Dostoevsky and Hans Holbein's 'The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb'

 

(A conversation between Dostoevsky and Nietzsche) 

Painted between 1520 and 1522 by Hans Holbein the Younger, The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb shows Christ laid out in death, moments before any imagined resurrection. The painting is life-sized, roughly 30.5 cm by 200 cm, measuring like a real tomb, forcing us to see Christ not as a holy figure, but as a corpse.

There is no halo, no light, no suggestion of divinity. Holbein gives us a human body in decay: emaciated limbs, discolored skin, dead weight sinking into darkness. The only signs that this is Christ are the wounds on his hands, feet, side, and the stark inscription above him. According to legend, Holbein may have used the body of a drowned man from the Rhine as his model. The result is a painting so real it strips away hope.

In 1867, on the way to Geneva, Dostoevsky and his wife Anna stopped in Basel. They visited the Kunstmuseum. There, Dostoevsky stood before Holbein’s painting and was completely shaken by its brutal reality. Anna later wrote:

“On our way to Geneva, we stopped for a day in Basel to see a painting … [it] depicts Christ … decaying. His bloated face is covered with bloody wounds, and his appearance is terrible. The painting had a crushing impact on Fyodor Mikhailovich. He stood before it as if stunned. … expecting the attack from one minute to the next. Luckily, this did not happen. … he insisted on returning once again to view this painting which had struck him so powerfully.”

She added:

“Fedya … was enraptured by it and, wishing to see it more closely, he climbed on a chair.”

From Anna’s words, it’s pretty clear that it broke something in Dostoevsky. Because if Christ, the most perfect being, ends like this - what hope is there for the rest of us? And he really began to struggle with that.

Soon after, in Geneva, he started writing The Idiot. Holbein’s painting shows up in the book more than once. It hangs in Rogozhin’s house, and it’s not just decoration. It becomes a moment of deep crisis for two characters: Prince Myshkin and Ippolit.

Myshkin, who’s sensitive and pure, is shaken by it. He says:

“That picture! That picture!” cried Muishkin, struck by a sudden idea. “Why, a man’s faith might be ruined by looking at that picture!” (Part 2, Chapter 4)

Then there’s Ippolit, a dying teenager who’s been fighting his own fear of death. He stares at the painting and says:

“This blind, dumb, implacable, eternal, unreasoning force is well shown in the picture, and the absolute subordination of all men and things to it is so well expressed that the idea unconsciously arises in the mind of anyone who looks at it. All those faithful people who were gazing at the cross and its mutilated occupant must have suffered agony of mind that evening; for they must have felt that all their hopes and almost all their faith had been shattered at a blow. They must have separated in terror and dread that night, though each perhaps carried away with him one great thought which was never eradicated from his mind for ever afterwards. If this great Teacher of theirs could have seen Himself after the Crucifixion, how could He have consented to mount the Cross and to die as He did? This thought also comes into the mind of the man who gazes at this picture.” (Part 3, Chapter 6)

That’s what Dostoevsky saw that day in Basel. Not just a terrifying painting, but something that shook his core beliefs. It may have been the moment that started his deep wrestling with God, and with his own faith. You can see that struggle not only in The Idiot, but even more powerfully in The Brothers Karamazov, where questions about God, suffering, and the meaning of faith are pushed to their absolute limit.

#copied from internet

On Human's Intellectual Evolution

 

Cross!

"، ڈاکٹر داؤد رہبر نے پچاس کی دہائی میں قیام انقرہ کے دوران بپتسمہ لے لیا تھا ۔ ن م راشد صاحب نے کسی موقع پر ان سے کہا کہ باتوں اور خیالات سے تم ہم جیسے ہو، پھر یہ مسیحیت کا کیا پاکھنڈ بنا رکھا ہے ۔ رہبر صاحب نے دل چسپ جواب دیا جو کچھ یوں تھا کہ میں بطور انسان اندر سے بہت کم زور ہوں اور مجھے مایوسی کی انتہا پر پہنچ کر پاگل ہونے یا خود کشی سے بچنے کے لیے ایک نفسیاتی سہارا درکار ہوتا ہے۔ میں نے مارکیٹ میں دست یاب خدا کے جملہ ماڈلز پر نظر ڈالی تو سب سے زیادہ مجھے اس خدا نے اپنی جانب کھینچا جو میری نجات کی خاطر بے قصور سولی پر چڑھ گیا ، سو ۔۔" 

For Agnostics

 

Puzzle of Life

Classic of Irrfan Khan

 

 

On Faith

I agree to disagree with his opinion - but indeed a strong argument against religions and faiths fron a scientific mind.

 

Einstein's view on life

I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I do not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. 

The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. 

I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.

-- *Albert Einstein (1879-1955)*, _as mentioned in Glimpses of the Great by G. S. Viereck (1930), paraphrased in Walter Isaacsson's Einstein: His Life and Universe_

Science and Religion

 I don't agree with him many times. I think he is overrated. But I liked this statement.

