© 2019 Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosopher

This website has been created by the Wix platform. Create a wix website as well.

Hermitericum

The first book of mine to ever get printed is called Hermitericum, which serves as the core thesis of my philosophy I composed, named Solitary Individualism. The book’s name is a pun of a combination between “hermit” and “intercom”, which literary means the introduction of my hermetic philosophy.

The book itself has 235 pages in it with plenty of articles. To this date, this is my only printed book of mine where every article has a specific name instead of a number, particularly because it was originally an arrangement of various articles, combined to a collection in the form of this book:

Now I may translate its first article, which is the introduction article, which also called “Introduction (Part 1)”. The next part of the book’s introduction is a short story I wrote in an attempt to describe my ideology in a more creative, rememberable way.

 

I am Tomasio the Monk; an individual in which after a particular period decided to dedicate his life for the development of a specific philosophy; a philosophy in which there is not much ideological information on it, and in which is about a subject hated by the majority; a subject in which I hope to bring to the center of the human consciousness in the post-modern age. It is a fundamentally esoteric field, and since I was exposed to it, I became obsessive, until that subject turned into my most superior meaning of life; something which in my opinion is appropriate to dedicate an entire lifetime for its composition, evolution and for the increase of awareness towards it.

It is a radical subject, which searches to break the limits and norms of the existent collective consciousness, in the quest to leave a mark on the world; in the journey to the global contribution by deep contemplation on the basis of the human existence and its meaning. It is a controversial issue, in which most people look down on it with pity, or look up, with fear. Pity and fear are the exact reason I wish to open this book in this way - for the quest of the destruction of the negative stereotypes this esoteric issue has brought with in throughout humankind’s history - while collectives all around the world became one - the global collective - which not only tries with its imperialism to rule the world but also on the brain, heart and the mind of the individual.

This is exactly what this subject wishes to clarify to the sleepy consciousness: that the collective is the biggest obsession of the post-modern individual; every subject of particular interest indulges on togetherness, on groups and on collectives. This obsession has become a neurosis, which its many preachers - people of education, politics, science and media - claim with a subjective yet superior sense of objectivity that being together with other people is the meaning of life, with every power and nature of the human being, in which without it - so they claim - the human being is nothing.

This book aspires to prove the opposite - that beyond the social dome there is a whole world humanity is yet to explore; a world until nowadays the preachers of the social religion wished to hide from their followers, which claim this is not a world, but a meaningless void which leads to depression, boredom, anxiety, misery and many other stereotypes the average human is yet to inspect them within their contemplation. This is a book composed of a collection of articles about the same controversial subject, in which, even after thousand of years of development from primitivity to benevolency - still brings to many associations of negativity, which prevents them to experience the the most basic of things which exists not only within humanity as a whole, but humanity is a collection of individuals, which every one of them can, if they shall try, to cope better with this issue in which can be viewed by intellectuals as a disease, a plague, a problem.

However, because of its mainstream approach which views this subject with so much of a negative light, this approach is to make this subject to look like this among the many who found themselves deep into this issue. They do not know, the problem is in the approach itself, in the allegedly objective claim that this issue is a problem - a problem needed to be eliminated. This is how the social religion came to power, in its quest to destroy the phenomenon of the said subject and eventually make it disappear from the human experience for eternity. From the efforts of international media bodies until the basic people - it seems that everyone damages this sensitive issue instead of learning to adopt it into their lives and to accept it as a part of the human experience; a part which is inevitable since it is, as stated before, the most basic thing the individual was blessed with - mental gently and an individual-developing experience, which is prevented from the person which learned all his or her life that the society is the meaning of life, and that it is the sole existing reality.

This approach I call The Sociocentric Approach, abuses individuals in the of the collective’s wide ego, while it prevents individuals, mentally, to be exposed to this subject in a more positive light. This subject, is solitude.

Try to think about this subject; the subject which you have learned to avoid it in the good matter, and despise him in the bad matter. What are your association on this subject? Do you think about a figure crying in the dark corner, abandoned? Do you think about a person in which his partner left him, and now sits in the home that used to be for them both, used to be full of life and love? Do you think about a sociopath which abandoned all sanity, and attempts to commit a massacre for his own amusement? All of these are theoretically possible options. However this is just the empty side of the glass, the part which the average individual was educated to look on it when things come to solitude.

