For many of our activities, their necessity is confined to a limited scope, especially to the narrow area of surviving in a definite duration of time. We must do a work or another for living in some particular conditions. Any further questioning of their necessity fails, since we cannot provide a supreme necessity for some particular conditions and it is hard to find strong reasons for the living itself.
After any uttered ‘must’, it is not absurd to add a concessive phrase: ‘you must do something, although you know that you act in a limited area and finally you will die, so that all you do in your life time has not great importance’.
However, there are some necessary activities in the case of which such a concessive adding has no meaning. So is the listening to the music, thought, or the contemplation of the works of art. Their necessity does not depend on our particular conditions or on our existence, but on the objects which generate them. They seem timeless for us. At the same time, they cannot eradicate our general existence under the pressure of concessive phrases. On the contrary, they show us clearer our limits.
Therefore, if they are claimed to be divine or beyond the human existence, then their influence on us is quite different from the religious image of divinity. They do not push us for acquiring a future eternity, but deepen the consciousness of our present limits and mortality by instilling in us some pieces of inaccessible eternity. It is reasonable to say that they do more than the religious hopes which turn us to an eternity about which we do not know anything in the present time.