 

Bertrand Russell Advice

 

On Suspending Judgement

 Bertrand Russel 

Dark side of 'good'

Once I was shocked and taken aback when someone said: "There is always an evil side to good." I think it's kind of true. There is no black and white in life. It is all grey. 

La-ilaha aur illallah saath saath chalte hain.

 

 

Bertrand Russell on Intellectual Rubbish

 "If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do. If some one maintains that two and two are five, or that Iceland is on the equator, you should feel pity rather than anger, unless you know so little of arithmetic or geography that his opinion shakes your own contrary conviction. 

The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way. Persecution is used in theology, not in arithmetic, because in arithmetic there is knowledge, but in theology there is only opinion. So whenever you find yourself getting angry about a difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will probably find, on examination, that your belief is going beyond what the evidence warrants."

— Bertrand Russell, An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish (1943)

Russel advise to incoming generations

 

On humility

 (A conversation)

How come you sustain so much humility and humbleness?

Because I have seen my worst.

On Bertrand Russell's quote

Although I disagree with Bertrand Russell's following observation, but it also tells me that Islam's extreme amalgamation with real/practical life is validated. On a personal note, I think Bertrand Russel is referring to political Islam after Mohammad's death, and not to the real Quranic Islam which values are nearer to other Abrahamic religions and Buddhism.

“Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world. Their founders would not have resisted the third of the temptations in the wilderness. What Mohammedanism did for the Arabs, Bolshevism may do for the Russians. As Ali went down before the politicians who only rallied to the Prophet after his success, so the genuine Communists may go down before those who are now rallying to the ranks of the Bolsheviks. If so, Asiatic empire with all its pomps and splendors may well be the next stage of development, and Communism may seem, in historical retrospect, as small a part of Bolshevism as abstinence from alcohol is of Mohammedanism." 

 ―Bertrand Russell, The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism (1920), Part I, The Present Condition of Russia, IX. International Policy, page, 106

The paradox of 'everything is assessible'

سب سے زیادہ کربناک لمحات وہ ہوتے ہیں کہ ؛ جب ہر چیز مُیسر ہو 

"Nothing is more painful in life when everything is assessible"

Sounds like a paradox, but think for a minute if you have everything available to you, what kind of life you will have without any ambition, anything to achieve, and the only thing left is greed!

As Ghalib said:

na ho marnā to jiine kā mazā kyā

Pascal's wager

 This is an interesting 2x2 table developed by Pascal. It argues that believing in God has a better probability of a benefit than not believing in God. 

I am sure it means nothing but is still interesting. You can read more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager 

I save this with the caption: LOL.

Fourth Wall

 Insaan zindagi main baRe drame kerta hai - aur jawani main kuch ziyada hi. 

When I was 19, I gave an audition at the Karachi Arts council for acting. To imitate India, Pakistani actors were getting serious about formal training in acting. To make a story short, I was selected (which I never pursue after a few classes). The first lecture was from actor Talat Hussain. On that day, I realized he is indeed an actor of high caliber with a depth of knowledge in literature and human emotions. On that day, he said a beautiful thing.

"Actor's biggest obstacle is the fourth wall. An actor on stage has three walls around him but there is an unseen wall between him and an audience. You need to learn to break that wall and connect with your audience. That's the only skill you might need all your life even if you are not an actor. You will need this everywhere. This skill of connecting with the soul and psyche of your audience to strike the cord is the essence of your success".

Sleep, Death and Correction

"Why do we sleep?"

"It's a correction."

"Hmmm"

"Mother nature has its way of correcting. Sleep is a correction. Death(s) is a correction."

*

Square is Actually a Circle

I have talked about my Maths teacher, Sir Zaheer many times on this blog (here, here).


Aik din Sir Zaheer class main aaye aur board pe ye jumla likh diya (Un ki entry class main aksar dramaii hoti thi)

" A square is a circle"*

Hum sab zor se zor se hasne lage.

Phir unhone ne board pe 2/3 pictures banaii aur wazeh kiya: "Square is actually a circle which get attached to two perpendicular surfaces at an appropriate distance". 

Hume kuch samjh aaya, aur kuch nahi.

Sir Zaheer hamesah math ko zindagi se joR dete. Kehne lage: "Hum sab bhi circle hain, jo zindagi ki chakki ke do pattoN main phans ke square ban gaye hain. Hum sab aik dusre ka izhaar hain. Jese square circle ki aik shakal hai. Jese tum sab apne parents aur tumhare parents tumhara izhar hain. Dekhne main shaklain alag alag magar hum sab aik hi golaii ka izhar hain. Mard aurat aur aurat mard hi ka parto hai.

(Hum sab hunaqqoN ki tarah un ka chehra dekhte rahe)

Zindagi bhar, Sir Zaheer ki aesi kai batain bohat yaad aain. Suna hai: ab bhi - federal 'B' area - ke usi makan main rehte hain

* Later I learned: Square is a circle is one of the most mysterious concepts in maths. Some think it can be done, some think it is impossible. Now it is more of a metaphor and a generalized concept.