Why I Am Destiny

I know my destiny. There will come a day when my name will recall the memory of something formidable—a crisis the like of which has never been known on earth, the memory of the most profound clash of consciences, and the passing of a sentence upon all that which theretofore had been believed, exacted, and hallowed. I am not a man, I am dynamite. And with it all there is nought of the founder of a religion in me. Religions are matters for the mob; after coming in contact with a religious man, I always feel that I must wash my hands.... I require no "believers," it is my opinion that I am too full of malice to believe even in myself; I never address myself to masses. I am horribly frightened that one day I shall be pronounced "holy." You will understand why I publish this book beforehand—it is to prevent people from wronging me. I refuse to be a saint; I would rather be a clown. Maybe I am a clown. And I am notwithstanding, or rather not _not_withstanding, the mouthpiece of truth; for nothing more blown-out with falsehood has ever existed, than a saint. But my truth is terrible: for hitherto lies have been called truth. The Transvaluation of all Values, this is my formula for mankind's greatest step towards coming to its senses—a step which in me became flesh and genius. My destiny ordained that I should be the first decent human being, and that I should feel myself opposed to the falsehood of millenniums. I was the first to discover truth, and for the simple reason that I was the first who became conscious of falsehood as falsehood—that is to say, I smelt it as such. My genius resides in my nostrils. I contradict as no one has contradicted hitherto, and am nevertheless the reverse of a negative spirit. I am the harbinger of joy, the like of which has never existed before; I have discovered tasks of such lofty greatness that, until my time, no one had any idea of such things. Mankind can begin to have fresh hopes, only now that I have lived. Thus, I am necessarily a man of Fate. For when Truth enters the lists against the falsehood of ages, shocks are bound to ensue, and a spell of earthquakes, followed by the transposition of hills and valleys, such as the world has never yet imagined even in its dreams. The concept "politics" then becomes elevated entirely to the sphere of spiritual warfare. All the mighty realms of the ancient order of society are blown into space—for they are all based on falsehood: there will be wars, the like of which have never been seen on earth before. Only from my time and after me will politics on a large scale exist on earth.

I know my destiny. One day, my name will bring to mind something formidable: a crisis unlike any ever known on earth. It will recall the deepest clash of consciences. It will recall a judgment passed on everything people had believed, demanded, and held sacred until then. I am not a man. I am dynamite. Yet there is nothing of the religious founder in me. Religions are for the mob. After meeting a religious man, I always feel I must wash my hands.... I need no "believers." I think I am too malicious to believe even in myself. I never address the masses. I am terribly afraid that one day I will be declared "holy." You will understand why I am publishing this book in advance. It is to prevent people from doing me that injustice. I refuse to be a saint. I would rather be a clown. Maybe I am a clown. And yet, or rather not not because of that, I am the mouthpiece of truth. For nothing has ever been more bloated with falsehood than a saint. But my truth is terrible, because until now lies have been called truth. The Transvaluation of all Values is my formula for mankind's greatest step toward coming to its senses. In me, that step became flesh and genius. My destiny made me the first decent human being. It made me feel opposed to the falsehood of thousands of years. I was the first to discover truth, for a simple reason. I was the first to recognize falsehood as falsehood. That is, I smelled it for what it was. My genius is in my nostrils. I contradict as no one has ever contradicted before, and yet I am the opposite of a negative spirit. I bring a joy unlike any that has ever existed before. I have discovered tasks of such lofty greatness that, until my time, no one had any idea of such things. Only now that I have lived can mankind begin to have new hopes. I am therefore necessarily a man of Fate. For when Truth takes up the fight against the falsehood of ages, shocks are bound to follow. There will be a series of earthquakes, followed by hills and valleys changing places. The world has never imagined anything like it, even in its dreams. The idea of "politics" then rises entirely into the sphere of spiritual warfare. All the mighty realms of the old social order are blown into space, because they are all based on falsehood. There will be wars unlike any ever seen on earth before. Only from my time onward, and after me, will politics on a large scale exist on earth.

