H. IBRAHIM TÜRKDOGAN
Omar Khayyam and Max Stirner
Translated by Ulrike Hirschhäuser
I Determined To Rely On Nothing !
the following section we shall analyze the indeterminable world in which Stirner
and Omar will meet once more. In doing so, we shall start out from a
non-religious, “godless” mysticism.
to my own knowledge Stirner was rarely associated with mysticism, while his role
as a “social critic”, his “anarchism”, his “Gesellite” views have
always been frequently discussed topics. In an industrialized
world in which man´s mind is dominated by the mechanistic principles of
efficiency his anti-pedagogic and psychoanalytic ideas were disdained.
There may be some special reasons for this which we cannot
Stirner has denounced the whole world of explanations, of ideas, of philosophies,
in short of ideologies as ghosts, as
psychical disorders in men, he, to my mind, arrives at a problematic, i.e.
empirically speaking very complex conclusion, “It is myself who is the criterion of truth, I, however, am no idea, but
more than an idea, i.e. inexpressible.” 
The living meaning the concrete Ego, body and soul, is, as we
have pointed out above, the Ego with a self-centred motivation, with a will of
its own, which because of his potential capacities can take possession of what
it is capable of to satisfy its hunger with relish. But the indefinable Ego is
something different, a phenomenon which cannot be grasped empirically, the all
in all, the Ego´s creator; it is its creator and its creation in one. This Ego
is identical with God: He is nameless, there is no word to denote everything
that his divinity entails. This also applies to Stirner: no concept denotes his
entire nature, nothing that he is characterized by is exhaustive enough to sum
up his nature. Therefore Stirner consistently states, “I rely on nothing.”
this point on Stirner cannot be communicated to anybody anymore. After Stirner
has completed his thought, he falls silent. Thus he becomes a mystic: an active
individual turns into an inactive individual, the Ego, full of desire, turns
into the Ego that dissolves – this is the world of “I am the inexpressible.”
the physical I, which perceives itself and which turns itself into an object,
the Ego´s sense of vitality is hiding. Therefore there may be something
concealed behind all objects.This, however, is indefinable.
Mauthner writes about the dilemma of language, “I belong to the world of
appearances; apart from that I am – though I am the only one who knows that
– a thing in itself, a thing for me. Come on, out with it! What am I as a
thing in itself, as a thing for me? Me, me, me! I am me. Language cannot go
beyond this silly tautology, this babble.”
We have every right to wonder: Does Stirner manage to go
beyond this “babble”? He at least realizes his linguistic limits and says
that he relies on Nothing, thus facing the imperfection of language.
Linguistically speaking that is the only logical consequence. So we are not
amazed at the fact that Stirner called language a ghost,
too. Mauthner saw that Stirner was a critic of language and wrote,“In a
certain though limited way Stirner was the most relentless critic of language...
But all misunderstandings concerning Stirner, who crushed the whole world,
result from the fact that no language whatsoever can express whether the Unique
Ego denotes a solipsist or man after all. This is not Stirner´s fault, but is
due to language.”
Let us unveil the secret. Referring to the Ego as
“nothing” , Stirner touches upon a conceptual limit and leaves all ghosts behind.
 Cf. Max Stirner und die Psychoanalyse (Max Stirner and Psychoanalysis) In: Der Einzige. (The Unique Ego) Vierteljahresschrift des Max-Stirner-Archivs Leipzig, Heft 1 u.2 Februar 2001 (Quarterly of the Max-Stirner-Archives Leipzig , issue 1 & 2, February 2001)
 Max Stirner Der Einzige und sein Eigentum (The Ego and Its Own) Sturrgart 1981, p. 400
 p. 412
 Fritz Mauthner Wörterbuch der Philosophie (Dictionary of Philosophy) 2.Band (Volume II) Publishers: Diogenes, 1980, p. 373