able, it is simply contingent. Kierkegaard (Postscript, p. 468 seq.) is closer to the mark. p. 80/36-39 noted. p. 82/3-4 noted. p. 82/14-16 noted. p. 82/19-21 [Consciousness is its own foundation but it remains contingent in order that there may be a consciousness rather than an infinity of pure and simple in-itself.]: ? p. 82/25-27 [Thirst refers to the consciousness of thirst, which it is, as to its foundation—and conversely. But the totality “reflected– reflecting,” if it could be given, would be contingency and in-itself.]: ? p. 82/31-32 noted. p. 83/3-4 noted. p. 83/21 noted. p. 84/23-25 noted. p. 86/23-25 noted. p. 87/13-14 [The existence of desire as a human fact is sufficient to prove that human reality is a lack.] noted: But this does not explain the existence of desire. There is no a priori reason why a lack should be unpleasant. p. 89/21-25 noted. p. 90/28-33 [The being of human reality is suffering because it rises in being as perpetually haunted by a totality which it is without being able to be it, precisely because it could not attain the in-itself without losing itself as for-itself. Human reality therefore is by nature an unhappy consciousness with no possibility of surpassing its unhappy state] noted: Why is this of necessity a condition of suffering? p. 91/13-17 [It is consciousness itself, in the heart of consciousness, and yet out of reach, as an absence, an unrealizable. Its nature is to inclose its own contradiction within itself; its relation to the for-itself is a total immanence which is achieved in total transcendence.] noted: See p. 74. p. 92/16-20 noted. p. 92/40-41 [Now we can ascertain more exactly what is the being of the self: it is value.] double noted p. 93/34-36 noted. p. 94/fn.12.4-7 noted. p. 94/fn.12.9-10 [the For-itself is not a moment which can be surpassed. As
Published on Jun 26, 2013
Part B includes two early essays (Nibbana and Anatta and Sketch for a Proof of Rebirth) as well as notes from a Commonplace Book and Margina...