silence, indifference, detachment, they would, have passed every dark night of the soul (cf. John of the Cross), and arrived at the radiant light of darkness (cf. St. Dionysius), the purity of the absolute void. For them, life would be ‘less than a cobweb’ (cf. St. John Chrysostom)

Does it not seem that such a person, the TRUE nihilist, would necessarily also be approaching sanctity?

For the sake of discussion - - - You have shared with us what your “true nihilist” does NOT believe, give value to etc… but you have not shared what he DOES believe, value, etc…

Sanctity is about growth - not about elimination. To simply look at what is eliminated (even if they are bad things) does not = growth in the good.
Consider Mt 12:43-45
43"When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. 44Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order.45Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. …"
The one who has eliminated vices but has not replaced them with active virtues - is like this empty house - primed and ready to fall into a worse state than he was previously.

Just a thought.

Peace
James

 

[ThinkingSapien]

…]values nothing and therefore is immune to sadness or happiness, …]would happily commit suicide, but could not be bothered to make the effort and upset others,…]

That’s a bit of a contradiction. If upsetting others is a factor in his behaviour then there is something that he values.

Does it not seem that such a person, the TRUE nihilist, would necessarily also be approaching sanctity?

Contradictions aside, he might make a good ascetic Buddhist without making to much of an effort.

 

[Linux]

For the sake of discussion - - - You have shared with us what your “true nihilist” does NOT believe, give value to etc… but you have not shared what he DOES believe, value, etc…

Sanctity is about growth - not about elimination. To simply look at what is eliminated (even if they are bad things) does not = growth in the good.
Consider Mt 12:43-45
43"When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. 44Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order.45Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. …"
The one who has eliminated vices but has not replaced them with active virtues - is like this empty house - primed and ready to fall into a worse state than he was previously.

Just a thought.

Peace
James

A true nihilist does not place value on anything. A true nihilist does not exist.

 

[JRKH]

A true nihilist does not place value on anything. A true nihilist does not exist.

Fair enough…but since the OP seems to be talking hypothetical here…It seemed like a good approach to allow the OP to examine their idea in the light of what true holiness (sanctity) is.

Peace
James

 

[Linux]

Fair enough…but since the OP seems to be talking hypothetical here…It seemed like a good approach to allow the OP to examine their idea in the light of what true holiness (sanctity) is.

Peace
James

What is holiness?

 

[JRKH]

What is holiness?

That which we are called to be…Perfection in Love…Mt 5:48

Peace
James

 

[Qoeleth]

Without going into Nietzsche’s political account of nihilism, I suggest you read Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons. The nihilist Bazarov sees himself as a god who plays with human “bricks” like his friend Arkady. Though I leave this to intellectual historians, I think Turgenev’s novel helped to popularize the term “nihilism.” I suggest you study the great poets and novelists rather than creating arbitrary human constructs. In short, your construct has no passion or desire.

Thank you for your suggestions.

 

[Qoeleth]

For the sake of discussion - - - You have shared with us what your “true nihilist” does NOT believe, give value to etc… but you have not shared what he DOES believe, value, etc…

Sanctity is about growth - not about elimination. To simply look at what is eliminated (even if they are bad things) does not = growth in the good.
Consider Mt 12:43-45
43"When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. 44Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order.45Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. …"
The one who has eliminated vices but has not replaced them with active virtues - is like this empty house - primed and ready to fall into a worse state than he was previously.

Just a thought.

Peace
James

I have in mind the tradition of Evagrius (articulated perhaps more popularly by de Chaussade), in which he suggests the human aspect of the spiritual life is primarily one of emptying oneself of preferences, projects, opinions, values, etc.

Now, to use the image of the house, it is our ‘job’ to empty our house. But then, is it not God who supplies the virtues?

Let me pose an example. Imagine a person ambitious for power or wealth, who spends their time building up a company One day, they realise this is vanity, and so ‘empty themselves’ of this ambition and project. But the next day, start to seize upon ‘virtues’ (or what seem like virtues), and founds a new charitable foundation, or something. Can it not be the same egotism, the ‘will to power’ simply in another form? Or the aggresive atheist, who suddenly renounces atheism, but then becomes an equally dogmatic proponent of the faith?

St. Bonaventure, in talking about the spiritual progress, imagines the final stage as one completely without preferences, without any fear or desire, indifferent “sive agere, sive pati, sive vivere, sive mori.” (whether to do or to suffer, to live or to die).

I suppose what I am saying is that attachment, even to ‘good’ things, tends to lead to sin (e.g. the Christian who becomes uncharitable when arguing with the atheist, or the philanthropist who becomes ambitious in his own good works).

In contrast, the person with no preferences, values or beliefs, one way or the other would simply give way in all things.