If you should require a formula for a destiny of this kind that has taken human form, you will find it in my Zarathustra.

If you need a formula for this kind of destiny in human form, you will find it in my Zarathustra.

"And he who would be a creator in good and evil—verily, he must first be a destroyer, and break values into pieces.

"And anyone who wants to create good and evil must first be a destroyer and smash values to pieces.

"Thus the greatest evil belongeth unto the greatest good: but this is the creative good."

"Thus, the greatest evil belongs to the greatest good: but this is the creative good."

I am by far the most terrible man that has ever existed; but this does not alter the fact that I shall become the most beneficent. I know the joy of annihilation to a degree which is commensurate with my power to annihilate. In both cases I obey my Dionysian nature, which knows not how to separate the negative deed from the saying of yea. I am the first immoralist, and in this sense I am essentially the annihilator.

I am by far the most terrifying man who has ever lived. But that does not change the fact that I will become the most beneficial. My joy in annihilation is as great as my power to annihilate. In both, I follow my Dionysian nature, which cannot separate the act of negation from saying yes. I am the first immoralist, and in this sense I am essentially the annihilator.

People have never asked me as they should have done, what the name of Zarathustra precisely meant in my mouth, in the mouth of the first immoralist; for that which distinguishes this Persian from all others in the past is the very fact that he was the exact reverse of an immoralist. Zarathustra was the first to see in the struggle between good and evil the essential wheel in the working of things. The translation of morality into the realm of metaphysics, as force, cause, end-in-itself, is his work. But the very question suggests its own answer. Zarathustra created this most portentous of all errors,—morality; therefore he must be the first to expose it. Not only because he has had longer and greater experience of the subject than any other thinker,—all history is indeed the experimental refutation of the theory of the so-called moral order of things,—but because of the more important fact that Zarathustra was the most truthful of thinkers. In his teaching alone is truthfulness upheld as the highest virtue—that is to say, as the reverse of the cowardice of the "idealist" who takes to his heels at the sight of reality. Zarathustra has more pluck in his body than all other thinkers put together. To tell the truth and to aim straight: that is the first Persian virtue. Have I made myself clear? ... The overcoming of morality by itself, through truthfulness, the moralist's overcoming of himself in his opposite—in me—that is what the name Zarathustra means in my mouth.

People have never asked me, as they should have, exactly what I mean by the name Zarathustra. What does it mean on the lips of the first immoralist? What sets this Persian apart from everyone else in the past is that he was the exact opposite of an immoralist. Zarathustra was the first to see the struggle between good and evil as the central driving force of all things. He was the one who turned morality into a metaphysical force, cause, and end in itself. But the question suggests its own answer. Zarathustra created morality, the most momentous of all errors. Therefore, he must be the first to expose it. He has had longer and greater experience of morality than any other thinker. Indeed, all history is an experimental refutation of the theory of a so-called moral order of things. But more importantly, Zarathustra was the most truthful of thinkers. His teaching alone upholds truthfulness as the highest virtue. Truthfulness is the opposite of the cowardice of the "idealist", who runs away at the sight of reality. Zarathustra has more courage in his body than all other thinkers put together. To tell the truth and aim straight: that is the first Persian virtue. Have I made myself clear? ... Morality overcomes itself through truthfulness. The moralist overcomes himself by becoming his own opposite, in me. That is what I mean by the name Zarathustra.