If these are the only associations you can come up with, then it is still prevented from you to see what there is beyond the collective’s consciousness. This book offers a different perspective on this issue, in the aim to improve its reputation with more positivity, which can resemble the following associations: A man in a lotus posture which meditates in a Buddhist temple; A free roaming child in the orchid of afternoon’s spring; a writer which secludes themselves to concentrate in the writing of a book; a person drinking tea before the dawn; a student in their room to prepare themselves for a test in quiet and serenity, and many more are possible.

The philosophical approach in which the books functions upon is Solitary Individualism - the belief that an individual can be free, independent and authentic to the fullest only when they are by themselves, alone. This book is also a book of humanities, which does not attempts to connect the reader with a divine entity, but to a higher meaning; a higher meaning which is placed within the contemplation of one’s solitude.

I, Tomasio the Monk, aspires to actualize my contemplation, ideas and insights which were composed, invented and found in my own solitude, in the quest to bring the a more sweet, golden solitude to its proper glamour, and wishes the reader enjoyment, harmony, insight and enlightenment.

The first story of mine to ever get printed may seem to have a quite “dry” and formal name, besides it being the second and final part of Hermitericum’s Introduction. Basically the purpose of that short story is to present the basis of my philosophy as a sort of a fable, the “genesis” of all my published and later-to-be-published book.

In summary, the story is about a solitary person (which is not necessarily lonely) who was invited to an important intellectual and his wife’s apartment. While it can seem quite laconic and lack some spice, it is about the small details which behold a metaphor to my ideology of Solitary Individualism. While there are no specific names to the three characters, they are viewed as archetypes.

This is the translated story by the name of “A Story on The-Man-as-Himself in contrast to The-Man-Relative-To-Others”:

This is a story on two people; one of them is self-propelled, well-informed on the thesis of individualism and its writings, an owner of mental resilience and a humongous drive for social and mental independence - an auto-didact that values the company of one’s own, free from the ideals of the collective ego, and very much dedicates his life of a creation of a new nature - the solitary nature - a nature immune and independent from anyone for his emotional needs, which are self-fulfilled. Especially, he is to abstain from the romantic urges of the social nature, in which he abandoned for his monastic survival. He aspires to become a Ubermensch archetype which Nietzsche composed, in the 21st century; an age whose the individuality of the external world, sinks slowly in the name of the non-restraining, horrendously-depending, and the never-ending social-romantic-hedonistic nature of the mainstream. This is The-Man-As-Himself.

One day, The-Man-As-Himself was invited to an informal meeting with The-Man-Relative-To-Others, whose all drives are originated from requests and desperation of his external environment - the enslaving wife, his pressuring peers, and his authoritarian boss the most, which is also his mentor, nicknamed The Sociocentric.

Because The-Man-As-Himself decided, for ideological reasons, to be and to remain peerless, this eccentric man came to his collectivist friend’s house by himself, while he’s silent as a monk but polite like a man of the higher classes of society. The door to his friend’s house was opened not the friend himself, but his seductive partner, by the name of The Enslaver. Her face were utterly in make-up, however wonderfully charming. Her inviting voice would have seduced The-Man-As-Himself if he wouldn’t have ventured in the eccentric and esoteric writings of a philosopher by the name of Tomasio The Monk.

The-Man-As-Himself has developed a mindset that may assist him to abstain from the temptations of romance, and especially adultery. The beautiful women greeted him and he entered the host’s abode, which was full of pictures and portraits of family members and social revolutionaries, and above the fireplace prospered the host’s prideful mentor, the famous sociologist and scientist Mr Sociocentric.

The-Man-As-Himself, an Indie-Solitaire (one who believes in Solitary Individualism) read in the past Mr Sociocentric’s writing and the theory which is named after him, and nevertheless The-Man-As-Himself (which shall be called Mr. Mah for as a short acronym), the protagonist, was able to use the skill of judgment Tomasio The Monk called in the genesis of his theory, the Hermitericum, skillfully. This anonymous philosopher which called for self-analysis and social-analysis in order to reach material objectivity, heavily condemned the Sociocentric Approach, with the basic criticism that a collective, too, can have an enormous ego just like a single individual, and yet egoism is viewed negatively.

The-Man-Relative-To-Others (which shall be called, for acronym-like comfort, Mr. Merato), sat on a highly-decorated sofa, a gift from his family, and his face expression displayed boredom as he waited for his solitary friend (even though he came on time) - restless in front of the void The Monk claimed it to contain much more meaning than it has “on the ground”.