Now, it seems to me that there is a kind of sanctity in this capacity to give way to others, to life, to death, etc.- to let others go first, to accept good or bad with indifference, not to be offended by anyone else’s sin, to have no desire to acquire or achieve anything.

Some of the saints talk about, in certain stages of spiritual life, of giving up even the desire for Heaven. Is this the same kind of thing very similar to the nihilism of E.M. Cioran, Gaudapada, or Sankara?

 

[JRKH]

I have in mind the tradition of Evagrius (articulated perhaps more popularly by de Chaussade), in which he suggests the human aspect of the spiritual life is primarily one of emptying oneself of preferences, projects, opinions, values, etc.

I’ve heard various discussions on this “emptying” and think that this - just by itself - is not necessarily a good thing. Such emptying needs to be replaced by something else.

Now, to use the image of the house, it is our ‘job’ to empty our house. But then, is it not God who supplies the virtues?

God supplies them but it’s up to us to move them in and arrange them and make use of them for the Glory of God…Can a Nihilist do that?

Let me pose an example. Imagine a person ambitious for power or wealth, who spends their time building up a company One day, they realize this is vanity, and so ‘empty themselves’ of this ambition and project. But the next day, start to seize upon ‘virtues’ (or what seem like virtues), and founds a new charitable foundation, or something. Can it not be the same egotism, the ‘will to power’ simply in another form? Or the aggresive atheist, who suddenly renounces atheism, but then becomes an equally dogmatic proponent of the faith?

I would venture to say that they have not actually emptied themselves of vanity…but merely exchanged one form of vanity for another. Not unlike the bible reference where the demon comes back and reoccupies the house.
Such a person as you describe may have had an epiphany and did away with certain ambitions and projects (cleaned house) and replaced them with new - more worthy projects. So far so good…but there is something wrong internally - and emptiness that allow the ego to once again assert itself…
The outside has changed, but the inside - not so much…

St. Bonaventure, in talking about the spiritual progress, imagines the final stage as one completely without preferences, without any fear or desire, indifferent “sive agere, sive pati, sive vivere, sive mori.” (whether to do or to suffer, to live or to die).

One must be careful about how one reads these things. Signs of spiritual progress such as you list can be good when they are part of a properly oriented spiritual journey.
If these are made the goal instead of simply the result of proper growth, then there is a problem.
The Nihilist - in not caring about anything - is not growing properly so while certain signs might be similar…the internals are vacant.

I suppose what I am saying is that attachment, even to ‘good’ things, tends to lead to sin (e.g. the Christian who becomes uncharitable when arguing with the atheist, or the philanthropist who becomes ambitious in his own good works).

This is true which is why we must always remain properly focused on building up Love and seeking first the kingdom in our own hearts. If we get off course, hopefully we have someone to set us straight.

In contrast, the person with no preferences, values or beliefs, one way or the other would simply give way in all things.

Yes - gives way in all things - good or bad…

Now, it seems to me that there is a kind of sanctity in this capacity to give way to others, to life, to death, etc.- to let others go first, to accept good or bad with indifference, not to be offended by anyone else’s sin, to have no desire to acquire or achieve anything.

There is a certain sanctity in it if it is properly focused…but a nihilist, by definition has the wrong focus.

Some of the saints talk about, in certain stages of spiritual life, of giving up even the desire for Heaven. Is this the same kind of thing very similar to the nihilism of E.M. Cioran, Gaudapada, or Sankara?

I cannot speak to this. I am not a philosopher nor have I ever heard of a saint who said it’s good to not desire heaven…

The bottom line is that Sanctity is not about what we give up, it’s about what we acquire. We give up bad things in order to dispose ourselves to acquiring more good things. Growing in holiness (sanctification) is about building something up, not tossing things out.

Peace
James

 

[Linux]

That which we are called to be…Perfection in Love…Mt 5:48

Peace
James

Why do we need to be perfect in love and what does it mean?

 

[JRKH]

Why do we need to be perfect in love and what does it mean?

Linux…I normally don’t just list off a bunch of bible quotes…but in this case I think it is the best way to answer your question - note that the Greek “agape” love is used in all of these cases.

1John 4:7-8
7 Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God, and he who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 He who does not love does not know God; for God is love.

Mt 22:36-40
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, " You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 **"On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."
** commands base on and in love

Mt 5:43-45 43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

John 13:34-35 "34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

John 15:13 - Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

1 Cor 13
1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; 5 it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. 7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never ends; as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect; 10 but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood. 13 So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Peace
James

 

[Qoeleth]

Linux…I normally don’t just list off a bunch of bible quotes…but in this case I think it is the best way to answer your question - note that the Greek “agape” love is used in all of these cases.

1John 4:7-8
7 Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God, and he who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 He who does not love does not know God; for God is love.

