Heidegger questioning (a) Japanese

Heidegger questioning (a) Japanese Japanese as (a) language

Vasil Penchev • Bulgarian Academy of Sciences: Institute for the Study of Societies and Knowledge (the former Institute for Philosophical Research) • vasildinev@gmail.com

o2nd Annual Conference of The European Network of Japanese Philosophy (ENOJP) oUniversité libre de Bruxelles 2016, December 7-10 o8 December 15:30 (room 3)

“The petals of rhapsodic silence”!

• Language is Koto ba in Japanese: “the petals of rhapsodic silence”, according to the Questioning’s translation

o The Questioning synthesizes the elucidation of the Japanese about what the Japanese word for ‘language’ means in this way

• The dialog and thus text are conecntarted on that understanding of language hidden in the extraordinary definition of language which the Japanase language contains as a word for ‘language’

About that text of Heidegger!

• That text of Heidegger is unusual among all texts of his o One might add that Heidegger himself is extraordinary among all

European philosophers

• All his texts are sharply distinguishable o They are both conceptual and metaphorical • He calls for a kind of philosophy, which is not anticonceptual, but pre-conceptual fot it should ground the notions themselves

Its peculiarities: • This text of Hedegger is the only one in the form of dialog o It is the only one comparing his thought with the Japanese way of

thought

• One can assume that the subject of the text, namely the essence of language, is what calls for those extraordinary peculiarities o Then, its form being inseparable from its contains should be consider as

an essential part of the definition itself of language

The being of language, or being’s being!

• What the dialog addresses is the being of language, where ‘being’ should be heard also as both ‘creature’ and ‘essence’ as in the German word ‘Wesen’ o That approach is opposite to the standard one of European science • The modern European science constitutes itself by disjunctively dividing ‘subject’ (‘creature’) from ‘object’ to purify the latter to its ‘essence’ as truth o Thus Heidegger’s thought of language is directly opposed to that idea of

science

A dialog with a certhain otherness!

• So, the unusual form and subject should answer to the questioning being of language: o The dialog with an otherness, but not any, and a certain otherness, that

of Japanese, was what Heidegger chose as the relevant form to reveal the being of language

• Language is conversation, “we are a conversation”, he states in a work for Hölderlin o Then, that dialog, which we are, is language, and its essence can be

discovered just by a relevant dialog

Being’s being as the “petals of rhapsodic silence”!

• If the word of language in Japanese might be thought as the “petals of rhapsodic silence”, the Japanese language tells us the being of language o That metaphor juxtaposes the language with the opposite of it: silence • However, not any silence is pregnant with language, but only “rhapsodic silence” o That “rhapsodic silence” is able to floar in that process known as

language, the words of which are “petals”

Language as “Dichtung” (poetry)!

• That was the reason for Heidegger to choose its otherness to think of the being of language o Just as he chose Hölderlin’s poetry for Hölderlin created in verses

(dichtet) the being of poetry (Dichtung)

• Language for linguistic is an object of investigation consisting of words is not alive o Language for poetry is a live creature for the poetry itself is alive • Language as poetry recreate the essence of all by dialog, i.e. only in a conversation with another creature such as human beings

Self-referentiality of the text! • The dialog of the Questioning with the Japanese about the being of language (in Japanese) is just right the being of language o However, the text represents what means also by its form itself

• The text, which should explain the essence of language is (a part of) language in turn o Language generates ontology and thus totality by itself

The being of language as a conversation of otherness(es)! • This means: the being of language is a dialog with an otherness, but not any, and a certain otherness, that of poetry o Poetry is that otherness of language, which is its essence • Language as the totality contains its otherness within itself as its essence, which is poetry

o Language questions Japanese, a certain other language, to bloom its essence in (a) dialog

Language, truth and Alethea • Japanese is poetic, here is why it is chosen to reveal and bring out the being of language from hiddenness in Alethea o Koto ba, the petals of rhapsodic silence is the poetic essence of language,

its being as a creature

• Koto ba is the word, a petal, in Japanese for ‘language’ o The petals of rhapsodic silence is that language, which think its being • This is Japanese

poetically

The only way for language to be!

• The being of language questions its otherness of poetry, or “rhapsodic silence”, always, and this is the only way for language to be

oThus, the conversation of the Questioning with (a) Japanese is a way for the language itself and by itself to reveal itsef in intself

• That text is an extended description of the phenomenon of language in the sense of philosophical phenomenology o It happens by itself only for the nature of language

Languages and “petals”!

