Daoist Encounters
Daoist Encounters
Daoist Encounters
net/publication/338877991
Two Portrayals of Death in Light of the Views of Brentano and Early Daoism
CITATIONS READS
0 117
1 author:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Mary Irene Bockover on 01 February 2021.
Edited by
David Chai
David Chai has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988,
to be identified as Editor of this work.
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility for, any
third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this
book were correct at the time of going to press. The editor and publisher regret
any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to
exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com
and sign up for our newsletters.
List of Contributors ix
Acknowledgments xii
Editor’s Introduction 1
Index 309
When Matteo Ricci arrived on the shores of China in 1583, he would open
a new chapter in Western civilization’s engagement with the East. Struck by
the wisdom of Chinese thought, the Jesuits would translate the canonical
works of China into Latin and these, in turn, would be rendered into other
European languages. As these translations made their way through Europe,
some of them found their way into the hands, or were whispered into the
ears, of the greatest thinkers of the early-modern and modern periods.1 One
would think the texts of Confucianism would have garnered the greatest
interest given their moral-political content but that was not the case. It was
the naturalistic thought of Daoism that caught people’s attention, a
naturalism that is cosmological and aesthetic, spiritual and phenomenological.
What is more, Daoism addresses both the sayable and unsayable, the visible
and invisible, as well as the knowable and unknowable. It is, in other words,
a philosophical tradition concerned with things and non-things alike and
humanity’s ability to comprehend this inseparable, binomial nature of
reality.
When it comes to the topic of this book—phenomenology—far greater
attention has been paid to its reception in Japan than China. Of the works
written to date about Chinese phenomenology in English, they have either
been limited in scope to Edmund Husserl,2 or were done at a time that their
findings are in need of refreshing.3 What is more, there has not been a single
book-length study in English devoted to Daoism and phenomenology.4 The
present work will not only remedy this neglect, it will argue that Daoism’s
inherently phenomenological nature makes it the perfect foil to question the
Western tradition’s self-assuredness and domination of the modern global
philosophical stage.
This is not to say that the West’s grip on phenomenology should be
eradicated simply to make room for that of the East: quite the contrary.
Phenomenology has and continues to demonstrate a willingness to adapt to
the challenges put before it by thinkers and traditions within and beyond the
Western realm.5 Having said as much, it should be stated that the present
work is neither an apology for, nor a history of phenomenology, but an
encounter between two historically and culturally unique understandings of
the phenomenological world. Thus while Daoism does not belong to the
school of phenomenology per se, it touches upon issues found in the latter’s
philosophical system in such a way that the two traditions mutually resonate
with one another. In this way, the intercultural encounter that guides this
work has been designed to provoke questions about human existence in
such a way that the answers arrived at will be globally relevant and not
limited to either East or West. Daoism thus acts as the protagonist, poking
and prodding the West to justify its reasoning and methodologies. Such
being the case, the first objective of this book is to debunk the
mischaracterization of Daoism as nothing more than mystical gibberish; the
Daoist rendition of phenomenology is as valid as it is ancient. A second
objective is to highlight how Western phenomenology, as represented by the
figures included in this volume, is closer in spirit to Daoism than it is apart.
The book’s third and final objective is perhaps the hardest to realize in that
it not only asks us to think phenomenologically, it challenges us to make
Daoism part of our life praxis.
