Heidegger

Bob,

Thanks for your note. I’m always up for reflexive possibilities which, by
the way, I believe to be endless. But even with endless possibilities, there
are still certain maneuvers that are impossible, and it seems to me that
self-exhortation is one of them. Because my own discourse can’t really look
back at itself, I depend, as the saying goes, on the kindness of strangers,
except there are no strangers who understand me, as I think I understand
Tympan, or anyone else for that matter. Fritz Perls of blessed memory argued
that every observation about another’s inner life is only a projection. He
recommended that I turn such a projection back on myself in what he called
retroflection. He likened this maneuver to a boomerang. But I could never
get one to return to me, so I don’t think it’s possible. All that having
been said, I’m still open to any observations regarding my own version of
transparency. I think this would be a significant exchange even if it’’s
wrong.

Bob and Allen,

It seems to me no one can ever understand someone else or figure out what
they are thinking but one can share the adventure of thoughts and how they
are turned, how they are reflected or circulated which seems to me a
significant “mode” that the mind can go through and that Aristotle
distinguishes from linear thinking as I was saying?

Tympan,

Thanks for returning my call.

I think each of us is capable of understanding the other’s thinking because
of the ways in which thinking is reflected in language, language that is
willfully put forward as a translation for the other of what is going on in
one’s mind. That’s not the only willful putting forward of language of
course. There are dozens of other speech-act possibilities. But the
willful putting forward of a translation for the other of a reflection of
thought as one sees it developing is about as generous as we get with one
another. I recognize the generous putting forward and respond in kind. The
ongoing result definitely approaches circularity, as you suggest. Such
exchanges are at the heart of Gadamer’s understanding of hermeneutics. But
as I said in my last post, there’s no way I can understand my own thinking
as well as I understand yours. I guess because of the fact that you and I
can come to an understanding, a Sichverstehen, as Heidegger puts it. The
way language works makes it difficult to impossible for me to come to an
understanding with myself. “Thinking comes to language in dialogue.” I
didn’t expect to arrive at this point, but here I am. Whaddyah think?

tympan: Well, I think you have make the effort to stay the course and
dialogue more. I have been thinking if I were Jewish reading Heidegger given
what I have been saying lately I would see Heidegger connect to the practice
of killing the “first born of Egypt” through his being-in-the-world which is
itself a psychological spiritual therapy i.e. leads to the tranquility of
the mind that is there when one is guarding the heart mind and there is a
sense of wonder before the beyng of the things themselves. It’s a being
towards death just like the model at issue in the Baptism of water in St.
Basil’s “Concerning Baptism” but it is also the story of the struggle for
the recognition of the people of Isreal through a dividing of the I or
through a disidentification of the I with it’s narcissistic individuality
such that you get Selfhood or Dasein. The foundational stone is the start of
the construction of pehaps a third Temple of a New Jerusalem? Of course it’s
not according to the final wishes of Heidegger but it works when you are
thinking through a sort of structural analogical imagination. It all
reinforces the goal of mental health understood as the practice where one
guards the heart mind.The practice prepares the Bride for the Bridegroom
where Isreal is the soul.This way one attains some measure of peace that is
ecumenical and interfaith oriented. The building of a temple is a process, a
redeeming practice, a way towards sanctification but also the midrash of an
ongoing conversational circle. It is an emergent network where each person
is a “node”, “cell”, “lodge”, “altar”, “chamber”, etc; participating
according to their allotted portion or gift or blessing in a temple process.
The common purpose is clear — the killing of the first born of Egypt i.e.
mental health. St. Basil says as much when he in “Concerning Baptism” writes
that the “solicitude of the inner man is of the first importance, that the
mind may be free from distraction and, as it were, be identified with the
aim of giving glory to God […] We men are easily prone to sins of thought.
Therefore, he who has formed each heart individually, knowing that the
impulse received from the intention constitutes the major element in sin,
has ordained that purity in the ruling part of the soul be our primary
concern.” The most important thing is the renewal of the old self, the
sanctification of Egyptian roots such that the people of Isreal can be
recognized as much as the influence of the sacred heart of Jesus inside our
own heart. I was saying this involves a radical sublimation of
self-interested exchange that leads to a more universal expression of
interest or love. The basic principle even of Joseph Smith founder of the
Mormons was following the model of dying with Jesus and redeeming oneself
through that practice and so through the Baptism of the waters of mercy, of
the active intellect or first good. It’s the story of the life of Moses.

regards,
tympan

I’ll try to respond to your response more quickly and we can move on from
there to what you say below. But if not then not. “Oz nisht, is nisht” in
the Yiddish.

