cannot be laid hold of。 Religion necessarily has this character； since the fear of the Lord is the
essential element beyond which we cannot get。 〃The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom〃
is indeed a true saying； man must begin with this in order to know the finite ends in their negative
character。 But man must also have overcome fear through the relinquishment of finite ends； and the
satisfaction which that Religion affords is confined to what is finite； seeing that the chief means of
reconciliation are natural forms which are impersonated and held in reverence。
The oriental consciousness raises itself； indeed； above the natural content to what is infinite； but it
only knows itself as accidental in reference to the power which makes the individual fear。 This
subordination may take two forms and must indeed from one extreme pass to the other。 The finite；
which is for consciousness； may have the form of finitude as finite； or it may become the infinite；
which is however an abstraction。 The man who lives in fear； and he who rules over men through
fear； both stand upon the same platform； the difference between them is only in the greater power
of will which can go forth to sacrifice all that is finite for some particular end。 The despot brings
about what his caprice directs； including certainly what is good； not as law； but as arbitrary will：
the passive will； like that of slavery； is converted into the active energy of will； which will； however；
is arbitrary still。 In Religion we even find self…immersion in the deepest sensuality represented as
the service of God； and then there follows in the East a flight to the emptiest abstraction as to what
is infinite； as also the exaltation attained through the renunciation of everything； and this is specially
so amongst the Indians； who torture themselves and enter into the most profound abstraction。 The
Indians look straight before them for ten years at a time； are fed by those around； and are destitute
of other spiritual content than that of knowing what is abstract； which content therefore is entirely
finite。 This； then； is not the soil of freedom。
In the East； Mind indeed begins to dawn； but it is still true of it that the subject is not presented as
a person； but appears in the objectively substantial； which is represented as partly supersensuous
and partly； and even more； material； as negative and perishing。 The highest point attainable by the
individual； the everlasting bliss； is made an immersion into substance； a vanishing away of
consciousness； and thus of all distinction between substance and individuality … hence an
annihilation。 A spiritually dead relation thus comes into existence； since the highest point there to
be reached is insensibility。 So far； however； man has not attained that bliss； but finds himself to be
a single existent individual； distinguished from the universal substance。 He is thus outside the unity；
has no significance； and as being what is accidental and without rights； is finite only； he finds
himself limited through Nature … in caste for instance。 The will is not here the substantial will； it is
the arbitrary will given up to what is outwardly and inwardly contingent； for substance alone is the
affirmative。 With it greatness； nobility； or exaltitude of character； are certainly not excluded； but
they are only present as the naturally determined or the arbitrary will； and not in the objective
forms of morality and law to which all owe respect； which hold good for all； and in which for that
same reason all are recognized。 The oriental subject thus has the advantage of independence； since
there is nothing fixed； however undetermined is the substance of the Easterns； as undetermined；
free and independent may their character be。 What for us is justice and morality is also in their
state； but in a substantial； natural； patriarchal way； and not in subjective freedom。 Conscience does
not exist nor does morality。 Everything is simply in a state of nature； which allows the noblest to
exist as it does the worst。
The conclusion to be derived from this is that no philosophic knowledge can be found here。 To
Philosophy belongs the knowledge of Substance； the absolute Universal； that whether I think it
and develop it or not； confronts me still as for itself objective； and whether this is to me substantial
or not； still just in that I think it； it is mine； that in which I possess my distinctive character or am
affirmative： thus my thoughts are not mere subjective determinations or opinions； but； as being my
thoughts； are also thoughts of what is objective； or they are substantial thoughts。 The Eastern form
must therefore be excluded from the History of Philosophy； but still； upon the whole； I will take
some notice of it。 I have touched on this elsewhere； for some time ago we for the first time
reached a position to judge of it。 Earlier a great parade was made about the Indian wisdom
without any real knowledge of what it was； now this is for the first time known； and naturally it is
found to be in conformity with the rest。
c。 Beginnings of Philosophy in Greece。
Philosophy proper commences in the West。 It is in the West that this freedom of
self…consciousness first comes forth； the natural consciousness； and likewise Mind disappear into
themselves。 In the brightness of the East the individual disappears； the light first becomes in the
West the flash of thought which strikes within itself； and from thence creates its world out of itself。
The blessedness of the West is thus so determined that in it the subject as such endures and
continues in the substantial； the individual mind grasps its Being as universal； but universality is just
this relation to itself This being at home with self； this personality and infinitude of the 〃I〃 constitutes
the Being of Mind； it is thus and can be none else。 For a people to know themselves as free； and
to be only as universal； is for them to be； it is the principle of their whole life as regards morality
and all else。 To take an example； we only know our real Being in so far as personal freedom is its
first condition； and hence we never can be slaves。 Were the mere arbitrary will of the prince a law；
and should he wish slavery to be introduced； we would have the knowledge that this could not be。
To sleep； to live； to have a certain office； is not our real Being； and certainly to be no slave is such；
for that has come to mean the being in nature。 Thus in the West we are upon the soil of a veritable
Philosophy。
Because in desire I am subject to another； and my Being is in a particularity； I am； as I exist； unlike
myself； for I am 〃I；〃 the universal complete； but hemmed in by passion。 This last is self…will or
formal freedom； which has desire as content。 Amongst the Greeks we first find the freedom which
is the end of true will； the equitable and right； in which I am free and universal； and others； too； are
free； are also 〃I〃 and like me； where a relationship between free and free is thus established with its
actual laws； determinations of the universal will； and justly constituted states。 Hence it is here that
Philosophy began。
In Greece we first see real freedom flourish； but still in a restricted form； and with a limitation；
since slavery was still existent； and the states were by its means conditioned。 In the following
abstractions we may first of all superficially describe the freedom of the East； of Greece； and of
the Teutonic world。 In the East only one individual is free； the despot； in Greece the few are free；
in the Teutonic world the saying is true that all are free； that is； man is free as man。 But since the
one in Eastern countries cannot be free because that would necessitate the others also being free
to him； impulse； self…will； and formal freedom； can there alone be found。 Since in Greece we have
to deal with the particular； the Athenians； and the Spartans； are free indeed； but not the
Messenians or the Helots。 The principle of the 〃few〃 has yet to be discovered； and this implies
some modifications of the Greek point of view which we must consider in connection with the
History of Philosophy。 To take these into consideration means simply to proceed to the dividing
up of Philosophy。
Introduction
C。 Division； Sources； and Method Adopted
in Treating of the History of Philosophy。
1。 Division of the History of Philosophy。
Since we set to work systematically this division must present itself as necessary。 Speaking
generally； we have properly only two epochs to distinguish in the history of Philosophy； as in
ancient and modern art…these are the Greek and the Teutonic。 The Teutonic Philosophy is the
Philosophy within Christendom in so far as it belongs to the Teutonic nations； the
Christian…European people； inasmuch as they belong to the world of science possess collectively
Teutonic culture； for Italy； Spain； France； England； and the rest； have through the Teutonic nations；
received a new form。 The influence of Greece also reaches into the Roman world； and hence we
have to speak of Philosophy in the territory of the Roman world； but the Romans produced no
proper Philosophy any more than any proper poets。 They