When they want to say that life is fleeting, and the events in it are constantly changing, they often use popular expression, the author of which is the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus (544-483 BC): "You cannot enter the same river twice."
The saying of Heraclitus became a proverb
What is the meaning of this saying in the understanding of Heraclitus? It is explained by the full quotation of the author: “You cannot enter the same river twice and you cannot catch the mortal nature twice in the same state, but the speed and speed of the exchange dissipates and gathers again. Birth, origin never stops. The sun is not only new every day, but eternally and continuously new.
How is this expression interpreted in the modern sense? It is understood that it does not make sense to return to the person with whom he once broke up, that is, "leaving - leave." Thus, its original meaning is distorted, as it is viewed through the prism of human relations. The phrase "You can't step into the same river twice" has become a proverb.
And yet, let's return to the original meaning of this expression, laid down by Heraclitus. Everything in the world is changing, time cannot be turned back. Time… It would seem that what could be simpler than time? After all, it exists, as it were, everywhere - any event takes place in time, and our life too ...
Winged expression of Heraclitus and the Great Mystery of Time
But if we think a little, then we will find ourselves in front of the Great Mystery of Time. And then not one, but a whole sea of questions will arise.
Why is time ubiquitous? Why is it flowing everywhere? Why can't you step into the same river twice?
The impossibility of repeating the same event, in particular, entering the river, is explained by the fact that some time will pass between the first and second times - and the water that we entered for the first time will simply flow away. There will already be new water in the river, which means that the river itself will be different.
So it is with time. It flows everywhere and constantly. And this moment will never happen again. You can find yourself in the same place as many times as you like, but it is impossible to be there at the same time. And all because time flows in only one direction - from the past to the future- and never the other way around.
By the way, another ancient Greek philosopher Cratylus, who was a student and follower of Heraclitus, to emphasize the momentary movement of space, time and matter, paraphrased the Heraclitus aphorism as follows: “You cannot enter the same river once.” Cratyl's statement, as it were, sums up the Heraclitean one and brings it to its logical conclusion.
People say that you don't step into the same river twice. Although, throughout life, everyone bathes and enters the same river many times. This is if we consider the purely direct meaning of this expression. But what is meant in a figurative sense, what meaning is hidden here, why it is customary to think so and whether it is worth entering this very river a second time.
Let's try to understand this article. Where does it all begin.
People meet, people fall in love, get married - the famous words of the old song. Relationship stories are different. There was happiness, there were meetings, affection and feelings, plans, dreams, hopes were made. Wishes were made while looking at the shooting stars in the night sky.
There was a preparation for the wedding, the purchase of a joint housing was supposed, the birth of a child was expected ... Yes, and a lot of other things were good, and sometimes not very good. But at one fine moment, everything collapsed, did not work out, and as a result, there was a separation. Everyone has their own reasons, completely different, however, as well as life situations.
Most people believe that past relationships cannot be returned, they cannot be renewed and adjusted. Bitter resentment, severe disappointment, circumstances, fear of another loss and pain - all this allows you to think so.
The past cannot be returned. Yes, that's right, the past is forever in the past. Is it possible to forgive, this is an individual ability. What awaits in the future and how life will turn out - no one knows. Whether there is a desire to start all over again depends on the feelings and wisdom of each individual person.
It is important to understand here that the river in question is life, it flows all the time, renews and changes. There are both joys and sorrows in it; both happiness and sadness. People also tend to change during their lives, grow up, become wiser, gain some experience.
Understand and accept something for yourself, and reject something. And what is the result. Indeed, it is impossible to enter the same river twice in principle. For it is, practically, every minute new. The same is true for the people who are in it. They are also different every day. With other life views, with a different mood and reasoning.
But, as for the relations referred to as the past, there is always the possibility of revising them. Draw conclusions from the mistakes made, reassess the values, set priorities.
Indeed, over time, many grievances seem ridiculous and ridiculous. And many actions are stupid and not as scary as it seemed before. Only over the years, having become wiser, do you gain the ability to look at many things from the outside and correctly analyze situations.
When there are feelings between people that have stood the test of time; there is a desire and desire to be together, you can always start all over again. With new forces, acquired knowledge, skillful approaches to each other.
Is it forbidden to walk along the river of life, renewed and happy. No, of course you can, and even need to enter the same river many times. Into the river called Love!
You can't step into the same river twice
cm. Everything flows, everything changes .
Encyclopedic Dictionary of winged words and expressions. - M.: "Lokid-Press". Vadim Serov. 2003 .
- Something is wrong in the Danish state
- Is it possible for walks / Away to choose a nook
See what "You cannot enter the same river twice" in other dictionaries:
CRATIL- from Athens (2nd half of the 5th century, beginning of the 4th century BC), other Greek. philosopher. According to legend, a follower of Heraclitus and a teacher of Plato; ch. a character in Plato's dialogue "Cratylus" (the main source of his life along with Aristotle's "Metaphysics"). According to… … Philosophical Encyclopedia
Everything flows, everything changes- From ancient Greek: Panta rhei. Literally: Everything moves. The original source of the words of the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus (Heraclitus from Ephesus, ca. 554 483 BC), which the philosopher Plato preserved for history: “Heraclitus says that everything moves and nothing ... ... Dictionary of winged words and expressions
Formation- Becoming ♦ Devenir Change seen as a global phenomenon. Therefore, it is being itself, since it is in constant change. “Panta rhei” (“Everything flows”), said Heraclitus. Indeed, everything flows, everything ... ... Philosophical Dictionary of Sponville
Heraclitus of Ephesus- (lat. Heraclitus, Greek. Iraklitos) (about 550 BC, Ephesus, Asia Minor about 480 BC), an ancient Greek philosopher, one of the largest representatives of the Ionian school (see IONIAN PHILOSOPHERS) of philosophy. He considered fire to be the origin of all things. encyclopedic Dictionary
Cratyl- (Kratýlos) ancient Greek philosopher of the late 5th century. BC e., a student of Heraclitus, who made extreme relativistic conclusions from his doctrine of the universal fluidity of things. In particular, K. denied that phenomena had any qualitative certainty, ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
psychology of creativity- region psychological research creative activity (see creativity) of people in science (see psychology of science), literature, music, fine and stage arts (see ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia
Cratyl— This article is about the philosopher Cratyl. See also Cratylus (Plato) Cratylus (other Greek Κρατύλος; 2nd half of the 5th century, beginning of the 4th century BC) was an ancient Greek pre-Socratic philosopher, a follower of Heraclitus (Heraclitean), an Athenian. Cratyl was ... ... Wikipedia
Cratyl- (Kratylos) (4th century BC), Greek. philosopher, the first representative of relativism, teacher of Plato. K. extremely sharpened the idea of Heraclitus that it is impossible to enter the same river twice (since both water and our own body will become different), ... ... Dictionary of antiquity
Indistinguishability principle- Indiscernibility principle ♦ Indiscernables, Principe des Put forward by Leibniz. Asserts that every real being is internally different from other beings, in other words, there are no absolutely identical or indistinguishable beings from each other (i.e... Philosophical Dictionary of Sponville
CRATIL- CRATIL (Κρατύλος) from Athens (late 5th century BC), other Greek. philosopher, follower of Heraclitus. Known as one of the teachers that Plato listened to in his youth: according to Aristotle, before meeting Socrates, according to later tradition (Apuley, ... ... ancient philosophy
Books
- Rubicon. Twice in the same river Buy for 185 rubles
- Rubicon. Twice in the same river. Roman, Kalbazov K. Once you have already crossed your Rubicon, changing your fate. You have come to terms with the loss of your entire past life and accepted the lot that has been drawn. Now you are one of the members of a prehistoric tribe. You teach what...
The expression "you cannot step into the same river twice" is attributed to ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus. Only fragments of his treatise "On Nature" have come down to us. The treatise consisted of three parts: "On Nature", "On the State", "On God".
More fully, this phrase looks like this: “You cannot enter the same river twice and you cannot catch the mortal nature twice in the same state, but the speed and speed of the exchange dissipates and gathers again. Birth, origin never stops. The sun is not only new every day, but eternally and continuously new. Although one cannot vouch for the authenticity of authorship, some scholars dispute it, for example, A.F. Losev.
There is another interpretation, which somewhat changes the philosophical meaning: “On those entering the same rivers, one time one, another time different waters flow.”
How can this expression be understood?
The expression can cause bewilderment if the river is perceived as a static phenomenon, a geographical or topographical concept. Without delving into philosophy, it is difficult to understand why it is impossible to go into the river twice, for example, the Klyazma, if a person took a swim, went out, dried up and decided to plunge again. In such a utilitarian meaning, the expression loses its meaning.
At a minimum, it is necessary to imagine the river as an ecosystem, then everything will fall into place. During the time when a person was on the shore, irreversible changes occurred in the water - some fish ate a worm, and the balance of living organisms changed, somewhere far away a stone fell into the water and changed the volume of the river. Even the pattern of the waves has changed, just as the man himself has aged for the time he rested on the shore.
In this regard, the expression is close to the more familiar - "everything flows, everything changes." Close, but not exactly, since in Heraclitus's statement more attention is paid to the subject of perception.
Perception of the utterance in a practical sense
A person who decides to return to the past is doomed to be washed by "other waters". Not better, not worse, just different. There is no element of edification in this, so the analogy with the Russian proverb “you can’t glue a broken cup” is not entirely correct. A glued cup creates the appearance of a past use, but a crack will constantly remind you of a past problem.
Entering another river is in no way associated with past life experiences, any failures or successes. A person who decides to go back will never be able to repeat what happened, and even the usual static things will change, not only relationships, but it is possible that in a positive way.
Bumped into " Metaphysics" Aristotle(forgetting that I read this in a dialogue " Cratyl" Plato):
It was on the basis of this assumption that the most extreme of the opinions mentioned arose - the opinion of those who considered themselves followers of Heraclitus and whom Cratylus adhered to, who in the end believed that nothing should be said, and only moved his finger and reproached Heraclitus for his words that it was impossible to enter into the same river twice, for he himself believed that this could not be done even once.
Aristotle's answer to this matter is as follows (either I did not understand, or something else, but not very clearly):
And we will say against this reasoning that what is changing, while it is changing, gives these people some reason to consider it non-existent, but this is in any case debatable; in fact, that which loses something has [still] something of what is being lost, and something of what arises must already be. And in general, if something is destroyed, there must be something that exists, and if something arises, then there must exist that from which it arises, and that by which it is generated, and this cannot go to infinity. But besides this, we point out that a change in quantity and a change in quality are not the same thing. Let things not be constant in quantity, but we know them all by their form. Moreover, those who hold such a view deserve the reproach that, although they have seen that even among the sensible things this is the case only with a smaller number of things, they have spoken in the same way about the world as a whole. For only the region of the sensible that surrounds us is constantly in a state of annihilation and emergence; but this region is, one might say, an insignificant part of everything, so that it would be more just for the sake of those [eternal] things to justify these, rather than because of these to condemn them. In addition, it is clear that we will say to these people the same thing that was said already before, namely: we need to explain to them and convince them that there is some immovable essence (physis). However, from their assertion that things both exist and do not exist at the same time, it follows that everything is at rest rather than in motion; in fact, [if we proceed from this statement], then there is nothing to change into anything: after all, everything is already present in everything.
Everything around that there must be something immovable. Even having entered the river once, something is already decreasing, something remains, but there is also something permanent. Without the constant, there would be nothing true; nothing at all.
And below on the same part (if things change):
And if everything is in motion, then nothing would be true; then, therefore, everything would be false, meanwhile it has been proved that this is impossible. And besides, that which changes is necessarily being, for change comes from something into something. However, it is not true that everything is only sometimes at rest or in motion, and eternally - nothing, for there is something that always moves the moving and the first moving is itself motionless.
Even before joining the circle of students of Socrates, Plato studied philosophy with Cratylus. He was a follower of Heraclitus, who did not stop at the most extreme and paradoxical conclusions from his doctrine of perpetual motion and eternal variability of everything that exists. In Cratylus, the thesis of Heraclitus is absolutized; not only can you not enter the river twice, but even once. Already the moment we enter it, it is not the same. It is impossible to call any thing by name: the name is the same, but the thing is constantly changing, so that the name is not applicable to it at any moment of its existence. There is only one way out - do not name things, but only point your finger at them. Subsequently, Plato will express himself in an ironic sense about this doctrine.
(Losev) that "you cannot enter the river twice" belongs to Heraclitus:
It is very difficult to judge on the basis of all these later philosophical transmissions and interpretations about the true expression of this thought in Heraclitus. The only text that can be used to some extent is the words of Plutarch (B 91). "It is impossible to enter the same river twice" - hardly belongs to Heraclitus himself. At least at the Met. IV 5, 1010 a 13 Aristotle conveys it through Cratylus, who reproaches Heraclitus for this, while Plutarch (B 91) and Simplicius, from whom this judgment is usually taken, undoubtedly copied it from Aristotle. Probably, Plato (Crat. 402 a) also learned from Cratyl his most detailed phrase about Heraclitus (a similar text is given by Plutarch A660): he says it is impossible to step into the same river twice"
An interesting point - some believe that before meeting Socrates, Plato studied philosophy with Cratylus. But here is what he writes Diogenes Laertsky th:
At first, Plato studied philosophy (at the Academy, then in the garden near Colon) 6 (as Alexander writes in the Successions), following Heraclitus; but then, preparing to speak with the tragedy at the competitions, he heard Socrates talking in front of the Dionysus Theater and burned his poems with these words:
God of fire, hurry: Plato needs you now!
And from that time (and he was twenty years old) he became a constant listener of Socrates; after the death of Socrates, he joined Cratylus, a follower of Heraclitus 8, and Hermogenes, a follower of Parmenides; then, at the age of twenty-eight (according to Hermodorus), together with some other Socrates, he moved to Megara to Euclid; then he went to Cyrene to the mathematician Theodore;
In principle, everything is correct - if a typo - Cratylus was mistaken for Heraclitus.