Scan barcode
A review by codekosmo
Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse
2.0
How can such a beauty of a book, be so manipulative and wrong at the very end?
Short to say, the contradictions Govinda wants to mark in Siddarthas philosophy in the last chapter are totally valid.
When you go with Siddartha and his points there, you easily will go with accepting evil, even if it’s possible to stop it.
In a way the book describes that siddartha is all that mass running in circles, just because of it’s solution to not want to change anything at all and give the same amount of love to everything.
I guess the point is to give then same amount of love to the meaning of everything. But if I did not overlooked something, that is not what the book is telling at the very end.
Again, I recommend to not let go of Govindas critical thoughts in the last chapter, I would rather take the still unsatisfied mood he represents there and combine it with Siddarthas high level of calmness and acceptance. Then you really are able to internalize the holy grail.
The books literally describes Siddartha as those running in circles. So why stay with his philosophy of absolute radical acceptance?
Don‘t take me wrong. A high level of acceptance is crucial for wisdom and that is what this book can give as a very precious perspective, but you have to know the limits. Without limits everything disappears in chaos.
I wonder if this book had it‘s impact on a critical mass of germans, in these years after release in 1922, to make it even easier for the nazis to take there way into the minds. Would Siddartha sit and smile and accept not even taking his democratic vote against them? At least I guess he wouldn’t judge on those voting for the nazis and making it acceptable to run with them.
Would I recommend reading this book?
Yes, definitely. But not for dupable people.
P.S: Be aware. The devilish lies in the details.
Short to say, the contradictions Govinda wants to mark in Siddarthas philosophy in the last chapter are totally valid.
When you go with Siddartha and his points there, you easily will go with accepting evil, even if it’s possible to stop it.
In a way the book describes that siddartha is all that mass running in circles, just because of it’s solution to not want to change anything at all and give the same amount of love to everything.
I guess the point is to give then same amount of love to the meaning of everything. But if I did not overlooked something, that is not what the book is telling at the very end.
Again, I recommend to not let go of Govindas critical thoughts in the last chapter, I would rather take the still unsatisfied mood he represents there and combine it with Siddarthas high level of calmness and acceptance. Then you really are able to internalize the holy grail.
The books literally describes Siddartha as those running in circles. So why stay with his philosophy of absolute radical acceptance?
Don‘t take me wrong. A high level of acceptance is crucial for wisdom and that is what this book can give as a very precious perspective, but you have to know the limits. Without limits everything disappears in chaos.
I wonder if this book had it‘s impact on a critical mass of germans, in these years after release in 1922, to make it even easier for the nazis to take there way into the minds. Would Siddartha sit and smile and accept not even taking his democratic vote against them? At least I guess he wouldn’t judge on those voting for the nazis and making it acceptable to run with them.
Would I recommend reading this book?
Yes, definitely. But not for dupable people.
P.S: Be aware. The devilish lies in the details.