Substantial agreement exists that Nietzsche considered the eternal recurrence his most important teaching. He calls it the “fundamental conception” of Zarathustra, which he celebrates as “the highest book there is … also the deepest, born out of the innermost wealth of truth” (EH III, Z 1; P 4). And he identifies himself in a special way with its teaching when summing up his philosophical intentions and achievements in one of his last books: “I, the last disciple of the philosopher Dionysus – I, the teacher of the eternal recurrence” (TI X, 5). If it is his central teaching, however, it is also the most frequently and effectively criticized of Nietzsche's doctrines. The body of philosophically sophisticated and interesting criticism of the doctrine of eternal recurrence remains unmatched by the literature on any other aspect of Nietzsche's philosophy. I will organize my interpretation of eternal recurrence as a response to the most important objections that have been raised against it.