In reality two negations are involved in my title Immoralist. I first of all deny the type of man that has hitherto been regarded as the highest—the good, the kind, and the charitable; and I also deny that kind of morality which has become recognised and paramount as morality-in-itself—I speak of the morality of decadence, or, to use a still cruder term, Christian morality. I would agree to the second of the two negations being regarded as the more decisive, for, reckoned as a whole, the overestimation of goodness and kindness seems to me already a consequence of decadence, a symptom of weakness, and incompatible with any ascending and yea-saying life. Negation and annihilation are inseparable from a yea-saying attitude towards life. Let me halt for a moment at the question of the psychology of the good man. In order to appraise the value of a certain type of man, the cost of his maintenance must be calculated,—and the conditions of his existence must be known. The condition of the existence of the good is falsehood: or, otherwise expressed, the refusal at any price to see how reality is actually constituted. The refusal to see that this reality is not so constituted as always to be stimulating beneficent instincts, and still less, so as to suffer at all moments the intrusion of ignorant and good-natured hands. To consider distress of all kinds as an objection, as something which must be done away with, is the greatest nonsense on earth; generally speaking, it is nonsense of the most disastrous sort, fatal in its stupidity—almost as mad as the will to abolish bad weather, out of pity for the poor, so to speak. In the great economy of the whole universe, the terrors of reality (in the passions, in the desires, in the will to power) are incalculably more necessary than that form of petty happiness which is called "goodness"; it is even needful to practise leniency in order so much as to allow the latter a place at all, seeing that it is based upon a falsification of the instincts. I shall have an excellent opportunity of showing the incalculably calamitous consequences to the whole of history, of the credo of optimism, this monstrous offspring of the homines optimi. Zarathustra,¹ the first who recognised that the optimist is just as degenerate as the pessimist, though perhaps more detrimental, says: "Good men never speak the truth. False shores and false harbours were ye taught by the good. In the lies of the good were ye born and bred. Through the good everything hath become false and crooked from the roots." Fortunately the world is not built merely upon those instincts which would secure to the good-natured herd animal his paltry happiness. To desire everybody to become a "good man," "a gregarious animal," "a blue-eyed, benevolent, beautiful soul," or—as Herbert Spencer wished—a creature of altruism, would mean robbing existence of its greatest character, castrating man, and reducing humanity to a sort of wretched Chinadom. And this some have tried to do! It is precisely this that men called morality. In this sense Zarathustra calls "the good," now "the last men," and anon "the beginning of the end"; and above all, he considers them as the most detrimental kind of men, because they secure their existence at the cost of Truth and at the cost of the Future.

In reality, my title Immoralist involves two denials. First, I reject the type of person who has until now been regarded as the highest: the good, the kind, and the charitable. I also reject the kind of morality that has come to be accepted and established as morality itself. I mean the morality of decadence, or, to put it more crudely, Christian morality. I would agree that the second denial is the more decisive. On the whole, the overvaluing of goodness and kindness already seems to me a consequence of decadence. It is a symptom of weakness and incompatible with any rising, life-affirming life. Denial and destruction are inseparable from an attitude that affirms life. Let me pause for a moment over the psychology of the good person. To assess the value of a particular type of person, we must calculate the cost of maintaining that type. We must also know the conditions necessary for its existence. The good depend on falsehood for their existence. In other words, they depend on refusing at any cost to see what reality is actually like. They refuse to see that reality is not always arranged to encourage benevolent instincts. Still less is it arranged to allow ignorant, good-natured hands to interfere at every moment. To regard every kind of distress as an objection, as something that must be eliminated, is the greatest nonsense on earth. Generally speaking, it is nonsense of the most disastrous kind, fatal in its stupidity. It is almost as mad as wanting to abolish bad weather out of pity for the poor, so to speak. In the great economy of the whole universe, the terrors of reality are incalculably more necessary than the petty happiness called "goodness." These terrors lie in the passions, the desires, and the will to power. We even need to make allowances just to give "goodness" any place at all, since it is based on a falsification of the instincts. I will have an excellent opportunity to show the incalculably disastrous consequences for all of history of the creed of optimism. This creed is the monstrous offspring of the homines optimi. Zarathustra,¹ was the first to recognize that the optimist is just as degenerate as the pessimist, though perhaps more harmful. He says: "Good people never speak the truth. The good taught you to seek false shores and false harbors. You were born and raised in the lies of the good. Through the good, everything has become false and crooked from the roots up." Fortunately, the world is not built solely on the instincts that would give the good-natured herd animal his petty happiness. Some want everyone to become a "good man," "a herd animal," "a blue-eyed, benevolent, beautiful soul," or a creature of altruism, as Herbert Spencer wished. But that would mean robbing existence of its greatest character, castrating man, and reducing humanity to a kind of wretched Chinadom. And some have tried to do this! This is precisely what people called morality. In this sense, Zarathustra calls "the good" at one moment "the last men" and at another "the beginning of the end." Above all, he considers them the most harmful kind of people, because they secure their existence at the cost of Truth and at the cost of the Future.