Regards,

Allen

I think if one is to look at it in Aristotle’s terms and perhaps also
that of Peudo-Dionysius as I am questioning lately following on the
suggestions of the Greek church fathers then this is the ancient-future
understanding of reflection where the mind is as it were passive in a
dynamic kind of way as its tendency is always to go linear and project
something when memory and the imagination is activated. It’s not a lazy mind
this cicular thinking since this takes effort and a lot of it at first. It’s
a “heart mind” that is guarded and can be further related to the practice of
contemplative dwelling in Heidegger which is how I have always read
Heidegger. But in terms of ancient Biblical discourse at issue is also what
saint Basil in his “On Baptism” calls the “Baptism of fire and water” where
the waters of mercy (i.e. the active intellect ) cool off the burning of the
“first borns of Egypt” or the “suggestive thinking” of the enemy that
distract us from the task at hand which is to continue to think in circles
and stay at home as it were instead going off on a big adventure of linear
thoughts developing some kind of argument that someone is supposed to
figure out and come to an agreement on. The adventure rather is that of
leaving Egypt and feeding the flames (anger of God) with the suggestive
thinking of the enemy. The fire of the holy spirit turns our linear thoughts
into ashes so that we become rooted in a sort of nomadic circular thinking
that as such is constantly returning “home” and returning to the
accountability and responsability of guarding the perimeter of the heart of
the homeland. This is why *fear of the Lord* is the beginning of wisdom. A
Mnemonic device like a prayer wheel or a rosary are made for this purpose of
remembering to come back to living in the simple presence of God through
naked intentionality or being-in-the-world where the individuality of the I
is held out into the nothing such that it becomes Da-sein or comes to its
ownmost possibility. And what is more this is how conversational *circles*
or base living communities are born. They have this practice as their
mission or law of life. It’s what binds a contempaltive people together. I
mean the practice defines the limit of the heart mind and how it is guarded
and this defines as well a base hermeneutical community. It’s not abour
arguing but getting on with practice with solitude and silence as companion
in common with those who have the same intention in their hearts, the same
vow of life. It’s a struggle for the recognition of a people and that means
turning one’s back on distracting linear conversations by leaving them in
silence and not giving reasons for one’s exilic action and not trying to
convert other people through arguments. No, the way the life goes is through
example and the sharing of a contemplative life, a way of turning one’s
thoughts always and with constancy towards that which is always and already
there and no doubt beyond thinking including circular contemplative thought.
The ancient contemplatives were not trying to show that God existed rather
they point to the “not being” (me on in Greek) of God or to what they
sometimes call the “more than God”, the ineffable.

But to get back briefly to the ongoing process of Baptism. Baptism is a
conversion of our narcissistic loving interest, the I’s appetites. This is
how Mathew 10:37-39 is interpreted by saint Basil. This Biblical passage
says: “He who loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and
he who loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he who
doth not take his cross and follow me, is not worthy of me. He who findeth
his life shall lose it; and he who loseth his life for my sake shall find
it.” Not to make too much of a Freudian reference what this means is that
there is a sublimation of love, the I’s appetites becomes desire where
“desire” is understood as a kind of diffused universal admiration for all
things, a sense of wonder before the things themselves. Jesus was a radical
democrat . It’s the individualist appetites of the I that are crucified so
that then the I is a dying away of its old self which means that then Christ
is coming to live in me. This continues our remarks on easter for the
Baptism of the holy of spirit is a crucifiction of the I’s appetites, an
alchemical sublimation that is also a dying away and entombment. For saint
Basil and others of the same Greek culture this meant for them a
(mis)understanding of the Jewish passover. For them/us the model was not
simply Jesus on the cross but the life of Moses. The tomb is also the womb
of Isreal or Mary the virgin not the prostitute as the Da Vinci Code would
have it. The holy grail is the heart mind. The practice of a new monastic
contemplative is a spiritual marriage between the bride (the heart mind) and
the bridegroom. Out of the erotic sublimation Jesus comes to me and is born
or ressurected along with the I that is dying but not completely as there is
always some of Him that is outstanding and remains to come and we fail until
death to conquer our appetites as seems to be our experience. But I have by
the grace of God the portion alloted to me. This is one way that ecumenical
dialogue is possible through the following of the example of Jesus and Moses
together. Basil writes that the meaning of carrying the cross and receiving
the Baptism of water is that we promise, make a vow to “be crucified, to
die, and to be buried with him.” But Basil says further in “Concerning
Baptism” that this means the expression of a certain kind of ‘hatred’ as it
is written in Luke 14:26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father
and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his
own life—he cannot be my disciple.” Again, from a contemplative and
analytical point of view this means an agressive sublimation of love and
narcissistic interest.

Thanks Allen, I think it might be worthwhile to think through the difference
between circular and linear thinking in Aristotle. What the ancients meant
by “reflection” seems to correspond well to thinking understood as
contemplation and what Aristotle sees as the motion of the sun that I
discussed in a different context when looking at Ezekiel’s vision according
to Maimonides which raises the mind towards the active intellect or allows
the mind to be moved by the active intellect. Probably a bit of both, no?
The ancient contemplatives thought of the “dynamic synergy” between human
effort and divine grace. There is the effort of practice understood to be
very much an agon or combat but also the letting go that is the operation of
grace in one’s life. The habit of practice is the ethos of a people.

Warm regards (Platonic regards I mean),
tympan

Posted on Friday, June 2nd, 2006 at 6:25 am
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback