[p. 241]
|241| in itself with will (not an empty in-itself, infertility)111) is the most determinate, i.e. the form of universality but no determination; legislation must see how it manages; – fix this or that determination, – determination, being on account of other living purposes; – military estate, depopulation, – characters of the estates etc. –
111) In the margin: Taking marriage as the universal under protection against contingency, and other relationships
β) the singular is considered in marriage according to his willing; – but as living only one with the family, he has renounced his natural solitude; – in this the family has property, it is property not of the singular, but of the family, it is family patrimony, – if a member dies, only this accident falls away, and the family remains, – hence inheritance, – it is not for the first comer to take possession of it, the state of nature does not set in – ground of inheriting. – But the singular [is] equally pure person, it is his property – and as such he is universal; he does not die; it is his declared will that counts concerning his property; not whether he is alive or dead; – just as a contract does not cease through the death of one contracting party, if the will can be fulfilled without his life; – the dead cannot marry, any more than a living person with a heavenly bridegroom; – but for one to receive the property of another, the life of the receiving one is not needed. – But this disposition of the singular over his fortune contradicts inheritance. – This cannot be mediated in any absolute way, but the one is to be limited by the other in a determinate way – bizarre notions in testaments (Thellusson’s) – contingency, one must simply see how to manage in an equitable way; – here and there there must now and then be give and take; the harshness
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.