• One might complement that Japanese and German (as well as English) languages are petals of the “rhapsodic silence” not less than the words in Japanese (or in any other language) o There is (Es gibt) that one is many at the same time for its nature • That special one is language o Any “atom” of it, a word, is the same kind of ‘one – many’, which is the

language itself

“Rhapsodic silence”: both metaphor and oxymoron!

• “Rhapsodic silence” is both metaphor and oxymoron for a speech is what can be naturally rhapsodic o The being of language is contradictory, a motion aiming to express or

even to be repose

• Thus it needs an expression being both metaphor and oxymoron to be itself by itself and in itself, i.e. for its phenomenon as appearing o That phenomenon needs a certain metaphor to be: “rhapsodic silence”!

From “rhapsodic silence” to the “petals of rhapsodic silence” • “The petals of rhapsodic silence” is both second metaphor and meta-metaphor thus reflecting and repeating the oxymoron of the former o The “petals” are sensual, visible, maybe smellable unlike silence whether

rhapsodic or not

• However, it is furthermore “rhapsodic” o So, the strcture of both metaphor and oxymoron is repeated in both

meta-level and same level

Language questioning itself: • That is an attempt for language to reply to its asking being revealed in Japanese as Koto ba

oThe question by itself is an openness, which calls for an answer, i.e. for closeness

• Questioning, language finds itself as the answer

oThus it reveals itself as a dialog with itself being both question and answer

• That questioning language is exemplified right the form of the text, in which the Questioning ask (a) Japanese for what language is

Language as the truth of metaphor!

• Whether the notions of language as linguistics or the being of language as an open and inexhaustible questioning says more?

oThe truth of metaphor is right its openness

• Speaking otherwise, just in opposition to the closeness of the notions, one may say “unhiddenness”, “aletheia” for the openness of metaphor

oFurthermore, on may think of language as that openness

Concepts vs metaphors! • European science and even philosophy prefers the concepts o They seem to be more reliable to build the knowledge for their

constantness

• However, that constantness implies closeness and thus a kind of dogmatism of scientific knowledge o On the contrary, the metaphors are always opened to new interpretation,

viewpoints and thus to new knowledge but seem to be unfit and unsuitable for building just for changeability

Heidegger’s preference! • Heidegger chose Japanese and Japanese philosophy to poeticize language and thus to reveal its being in this text

o Japanese serves to the language to talk to itself as one otherness to be able in thus to reveal its essence, being, phenomenon, creature, etc. right as a gracious and thoughtful conversation returning to and within itself

• (A) Japanese helps the questioning Heidegger to reveal what language is

The closeness of the concepts: • The concepts do not need any questions or interpretations to be what they are and mean

o They are or try to be independent of any context of relevant or even irrelevant use

• Thus their constancy to mean and be always one and the same implies their closeness just as the independence from their context

o The physical bodies of classical mechanics are analogically closed and constant concentrating all their actuality within themselves

Language as both openness and closeness!

• Language is a conversation and thus it needs both to exist o One might say that language is always a process sequently altering right

openness and closeness, e.g. the openness of metaphor and the closeness of notion, as each of which the “petals” of language can flower

• One might say furthermore that language is always a process sequently altering right the openness of dialog addressing some collocutor and the closeness of understanding o At last, one might say that the two phases are merging in one and the

same in the being of language

Ku, Iro, and Iki:

• The other three Japanese words in Heidegger’s text: Ku, Iro, and Iki o Unfortunately, there is no enough time to be discussed • Fortunately, the considered already Japanese word, Koto ba is crucial for the creature of Heideger’s text in question Thank you very much for your kind attention!

• The file of this presentation may be downloaded in formats PowerPoint, PDF, or watched at YouTube after typing its title, Heidegger questioning (a) Japanese, in any search engine such as Google, Bing, etc.

Reference: Heidegger, M. “Aus einem Gespräch von der Sprache (1953/54). Zwischen einem Japaner und einem Fragenden, in: Untrewegs zu Sprache (Gesamtausgabe, Band 12). Frankfurt am Main: V. Klostermann, 1985, pp. 80-145 (English translation: “A Dialog on Language,” in: On the Way to Language (transl. P. D. Hertz). New York, etc.: Harper & Row, pp. 1-54)