"The good—they cannot create; they are ever the beginning of the end.

"The good cannot create. They are always the beginning of the end.

"They crucify him who writeth new values on new tables; they sacrifice unto themselves the future; they crucify the whole future of humanity!

"They crucify anyone who writes new values on new tablets. They sacrifice the future to themselves. They crucify the whole future of humanity!

"The good—they are ever the beginning of the end.

"The good are always the beginning of the end.

"And whatever harm the slanderers of the world may do, the harm of the good is the most calamitous of all harm."

"And whatever harm those who slander the world may do, the harm done by the good is the worst of all."

Zarathustra, as the first psychologist of the good man, is perforce the friend of the evil man. When a degenerate kind of man has succeeded to the highest rank among the human species, his position must have been gained at the cost of the reverse type—at the cost of the strong man who is certain of life. When the gregarious animal stands in the glorious rays of the purest virtue, the exceptional man must be degraded to the rank of the evil. If falsehood insists at all costs on claiming the word "truth" for its own particular standpoint, the really truthful man must be sought out among the despised. Zarathustra allows of no doubt here; he says that it was precisely the knowledge of the good, of the "best," which inspired his absolute horror of men. And it was out of this feeling of repulsion that he grew the wings which allowed him to soar into remote futures. He does not conceal the fact that his type of man is one which is relatively superhuman—especially as opposed to the "good" man, and that the good and the just would regard his superman as the devil.

Zarathustra is the first psychologist of the good man, and so he must be the friend of the evil man. When a degenerate kind of man has risen to the highest rank among human beings, he must have done so at the expense of his opposite: the strong man who is sure of life. When the herd animal basks in the glorious light of the purest virtue, the exceptional man must be cast down as evil. If falsehood insists at all costs on claiming the word "truth" for its own point of view, the truly truthful man must be sought among the despised. Zarathustra leaves no doubt about this. He says that it was precisely his knowledge of the good, of the "best," that inspired his absolute horror of humanity. This feeling of disgust gave him the wings to soar into distant futures. He does not hide the fact that his type of man is relatively superhuman, especially compared with the "good" man. Nor does he hide the fact that the good and the just would regard his superman as the devil.

"Ye higher men, on whom my gaze now falls, this is the doubt that ye wake in my breast, and this is my secret laughter: methinks ye would call my Superman—the devil! So strange are ye in your souls to all that is great, that the Superman would be terrible in your eyes for his goodness."

"Higher men, I look at you now, and you raise a doubt in me. I secretly laugh at the thought that you would call my Superman the devil! Your souls are so alien to all that is great that the Superman's goodness would terrify you."

It is from this passage, and from no other, that you must set out to understand the goal to which Zarathustra aspires—the kind of man that he conceives sees reality as it is; he is strong enough for this—he is not estranged or far removed from it, he is that reality himself, in his own nature can be found all the terrible and questionable character of reality: only thus can man have greatness.

You must begin with this passage, and no other, to understand what Zarathustra aims for. The kind of man he imagines sees reality as it is. He is strong enough to do so. He is not cut off or distant from reality. He is himself that reality. His own nature contains all that is terrible and questionable about reality. Only in this way can man achieve greatness.