Mt 22:36-40
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, " You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 **"On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."
** commands base on and in love

Mt 5:43-45 43 "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

John 13:34-35 "34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

John 15:13 - Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

1 Cor 13
1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; 5 it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. 7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never ends; as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect; 10 but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood. 13 So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Peace
James

Love is a very ambigous think. The proper idea of agape love is difficult to understand- a totally unsentimental ‘love’ without desire, without preference and without goals.

Now, I think a absolute nihilist would come close to that love, having no grounds of distinguishing friend or enemy, nor grounds for preferring his own well-being to someone else’s, would have no grounds for being arrogant, rude, or resentful.

In the same way the a person coming close to death will often (not always) become infinitely forgiving, generous, and peaceful, as they no longer have anything to lose or to gain in this world, so would the true nihilist live always.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Let’s imagine a true nihilist- someone who sincerely (to the extent that sincereity means anything) places no value on the esteem of others, does not wish to convert anyone or to make any point, does not distinguish between enemy or friend, values nothing and therefore is immune to sadness or happiness, sees a lump of gold as being of no more value than a lump of rock, a human body as no more than a clod of earth, could not care less if he lives or dies, repeats to himself the formula “Vanitas vanitatum” with every breathe, until it, like everything, means less than nothing, would happily commit suicide, but could not be bothered to make the effort and upset others, and, since time means nothing to them, will just wait out their time.

Such a person would never experience greed, lust, envy, wrath, would have no preferences or prejudices. They would embody what the classical spiritual writers call the virtues of Christian life- humility, silence, indifference, detachment, they would, have passed every dark night of the soul (cf. John of the Cross), and arrived at the radiant light of darkness (cf. St. Dionysius), the purity of the absolute void. For them, life would be ‘less than a cobweb’ (cf. St. John Chrysostom)

Does it not seem that such a person, the TRUE nihilist, would necessarily also be approaching sanctity?

Nonesense, this person does not exhibit any Christian values. No Christian, including St. John and St Diobysius and St. John Chrysostom would be indifferent to the reality of the world around them, especially the lives of the men and women who populate the world. In addition, the true Christian believes in the existence of God and all that He has revealed including the duty to " love thy neighbor as thyself. " No Christian can be a true Nihilist, nor even anything close to it. The phrase " Vanity of vanities, all is vanity but to serve the Lord…" is a euphanism for the Sermon on the Mount. It has nothing at all to do with Nihilism.

Linus2nd

 

[JRKH]

Love is a very ambigous think. The proper idea of agape love is difficult to understand- a totally unsentimental ‘love’ without desire, without preference and without goals.

Agape Love is not ambiguous at all - though I do agree that we struggle to understand it. For instance I disagree that Agape Love - as preached by Jesus, the great saints and by the Church - has no goals. In fact it has a very specific goal which is union with the Father who is Love itself.

Now, I think a absolute nihilist would come close to that love, having no grounds of distinguishing friend or enemy, nor grounds for preferring his own well-being to someone else’s, would have no grounds for being arrogant, rude, or resentful.

In the same way the a person coming close to death will often (not always) become infinitely forgiving, generous, and peaceful, as they no longer have anything to lose or to gain in this world, so would the true nihilist live always.

To answer this let’s consider the definition of Nihilism.

1. Philosophy
   a. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
   b. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4. also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.

Given this definition - How could your “absolute nihilist” ever approach any kind of love.
Remember - you are proposing an “absolute nihilist” which means he would fit with the above definitions.
Could you point out just what there is in the above definitions allows for love of any kind? I mean - other than love of evil and destruction and annihilation…

Based on the above, your pure nihilist would simply reach a point of non-existence, not love.

Peace
James

 

[Qoeleth]

Agape Love is not ambiguous at all - though I do agree that we struggle to understand it. For instance I disagree that Agape Love - as preached by Jesus, the great saints and by the Church - has no goals. In fact it has a very specific goal which is union with the Father who is Love itself.

To answer this let’s consider the definition of Nihilism.

1. Philosophy
   a. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
   b. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4. also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.

Given this definition - How could your “absolute nihilist” ever approach any kind of love.
Remember - you are proposing an “absolute nihilist” which means he would fit with the above definitions.
Could you point out just what there is in the above definitions allows for love of any kind? I mean - other than love of evil and destruction and annihilation…

Based on the above, your pure nihilist would simply reach a point of non-existence, not love.

Peace
James

The first definition, which is the etymologically correct one. Well, it seems if my suggestion of a link (not, an identity) between nihilism and the Christian tradition is not regarded as having any validity.

I leave you with words of a certain saint, who, if he lived today, might pass for a nihilist:
“To come to possession in all
desire the possession of nothing.
To arrive at being all
desire to be nothing.
To come to the knowledge of all
desire the knowledge of nothing.”