With the emergence of man, the first cycle of creation is concluded, since in man, as we have just seen, freedom is posited as such - we are thereby again at the origins, in the absolute indifference: that is, the deepest essence of man is the abyss of freedom as pure indifference, as a willing which wants nothing. This means that - in so far as the universe qua multitude of entities effectively exists - the Absoute(God) Himself had to accomplish an analogous act on Himself: He had to disengage Himself from the primordial indifference and to posit the universe, reality. Man's act of decision, his step from the pure potentiality-essentiality of a will which wants nothing to an actual will, is therefore a repetition of God's act: in a primordial act, God Himself had to 'choose Himself', His eternal character - to contract existence, to reveal Himself. In the same sense in which history is man's ordeal - the terrain in which humanity has to prove its creativity, to actualize its potential - nature itself is God's ordeal, the terrain in which He has to declose Himself, to put His creativity to the test. Schelling delineates the contours of this unheard-of primordial act of God Himself in the last pages of the second draft of Weltalter:
The deed, once accomplished, sinks immediately into the unfathomable depth, thereby acquiring its lasting charater. It is the same with the will which, once posited at the beginning and led into the outside, immediately has to sink into the unconscious. This is the only way the beginning, the beginning that does not cease to be one, the truly eternal beginning, ispossible. For here also it holds that the beginning should not know itself. Once done, the deed is eternally done. The decision that is in any way the true beginning should not appear before consciousness, it should not be recalled to mind, since this, precisely, would amount to its recall. He who apropos of a decision, reserves for himself the right to drag it again to light, will never accomplish the beginning.8
The key to this enigma of the primordial deed is that 'it is done eternally[for all time], i.e. it is eternally [at any time] already done, therefore past'.9 What is thereby resolved is the tension between eternity and the singularity of the act: how can an act, unique by definition, a happenstane, be eternal? What is done eternally(in the sense of remaining, in its very withdrawal, the eternal foundation of the present, not just something disappearing in the recess of the past) must be eternally (at any time always-already) done, and is therefore inherently past - that is, it has to belong to a past which was never present. This is what the predicate 'unconsciouss' designates: a past which, although it never existed, persists as a durable foundation of the present. The paradox of such an 'eternal past' is constitutive of time: there is no time without reference to a past which was never present - that is to say, temporality, in its original dimension, is not a single line of events that runs from the past through the present to the future, but involves the tension of a relationship to an act which, precisely insofar as it was never present, in its very withdrawal, is always here as the (past) foundation of the present.
译文：
随着人的出现，第一个创造的循环闭合了， 因为正如我们所看到的，在人身上，自由被设定为其本身——我们因而又再次来到起源处， 即位于那绝对的无差别：人类最深层的本质便是作为纯粹无差别，与一无所求的意愿的自由的深渊。这意味着，由于作为实存之物之总和的宇宙确实存在着，绝对者（即上帝）必须施加于自身以一个相同的行动：他必须将自身从原初的无差别/漠不关心中分离出来，以设定出宇宙，即现实。人的这一决断行动，即他从一无所求的那个意志的纯粹潜能性/本质性中迈入一个实际的意志，因此便是一种对上述所提及的上帝的那个行动的重复：在一个原初的行动中，上帝自身必须“选择自身”，即他永恒的特征——以此来收缩自身、显现自身。在此意义上，历史便是人类所经受的痛苦的考验——这意味着人类必须证明自身的创造性，去实现自己的潜能——而自然本身也是上帝必须经受的痛苦的考验，这意味着他必须解蔽自身，使他的创造力接受考验。谢林在世界时代的第二份手稿末页描绘了这一前所未有的上帝自身的原初行动：
那件事，一旦完成，便立即沉入深不可测的地底，因而获得了永恒的特征。同样的，当意志被设定在开端并被导入其自身之外，便必须立即沉入无意识中。这也是那永不停止作为“大一”的真正永恒的开端，唯一可能的存在方式。这同样是因为，开端不应认识其自身。一旦完成，那件事便永远地完成了。那无论以何种方式作为开端的决断，都不应呈现于意识面前，它不应被心灵回忆起，因为只有借此它才能真正被我们追忆。谁若保留了自己将那一决断拖回意识之光照耀下的权利的人，将永不能实现一个开端。
解读此谜一般的原初行为的关键在于认识到“一旦它永远地（每时每刻）完成，也就是说，它永远地（在任意时间点）总已经完成了，因此才成为了过去”。在此，一个行动的永恒与奇异性之间的张力便消解了：一个独一无二的行动、一个偶然事件是如何成为永恒的？那被永恒地完成了的事（在此我的意思是，那件事作为现在的永远的奠基，而非某些在过去中迷失了的东西，将一直弥留于其对我们的逃避之中）必须是永恒地（在任何时间点总已经）完成了，因而内在地便是过去了——亦即，它必须属于那绝不会成为现在的过去。这就是“无意识”这个谓词的意思了：一个尽管从未实存过的过去，却作为现在之奠基而持久地持存着——亦即，时间性，在其原初意义上来说，并非从过去延伸到现在乃至未来的一堆事件的单一线条，而是始终与下列行动之间存在着一种张力，即正是因那个行动从未是现在的，因其始终逃避我们，所以它总是在此作为现在的（过去的）奠基。引自 位于无意识中的原初决断不可被追忆
contract=Zusammenziehung/Einschließung。两个意思：1、harden-condense-concentrate into a consistent form of being; 2、to get infected with being。后者是翻译成英文后才出现的引申义，齐泽克专属…
withdrawal是齐泽克很爱用的词，不过我观察了很久，该词虽然出现频率很高但始终难称得上术语，所以我认为意译成“始终逃避我们”也不错。
引述世界时代第二稿的文段中最后面“since this, precisely, would amount to its recall”这句肯定是译错了，否则逻辑不通，不过我手头没原文。
Žižek argues that in Christian theology, the notion of Eternity is homologous to the Lacanian Real. Eternity is the inconceivable “Event” or “cut” that opens up and sustains temporality. Like the Real, Eternity is excluded so that temporal reality maintains consistency: “If then, we claim that each concrete historical constellation generates its own eternity, this does not simply mean that Eternity is the ideological myth generated by historical reality: Eternity is, rather, that which is excluded so that historical reality can maintain its consistency” (Fragile, p. 96).
……
The “good news” of Christianity is that a conversion experience is an act which breaks through the symbolic texture of reality in a way which can even alter the effects of the nontemporal Real: a genuine conversion experience is a temporal event that can change the eternal. In terms of Lacanian psychoanalysis, the act disrupts and then reforms the symbolic order in unpredictable ways. Such an intervention in the symbolic can even transform our mode of Real jouissance.
kelsey wood：Zizek，p160-161引自 位于无意识中的原初决断不可被追忆
表示其中内容是对原文的摘抄