But I have chosen the title of Immoralist as a surname and as a badge of honour in yet another sense; I am very proud to possess this name which distinguishes me from all the rest of mankind. No one hitherto has felt Christian morality beneath him; to that end there were needed height, a remoteness of vision, and an abysmal psychological depth, not believed to be possible hitherto. Up to the present Christian morality has been the Circe of all thinkers—they stood at her service. What man, before my time, had descended into the underground caverns from out of which the poisonous fumes of this ideal—of this slandering of the world—burst forth? What man had even dared to suppose that they were underground caverns? Was a single one of the philosophers who preceded me a psychologist at all, and not the very reverse of a psychologist—that is to say, a "superior swindler," an "Idealist"? Before my time there was no psychology. To be the first in this new realm may amount to a curse; at all events, it is a fatality: for one is also the first to despise. My danger is the loathing of mankind.

But I have also chosen Immoralist as a surname and a badge of honor in another sense. I am very proud to bear a name that sets me apart from all the rest of humanity. Until now, no one has felt that Christian morality was beneath them. That required a height, a distant view, and an abyssal psychological depth never before believed possible. Until now, Christian morality has been the Circe of all thinkers. They have all served her. Before my time, who had descended into the underground caverns from which the poisonous fumes of this ideal burst forth? This ideal slanders the world. Who had even dared to suppose that there were underground caverns? Was a single philosopher before me a psychologist at all? Or were they not the very opposite of psychologists, that is, "superior swindlers," "Idealists"? Before my time there was no psychology. Being the first in this new realm may be a curse. In any case, it is a fate: for one is also the first to despise. My danger is my loathing of humanity.

Have you understood me? That which defines me, that which makes me stand apart from the whole of the rest of humanity, is the fact that I unmasked Christian morality. For this reason I was in need of a word which conveyed the idea of a challenge to everybody. Not to have awakened to these discoveries before, struck me as being the sign of the greatest uncleanliness that mankind has on its conscience, as self-deception become instinctive, as the fundamental will to be blind to every phenomenon, all causality and all reality; in fact, as an almost criminal fraud in psychologicis. Blindness in regard to Christianity is the essence of criminality—for it is the crime against life. Ages and peoples, the first as well as the last, philosophers and old women, with the exception of five or six moments in history (and of myself, the seventh), are all alike in this. Hitherto the Christian has been the "moral being," a peerless oddity, and, as "a moral being," he was more absurd, more vain, more thoughtless, and a greater disadvantage to himself, than the greatest despiser of humanity could have deemed possible. Christian morality is the most malignant form of all false too the actual Circe of humanity: that which has corrupted mankind. It is not error as error which infuriates me at the sight of this spectacle; it is not the millenniums of absence of "goodwill," of discipline, of decency, and of bravery in spiritual things, which betrays itself in the triumph of Christianity; it is rather the absence of nature, it is the perfectly ghastly fact that anti-nature itself received the highest honours as morality and as law, and remained suspended over man as the Categorical Imperative. Fancy blundering in this way, not as an individual, not as a people, but as a whole species! as humanity! To teach the contempt of all the principal instincts of life; to posit falsely the existence of a "soul," of a "spirit," in order to be able to defy the body; to spread the feeling that there is something impure in the very first prerequisite of life—in sex; to seek the principle of evil in the profound need of growth and expansion—that is to say, in severe self-love (the term itself is slanderous); and conversely to see a higher moral value—but what am I talking about?—I mean the moral value per se, in the typical signs of decline, in the antagonism of the instincts, in "selflessness," in the loss of ballast, in "the suppression of the personal element," and in "love of one's neighbour" (neighbouritis!). What! is humanity itself in a state of degeneration? Has it always been in this state? One thing is certain, that ye are taught only the values of decadence as the highest values. The morality of self-renunciation is essentially the morality of degeneration; the fact, "I am going to the dogs," is translated into the imperative," Ye shall all go to the dogs"—and not only into the imperative. This morality of self-renunciation, which is the only kind of morality that has been taught hitherto, betrays the will to nonentity—it denies life to the very roots. There still remains the possibility that it is not mankind that is in a state of degeneration, but only that parasitical kind of man—the priest, who, by means of morality and lies, has climbed up to his position of determinator of values, who divined in Christian morality his road to power. And, to tell the truth, this is my opinion. The teachers and I leaders of mankind—including the theologians—have been, every one of them, decadents: hence their) transvaluation of all values into a hostility towards; life; hence morality. The definition of morality; Morality is the idiosyncrasy of decadents, actuated by a desire to avenge themselves with success upon life. I attach great value to this definition.