In accordance to the social codes of the external world and its infinite social rituals, Mr. Mah greeted his host and asked for his well-being not necessarily out of interest or innocence, but out of the consistent hope to retrieve intellectual exchange in the name of “alternative hedonism”, an idea of the ascetic philosopher whose book he read. However his blabbering host, who heavily disliked silence, spoke and talked on the usual things which are included in the art small-talk, without any appearant reason in the eyes of the harsh-living individual in front of him. Mr. Mah, the guest, sat as well and listened with great attention. Even though he found existential emptiness in small talks, he commented throughout the conversation in the hypocrite submission of the social consciousness. The romantic Enslaver, sat in the side of her mate on the end of the expensive couch, and stared at her lover with her sparkling and made-up eyes, craving for affection and her preservation of reputation in society.

Sometimes in this conversation she implored to her chattering lover to remind the guest some experiences which were unnecessary to bring.

The time has passed, and the afternoon submitted to the night’s darkness with deterministic submission. The guest, who came in the failed hope to learn from the sociocentric devotee and his wife’s wisdom-of-the-masses, he gave up on the expectation of gain a sufficient intellectual stimuli from them, but he hid that in his mind to preserve his the interaction with them, an act he hated but knew well. In fact, he wanted to return to his own abode, in the city’s outskirts, and spend the rest of the weekend on his own, perhaps he would read a book or be in deep thought. He knew that there is no escape from the “plague” of solitude.

Mr. Mah also knew it is not wise to highlight is authentic self and his book-acquired and inwardly-acquired insights. He thought of “The Monk”’s socially-controversial book, which he and others learnt from his esoteric philosophy. He read enough from the Hermitericum to understand that “The Monk” isn’t a cult leader, nor a psycho. He viewed this controversial person as a reasonable individual, whose love for solitude is limitless. However Mah refused, for a time, to express that man’s philosophy in the ears of Mr. Merato and his mate, who disapproved harshly this philosopher, although Mah himself wanted to do so.

In moments of silence which appear in every conversation, Mr. Mah dared and talk in the approval of “The Monk”, while he did the best he could to avoid insulting his host which was on the other side of the ideological spectrum. Despite all of Mah’s efforts, Merato and his partner rebuked him, as their belief in the social nature and the sociocentric approach was religious-like.

Unfortunately to the Indie-Solitaire guest, which supported the freedom of belief, and to the joy of the hosts, which believed firmly they are objective in their thoughts, the rest of the meeting was used - or wasted - for their words of preach in the name of sociology and dependency, on condemning “The Monk” and on glorifying their own romantic love and the beliefs of Mr Sociocentric, their mentor.

In the end of the meeting, Mr. Merato offered his socially-repressed friend some books to read, and summarized that like in anything else in his life, he himself works and reads only when he is forced to. This declaration, even if is of humorous nature, summarized himself being as a wholly-dependent individual, unfortunately for Mr. Mah, which was now bitter because of the allegedly-objective atmosphere his hosts were so in depth in. Nonetheless, because Mah understood the difference between the external and the internal world, he knew that revelation from the heart would considered as a distortion capable of threatening the harmony of this situation. Therefore he remained silent. Some say he did it out of empathy, but he knew that emotional repression is rational.

After this meeting, Mr. Mah once again, like in any other time during his existence, found himself alone in the world at night, and screamed to the skies as a sign to his authenticy, as an expression fully justified when alone. On his way to his humble abode, as he analysed the meeting and was puzzled about it, he summarized it as a failure. He felt that this time was wasted for nothing, without any intellectual exchange which could have justified the probability of him feeling enjoyed in company.

During that time, in Mr. Merato’s apartment, he and his partner celebrated with a last glass of wine for this night (Mr. Mah did not even touched his own glass) in a feeling of victory, and ended their waking hours for this day with passionate intimacy in their room, devoted completely to their deed of love, in the craving to minimize even more the solitude of their apartment, which was nevertheless always filled with friends and family members, drunken in love, alcohol and reputation.

After a while, Mr. Mah eventually decided to terminate the friendship with the couple, which then were married and were from now on Mr. and Mrs. Merato. Regardless of the praised and widely known celebration of their marriage, there was still something missing in their happiness. The sharp turn of events of their former guest and friend, and despite their desperate request, the friendship between the Indie-Solitaire and the social devotees, which was already small, has disbanded to the unfortunate of the latters, and to the liberation of the first, as the husband and wife remember him to eternity, for good and for bad.