Have you understood me? What defines me, what sets me apart from all the rest of humanity, is that I unmasked Christian morality. For this reason, I needed a word that challenged everyone. Humanity had failed to recognize these discoveries until now. That struck me as the greatest stain on its conscience. It showed that self-deception had become instinctive. It showed a fundamental will to be blind to every phenomenon, every cause, and all reality. In fact, it was an almost criminal fraud in psychologicis. Blindness to Christianity is the essence of criminality, for it is the crime against life. All ages and peoples are alike in this, the earliest as well as the latest. So are philosophers and old women. The only exceptions are five or six moments in history, and myself as the seventh. Until now, the Christian has been the "moral being," a uniquely strange creature. And, as a "moral being," he was more absurd, more vain, more thoughtless, and more harmful to himself than even the greatest despiser of humanity could have imagined. Christian morality is the most malignant form of falsehood. It is humanity's true Circe, the force that has corrupted mankind. But it is not error as such that infuriates me when I see this spectacle. Nor is it the thousands of years without "goodwill," discipline, decency, or courage in spiritual matters that the triumph of Christianity reveals. Rather, it is the absence of nature. It is the utterly ghastly fact that anti-nature itself received the highest honors as morality and law. It hung over humanity as the Categorical Imperative. Imagine making such a mistake, not as an individual, not as a people, but as a whole species! As humanity! Imagine teaching contempt for all the basic instincts of life. Imagine falsely claiming that a "soul" or "spirit" exists, so as to defy the body. Imagine spreading the feeling that sex, the very first condition of life, is impure. Imagine finding the principle of evil in the deep need to grow and expand. That is, in severe self-love, though the term itself is slanderous. And conversely, imagine seeing a higher moral value in the typical signs of decline. But what am I saying? I mean moral value as such. Imagine finding it in conflicting instincts, in "selflessness," in the loss of ballast, in "the suppression of the personal element," and in "love of one's neighbour" (neighbouritis!). What! Is humanity itself degenerating? Has it always been in this state? One thing is certain: you are taught only the values of decadence as the highest values. The morality of self-renunciation is essentially the morality of degeneration. The fact "I am going to the dogs" becomes the command, "You shall all go to the dogs." And it becomes more than a command. This morality of self-renunciation is the only kind of morality taught until now. It reveals the will to become nothing. It denies life at its very roots. There is still another possibility. Perhaps it is not humanity that is degenerating, but only a parasitic type of person: the priest. Through morality and lies, the priest has climbed to the position of determining values. He recognized Christian morality as his path to power. And, to tell the truth, this is my opinion. The teachers and leaders of humanity, including the theologians, have all been decadents. That is why they transformed all values into hostility toward life. That is why we have morality. The definition of morality: Morality is the peculiar tendency of decadents, driven by a desire to take successful revenge on life. I attach great value to this definition.

Have you understood me? I have not uttered a single word which I had not already said five years ago through my mouthpiece Zarathustra. The unmasking of Christian morality is an event which unequalled in history, it is a real catastrophe. The man who throws light upon it is a force majeure, a fatality; he breaks the history of man into two. Time is reckoned up before him and after him. The lightning flash of truth struck precisely that which theretofore had stood highest: he who understands what was destroyed by that flash should look to see whether he still holds anything in his hands. Everything which until then was called truth, has been revealed as the most detrimental, most spiteful, and most subterranean form of life; the holy pretext, which was the "improvement" of man, has been recognised as a ruse for draining life of its energy and of its blood. Morality conceived as Vampirism.... The man who unmasks morality has also unmasked the worthlessness of the values in which men either believe or have believed; he no longer sees anything to be revered in the most venerable man—even in the types of men that have been pronounced holy; all he can see in them is the most fatal kind of abortions, fatal, because they fascinate. The concept "God" was invented as the opposite of the concept life—everything detrimental, poisonous, and slanderous, and all deadly hostility to life, wad bound together in one horrible unit in Him. The concepts "beyond" and "true world" were invented in order to depreciate the only world that exists—in order that no goal or aim, no sense or task, might be left to earthly reality. The concepts "soul," "spirit," and last of all the concept "immortal soul," were invented in order to throw contempt on the body, in order to make it sick and "holy," in order to cultivate an attitude of appalling levity towards all things in life which deserve to be treated seriously, i.e. the questions of nutrition and habitation, of intellectual diet, the treatment of the sick, cleanliness, and weather. Instead of health, we find the "salvation of the soul"—that is to say, a folie circulate fluctuating between convulsions and penitence and the hysteria of redemption. The concept "sin," together with the torture instrument appertaining to it, which is the concept "free will," was invented in order to confuse and muddle our instincts, and to render the mistrust of them man's second nature! In the concepts "disinterestedness" and "self-denial," the actual signs of decadence are to be found. The allurement of that which is detrimental, the inability to discover one's own advantage and self-destruction, are made into absolute qualities, into the "duty," the "holiness," and the "divinity" of man. Finally—to keep the worst to the last—by the notion of the good man, all that is favoured which is weak, ill, botched, and sick-in-itself, which ought to be wiped out. The law of selection is thwarted, an ideal is made out of opposition to the proud, well-constituted man, to him who says yea to life, to him who is certain of the future, and who guarantees the future—this man is henceforth called the evil one. And all this was believed in as morality!—Ecrasez l'infâme!

Have you understood me? I have not said a single word that I did not say five years ago through my mouthpiece Zarathustra. The unmasking of Christian morality is an event without equal in history. It is a real catastrophe. The man who brings it to light is a force majeure, a fate. He breaks human history in two. Time is reckoned before and after him. The lightning flash of truth struck precisely what had been held highest until then. Anyone who understands what that flash destroyed should look to see whether he still holds anything in his hands. Everything that had been called truth until then has been exposed as the most harmful, spiteful, and hidden form of life. The holy pretext of "improving" man has been recognized as a trick to drain life of its energy and blood. Morality understood as Vampirism.... The man who unmasks morality also exposes the worthlessness of the values people believe in or once believed in. He no longer sees anything to revere in the most venerable men, not even in those types declared holy. All he sees in them is the most fatal kind of failures, fatal because they fascinate. The concept "God" was invented as the opposite of the concept of life. Everything harmful, poisonous, and slanderous, and all deadly hostility to life, were bound together in him as one horrible whole. The concepts "beyond" and "true world" were invented to diminish the only world that exists. They were invented so that earthly reality would have no goal, aim, meaning, or task left. The concepts "soul," "spirit," and finally "immortal soul" were invented to cast contempt on the body. They were meant to make the body sick and "holy." They were also meant to encourage a shockingly careless attitude toward everything in life that deserves serious attention, i.e. questions of food and housing, intellectual diet, care for the sick, cleanliness, and weather. Instead of health, we find the "salvation of the soul." This means a folie circulaire that swings between convulsions, penitence, and the hysteria of redemption. The concept "sin" was invented along with its instrument of torture, the concept of "free will." Together, they were invented to confuse our instincts and make distrust of them second nature to us! In the concepts "disinterestedness" and "self-denial," we find the actual signs of decadence. The attraction of what is harmful, the inability to recognize one's own advantage, and self-destruction are made into absolute qualities. They become the "duty," the "holiness," and the "divinity" of man. Finally, to keep the worst for last, the notion of the good man favors everything weak, ill, botched, and sick in itself, everything that ought to be wiped out. The law of selection is thwarted. Opposition to the proud, well-formed man is made into an ideal. He is the man who says yes to life, who is certain of the future and guarantees it. From now on, this man is called the evil one. And all this was believed in as morality! Ecrasez l'infâme!

Have you understood me? Dionysus versus Christ.

Do you understand me? Dionysus versus Christ.