While the Western side of our discourse is flexible as concerns which
figures are discussed, the Daoist side is limited to either Laozi 老子 (c. sixth
century bce) or Zhuangzi 莊子 (fourth century bce). Laozi is associated
with a text entitled Daodejing 道德經 (Classic of Dao and Virtue) and
Zhuangzi with the Nanhua Zhenjing 南華真經 (True Classic of Nanhua), or
simply the Zhuangzi.6 Since an overview of phenomenology will make this
introduction unwieldy, I shall outline the major concepts of Daoism instead.7
Of primary concern to Daoism is learning how to comprehend and follow
Dao 道. Perhaps the most profound of Chinese concepts to explain in
English, Dao literally means “path” or “road” and has the extended meaning
of “Way.” The Chinese character is comprised of two parts: a head (首) and
a pair of feet (辶). The feet carry the head and, in so doing, create a path in
the world. When one lets their feet transport their head, as opposed to using
the head to determine where the feet should go, the “Way” to proceed
naturally presents itself. The second meaning bestowed to Dao is that of
primal creator or mother (mu 母). All things in the universe (i.e., the myriad
or ten thousand things, wanwu 萬物), as well as the universe itself, arise and
decline because of Dao; however, this cosmic birthing is neither a divine act
nor one of predetermination. Although the lifespan of things is fated
according to their form (xing 形), what determines whether its end is reached
or cut-short prematurely is not Dao but each thing itself. Exhaustion of the
body (ti 體 or shen 身) and (heart-) mind (xin 心), illness, natural or human
inflicted calamity, there are any number of ways a thing’s finitude can be
concluded. For Daoism, death is inevitable and since everything in the
universe must die at some point in time, there are no grounds to justify the
fear humanity harbors of what is essentially a natural occurrence.
Dao makes possible the occurrence of life (sheng 生) and death (si 死),
and the innumerable changes (hua 化 or bian 變) that take place in-between,
but it does not manipulate or interfere with them. From this we derive the
concepts of naturalism or spontaneity (ziran 自然), and non-interference or
non-action (wuwei 無為). These, in turn, give rise to the notions of selflessness
and forgetting (wang 忘). To be in harmony with Dao is hence to be in
accordance with the collective natural world (i.e., Heaven and Earth, tiandi
天地). In order to do this, Daoism states that humans must abandon our
dependency on certain models of thinking and acting whilst experiencing
the world. If we are to return to things themselves, we cannot do so if we
continue to view ourselves as being separate or different from the collectivity
of said things. Daoism is thus a proponent of cosmic holism wherein no one
thing has priority over all others.
In order to best illustrate this life praxis, Daoism offers us the model of
the sage (shengren 聖人). The sage reveals the nature of things by allowing
them to display their phenomenological uniqueness and harmony with Dao.
Acting as the mirror of the world, the sage allows things to shine in the light
of Dao whilst remaining dark himself, allows things to sound forth whilst
remaining silent himself, and stands still so that the world may revolve
around him. In this way, the sage helps preserve the root of Dao in the world
by showing the latter the true extent of the former’s potential. Without the
sage, the “Way” of Dao will become lost to humanity and when that happens,
humanity will descend into chaos and destruction.
In sum, the Daoist worldview is a phenomenological experience not
predicated on a knowledge-based self; rather, Daoism seeks to liberate
human knowing and thinking by discarding the subjective self, dogmatic
norms, and non-inclusionary theories of reality. In this way, Daoist
phenomenology contributes to the Western notion of the term by shifting
the plane of truth from the human sphere to the onto-cosmological realm of
Dao qua ultimate reality. Daoist phenomenology is thus simultaneously
mundane and transcendental, this-worldly and non-worldly, appreciative of
things as they naturally are while also being sensitive to what said things
were and may become. It is a mode of living alongside the beings and non-
beings of the world without being affected by their attributes or propensities,
all the while appreciating said qualities as perfectly natural and in accordance
with each thing’s inborn nature.
To conclude, the chapters comprising this book can be read independent
of one another and in any particular order. Although they are organized
chronologically according to the lifetime of the Western figure and divided
into three groups indicating the approximate development of
phenomenology—in the context of this book that is—what remains
consistent throughout is the edifying voice of Daoism.
Notes
1 See the following: Eric S. Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy in Early
Twentieth-Century German Thought (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017);
Graham Parkes, ed., Heidegger and Asian Thought (Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press, 1987); Graham Parkes, ed., Nietzsche and Asian Thought
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991); Lin Ma, Heidegger on East-West
Dialogue: Anticipating the Event (New York: Routledge, 2007); and Reinhard
May, Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His Work, trans.
Graham Parkes (New York: Routledge, 1996).
2 See Kwok-Ying Lau and John Drummond, eds., Husserl’s Logical Investigations in
the New Century: Western and Chinese Perspectives (Dordrecht: Springer, 2007).
3 See Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka, ed., Phenomenology of Life in a Dialogue
Between Chinese and Occidental Philosophy (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1984). Although the publication of this book was ground-breaking
at the time for introducing to the world the field of Chinese phenomenology,
only two of its twenty-five chapters dealt with Daoism. What is more, in the
time that has since passed, not a single work on phenomenology has appeared
in which Daoism has been given more than the briefest of analysis.
4 Even though the works of Hegel, Husserl, and Heidegger have been available in
Chinese for some time, Chinese scholars have been just as derelict as their
Western counterparts when it comes to direct comparisons between Daoism and
phenomenology. Two notable exceptions are: Rujun Wu, Daoist Hermeneutics
and the Forceful Purity of Phenomenology (Taibei: Taiwan Xuesheng Shuju
Youxian Gongsi, 2011); and Zhenyu Zhong, Daoist Phenomenology of Qi
(Taibei: Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan Zhongguo Wenzhe Yanjiusuo, 2016).
5 For more on phenomenology in its traditional and contemporary guises, see
Dan Zahavi, ed., The Oxford Handbook of the History of Phenomenology
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2018); Dan Zahavi, ed., The Oxford
Handbook of Contemporary Phenomenology (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2012); Dermot Moran and Lester Embree, eds., Phenomenology: Critical
Concepts in Philosophy (London: Routledge, 2004); Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka,
ed., Phenomenology World-Wide: Foundations, Expanding Dynamics,
Life-Engagements: A Guide for Research and Study (Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 2002); Dermot Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology
(London: Routledge, 2000); and Robert Sokolowski, Introduction to
Phenomenology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
6 We will not concern ourselves with the historical dates of Laozi or Zhuangzi,
or the compilation and editing of their texts, as these are beyond the scope of
this work.
7 More comprehensive introductions are available in: Hans-Georg Moeller,
Daoism Explained: From the Dream of the Butterfly to the Fishnet Allegory
(La Salle: Open Court, 2004); Eske Mollgaard, An Introduction to Daoist
Thought (New York: Routledge, 2011); and Steve Coutinho, An Introduction
to Daoist Philosophies (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013).
References
Coutinho, Steve. (2013), An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies, New York:
Columbia University Press.
Precursory
Encounters:
Unearthing Fertile
Seeds
To Color or Not?
David Chai
1. Introduction
To look upon the world is to see an astonishing array of colors. Indeed, the
colors that fall under our gaze bewitch our eyes and intoxicate our hearts
and yet, if we were to sweep away said coloration, turning the world into a
monochrome palette, would we still be enraptured by its bedazzling
visuality? What would we make of a world lacking the emotional,
psychological, and religious signification of color? Based on the bond
between color and these states of human realization, we confidently ascribe
each an array of identificatory markers. With this toolkit at our disposal, we
take the world at large to be constructed in a similar manner, forgetting the
fact that all outward manifestations of inner potential are fleeting in nature;
moreover, what makes each thing a particular thing—its spirit—is colorless.
The foggy translucency of spirit is not because it is impervious to color;
rather, by embodying colors in their collectivity, spirit colors the world such
that it transcends conventional representation. The challenge, therefore, lies
in conveying spirit’s resistance to literal expression.
One aspect of spirit commonly seen in the world’s great works of art is
freedom—not of the social, political, or religious kind, but that belonging to
humanity as a whole—and nowhere is freedom felt more than in Nature.
The artwork that merely imitates Nature, however, is but a decorative image
insofar as it lacks spirit. Ornamental art fails to encourage its viewer to
contemplate its painted scene, even though it might be pleasurable to look
at, because it does not bring said viewer a sense of inner freedom. In order
for art to be spiritually transformative, it needs to uplift our sense of self-
awareness, in terms of not just who we are as individuals, but who we are
as members of the collective being of spirit.
In discussing painting and spirit, one cannot but turn to the German
philosopher Hegel. In his Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art (hereafter,
Aesthetics), Hegel proclaims painting has united what was formerly two
distinct spheres of art: that of the external environment (architecture), and
that of the embodied spirit (sculpture). The color of a painting, he says, gives
the spiritual inner-life its appearance by rendering the invisible visible. While
this chapter is not concerned with Hegel’s account of the history of art, nor
with his discussion of the different styles of art or particular artists, it is
interested in exploring his thesis that a painter literally colors the living
sensuousness of an object. Neither drawing technique nor the clever use of
light and shadow can match the effect color has on spirit. While Hegel’s
discourse on the role of color in painting is an admittedly minor aspect of
his corpus, when compared to the writings of Alexander Baumgarten (1714–
62) and Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803), it is just as stimulating and
phenomenologically innovative.
Many centuries before Hegel, Chinese painters had come to an altogether
different conclusion regarding painting and color. For them, inner-spirit was
brought to life through brushwork, not color. Indeed, the influence of Daoist
philosophy on Chinese painting made color antithetical to the naturalness
of the depicted scene. What is of utmost importance is the spiritual resonance
between the painter and her subject. Although color was used in early
Chinese painting, it was done so sparingly in order to avoid masking the
brushwork delimiting the figures or scenes therein. Indeed, the blank canvas
was just as important to a painting as its content, so much so it became a
vital component of the finished work. In this way, when early Chinese artists
speak of the harmony between the white canvas and the black ink applied
to its surface, they were pointing to a human–cosmic harmony reflective of
the non-coloration of Nature. Daoist-inspired painting thus draws observers
into the collective spirit of Dao qua ultimate reality by freeing them to
partake in the naturalness of the painter’s heart-mind. In what follows, we
will compare the Hegelian and Daoist appropriation (or lack thereof) of
color and how it bears upon the standing of spirit in both its human and
worldly form.
canvas does the painted scene touch the spirit of others. As we shall see,
Daoist-inspired painting does not fixate on the technical particularities of
perspective, light and shadow, color saturation, and so forth, but on the
suggestiveness conveyed through brushwork.
In this regard, Daoism’s influence on artists, poets, and philosophers of
the Wei-Jin, Tang, and Song dynasties can be attributed to its emphasis on the
invisible attributes of the world in that to be hidden is to be mysterious, and
mystery lights the way to Dao. In other words, what is authentic (zhen 真)
does not belong to the world of the visible, a world where suggestiveness
is erased by crude pursuits of self-gain and recognition, and where the
hidden is trampled on by the vanity of the known and dispersed by the false
knowledge of spoken words. It is likewise absent from the line of clerks
awaiting their Prince’s command; rather, to be authentic entails a metaphorical
stripping-off of one’s clothes, and by implication the rank and honor
associated with them, so as to reveal one’s true self underneath. Herein lies
the difference between the Daoist and Hegelian views of painting—the
former sees spirit permeating the entirety of reality while the latter locates it
in the carnality of human flesh.
Why does it fall to the painter, as opposed to the sculptor, to successfully
capture human spirit? The following passage from Jean-Luc Marion gives
us some food for thought:
The painter grants visibility to the unseen, delivering the unseen from its
anterior invisibility, its shapelessness. But why is it the painter who
manages to do this—he and he alone? How does he seize the power to
make the unseen appear? By what gift does one become a painter?
Certainly, it is not enough to be able to see, to be on duty with a gaze, so
to speak, to have an eye for the visible already available and on display
every day, since in that case every non-blind person would know how to
paint. If the painter rules over the access of the unseen to the visible, his
gift thus has nothing to do with his vision of the visible but with his
divination of the unseen. The painter, like the blind man, sees more than
the visible, painting and seeing par excellence.5
Perhaps Hegel had something similar in mind when he noted how “art
liberates the true content of phenomena from the pure appearance and
deception of this bad, transitory world, and gives them a higher actuality,
born of the spirit.”6 It would seem that the art of painting is indubitably tied
to spirit, so let us examine in greater detail what this relationship entails.
need to lift the inner and outer world into his spiritual consciousness as an
object in which he recognizes again his own self.”7 We can contrast this with
what the Chinese painter and art theorist Xie He 謝赫 (fl. fifth century ce)
wrote:
Xie He’s “Six Laws” (liu fa 六法), like Hegel’s statement quoted before
them, place spirituality front and center; unlike Hegel, however, who held
that painting was about giving expression to human spirit by rendering it
visible through color, Xie He took brushwork to be of greatest importance.
Xie He is indicative of the early Chinese attitude toward art. Though he
would prove to be a highly influential figure, he was not the only one to
correlate painting and spirit. Take, for example, the great Tang poet and
painter Wang Wei 王維 (699–761 CE):
Wang Wei lived at a time when painting had only just begun to be the
domain of the literati class in China, and among said persons, ink-wash
landscapes rapidly became the medium of choice. Indeed, “it was exclusively
to the ink-wash that the Chinese literati assigned the play of variation
between pale and dark, dry and wet, between there is and there is not, to
render the evanescent character of things in the process of emergence or
resorption.”10 Working with black ink did not hamper the creative rendering
of painting for the early Chinese. In fact, they made up for the lack of color
by devising six “colors” appropriate to their monochrome take on the
world: black, white, dry, wet, thick, and thin.11 These three pairs allowed for
One may be said to have fulfilled one’s aim when the five colors are all
present in the management of ink alone. If one’s [heart-] mind dwells on
the five colors, then the images of things will go wrong. In painting things,
one should especially avoid meticulous completeness in formal appearance
and coloring, and extreme carefulness and detail that display skill and
finish. Therefore one should not deplore incompleteness but rather
deplore completeness. Once one knows a thing’s completeness, where is
the need for completing it in painting? This is not incompleteness. Should
one not recognize a thing’s completeness, that is true incompleteness.15
This textual passage is inspired by none other than the Zhuangzi. For
example, the corruption of images by way of the five colors is derived from
chapter 8 which says: “One who is web-toed in eyesight will be confused by
the five colors, bewitched by patterns and designs, by the brilliant blues and
spirit, concentrating upon his own unity. Being in harmony with the work
of creation itself, [his spirit] could borrow Master Wu’s brush. This is
[described as] formulating the conception before the brush is used, so
that when the painting is finished the conception is present . . . Now, if
one makes use of marking line and ruler, the result will be dead painting.
But if one guards the spirit and concentrates upon unity, there will be real
painting. Is not plain plaster better than dead paintings? Yet even one
stroke of a real painting will show the breath of life (shengqi). Now, the
more one revolves thought and wields the brush while consciously
thinking of oneself as painting, the less success one will have when
painting. If one revolves thought and wields the brush without ideas fixed
on painting, one will have success. [Painting] does not stop in the hand,
nor freeze in the [heart-] mind, but becomes what it is without conscious
realization.20
There is certainly a lot to be said about this long passage but the key idea
seems to be this: over-reliance on ink masks the authentic nature (spirit) of
the subject, wiping out the painter’s brushwork in the process. The opposite
is also true: a weak painting is one whose use of ink is too sparse and whose
brushwork is too feeble. In order to avoid these extremes, spirit resonance is
essential, for only concentrated spirit leads to clarity of thought, and when
both of these are present, the painter will envision the painting before her
brush even touches the canvas. In this way, the idea exists before the brush
is grasped, and what is grasped by the heart-mind is responded to by the
hand, as Zhang Yanyuan so eloquently stated.
Should we jump forward in time to the last dynastic period of China, the
Qing, we find all of the above ideas echoed in Shitao’s 石涛 (1642–1707)
Treatise on the Philosophy of Painting (hua yulu 畫語綠). For example, in
the fourth of his Treatise’s eighteen brief essays, Shitao famously declares
that when “a painting receives its ink, ink is then received by the brush, the
brush is then received by the wrist, and the wrist is received by the heart-
mind.”21 In his seventh essay, Shitao says: “When brush and ink meet, this is
known as indistinct intermingling. When what indistinctly intermingles is
not separated, this is called undifferentiated wholeness. To penetrate such
undifferentiated wholeness, what better way to do so than with the primal
brushstroke?”22 Brush and ink thus form an inseparable pair, in the same
way that Yin and Yang, Heaven and Earth do; what threads them together
is the spirit of Dao. The authentic painter, Shitao writes in his sixteenth
essay, “perceives things beyond their physical form and when composing
such forms, reveals no trace of his efforts.”23 The key is to manipulate ink
and brush in such a way that they free and revitalize the spirit of the subject
being painted: the spirit of Nature is hence one and the same with the spirit
of all things therein.
Returning to Hegel, he says nothing about brushwork but turns his
attention to the spatiality of the canvas:
[Painting allows] space to persist and extinguishes only one of the three
dimensions . . . This reduction of the three dimensions to a level surface
is implicit in the principle of interiorization which can be asserted, as
inwardness, in space only by reason of the fact that it restricts and does
not permit the subsistence of the totality of the external dimensions . . .
[Painting’s] content is the spiritual inner life which can come into
appearance in the external only as retiring into itself out of it . . . [hence]
painting has to renounce the totality of space.24
John Sallis offers some astute observations on the unique spatial nature
of painting: “The visible forms and colors of the painting itself serve to
project, beyond the painting, a visible configuration depicting things that
either actually are and could actually be seen or that, even if only imaginary,
are imagined as visible. In effect, painting engages three successive planes of
visibility: the forms and colors on the canvas, the visible scene thereby
composed and projected, and the actual or imaginary scene thereby
depicted.”25 A second point Sallis makes is that “a painting can present the
invisible in the very midst of the visible, that it can let something that never
appears to the senses—that cannot appear as such to the senses—be
presented in and through the very shining of the sensible.”26 He continues:
“What comes to appear on the surface as mere shining becomes also a trace
pointing back to spirit in its retreat; and, as painted, the trace is presented as
a trace. Painting presents spirit not as circumscribed or imaged there on the
painted surface, but only by way of the traces that from that surface point
back to spirit in its retreat.”27
The trace Sallis speaks of is also found in the Chinese tradition, such as
this detailed descriptive passage by the Tang dynasty theorist Jing Hao 荊浩
(c. 870–930):
Spirit is obtained when your [heart-] mind moves along with the
movement of the brush and does not hesitate in delineating images.
Resonance is obtained when you establish forms, while hiding [obvious]
traces of the brush, and perfect them by observing the proprieties and
avoiding vulgarity. Thought is obtained when you grasp essential forms,
eliminating unnecessary details [in your observation of nature], and let
your ideas crystallize into the forms to be represented. Scene is obtained
when you study the laws of nature and the different faces of time, look
for the sublime and recreate it with reality. Brush is obtained when you
handle the brush freely, applying all the varieties of strokes in accordance
with your purpose, although you must follow certain basic rules of
brushwork. Here you should regard brushwork neither as substance nor
as form but rather as a movement, like flying or driving. Ink is obtained
when you distinguish between higher and lower parts of objects with a
gradation of ink tones and represent clearly shallowness and depth, thus
making them appear natural as if they had not been done with a brush.28
Here, the trace is not directly bound-up in spirit but points the way to it
through brushwork. A subtle yet important difference, to be sure. The thing
we need to take away from Jing Hao’s account is that spirit does not lie
dormant within a painting, hidden amongst its colors, but flows with the
movement of the painter’s brush—here weak, there strong, here forcefully
visible, there subtly invisible. Chapter 22 of the Zhuangzi can be cited as but
one of many potential sources of inspiration: “The bright and shining is born
from deep darkness; the ordered is born from formlessness; and pure spirit is
born from Dao.”29 What is to be treasured in a painting is not the forms
inscribed on the canvas but the brushwork underlying said forms. In other
words, the painted forms should convey a degree of incompleteness because
only then does spirit have freedom of movement as the observer’s eyes traverse
from one section of the canvas to another, forming a complete yet fluid image
in their heart-mind. This is what Jing Hao means by resonance. We find the
same rationale expressed by Su Shi 蘇軾 (1037–1101) in a colophon he wrote
on a painting by Li Gonglin 李公麟 (1049–1106): “There is Dao and there is
skill. If one has Dao and not skill, although things have been formed in one’s
heart-mind, they will not take shape through one’s hands.”30
Having spirit alone is, therefore, not enough to make someone a genuine
artist, for such persons have mastered the skill of letting the hand follow the
heart-mind’s intuition, not using the heart-mind to control the hand. In this
way, the true painter allows her spirit to flow freely between hand and heart-
mind such that both come to assume the personality of the depicted subject.
One becomes the mountain, the bamboo, and so forth, the result of which is
a naturalism perfectly harmonious with Dao: “Let your heart-mind wander
in simplicity, blend your vital breath with that which is vast, follow along
with things as they are, and leave no room for personal views.”31 Such an
approach to painting means Chinese artists can produce works of art that
are neither technically driven nor color dependent. As for why Daoist-
inspired painters abstained from color while Hegel took it to be the highest
marker of the artist, this is a question we shall now try to answer.
What can be looked at and seen are but forms and colors; what can be
listened to and heard are but names and sounds. How sad, that the people
of the world take form and color, name and sound, as sufficient for
expressing the truth of things!32
appearance.”37 Is this to say, then, that without color the Hegelian soul
cannot be knowable to the world via painting? If the shining of spirit is the
result of a painter’s coloring, does this not imply that the painter, and by
extension works of painting, are dependent upon and limited by color?
Hegel’s understanding of light and dark, and color generally, was without
doubt influenced by the work of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832).
Indeed, in his Philosophy of Nature, Hegel often praises Goethe while
viciously criticizing the work of Isaac Newton (1642–1727):
The main feature of Goethe’s theory is that light is for itself, and that
darkness is another principle, which is external to it. White is visible light,
black is visible darkness, and grey is their primary and purely quantitative
relationship, which is therefore either a diminution or augmentation of
brightness or darkness. In the second and more determinate relationship
however, in which light and dark maintain this fixed specific quality in
face of each other, the deciding factor is which of the two is basic, and
which constitutes the dimming medium. There is either a bright base
present with a more shaded principle imposed upon it, or vice versa. It is
this that gives rise to color.39
Light illumines, the day drives away darkness; as the simple blending of
brightness with present darkness, this duskiness generally gives rise to
grey. In coloring however these two determinations are combined in such
a way, that although they are held asunder, they are to the same extent
posited in unity. Although they are separate, each also shows in the other.
This is a combination which has to be called an individualization; it is a
relationship which resembles that considered in what is called refraction,
in which one determination is active within another, and yet has a
determinate being of its own.43
For Chinese painters inspired by Daoism, not only did they learn to work
with monochromatic tones, they came to prefer them over their colored
alternatives. Wang Wei is a case in point: “Among the ways of painting,
monochrome is by far superior. It originates in the nature of the self-existent
and perfects the efforts of the creator. Thus in the few inches of a painting,
a hundred thousand miles of scenery may be drawn. East, west, south, and
north seem to be before the eyes; spring, summer, autumn, and winter are
produced under the brush.”44 The self-existent Wang Wei is referring to is
Dao, but Dao is only evident to those whose heart-mind has been properly
attuned to it. The Zhuangzi explains: “He who embodies Dao will have all
the gentlemen of the world gather around him. As for Dao . . . one may look
for it but it has no form; listen for it but it has no voice. Among those who
discuss it, it is called darkly profound. Thus the Dao that is discussed is not
[the authentic] Dao”45 Since Dao is dark and unknowable, Chinese painters
tried to capture its natural self-concealment via visual incompleteness.
Rather than darkening what is light by applying color, Chinese artists used
light to enhance the mystery of the dark. Painting in monochrome thus
required deftness of the brush not found in works of color if it was to avoid
appearing dead. Jing Hao elaborates:
Painting is equivalent to measuring . . . One must not take the outward
appearance and call it the inner reality. If you do not know this method
[of understanding truth], you may even get lifelikeness but never achieve
reality in painting . . . Lifelikeness means to achieve the form of the object
but to leave out its spirit. Reality means that both spirit and substance are
strong. Furthermore, if spirit is conveyed only through the outward
appearance and not through the image in its totality, the image is dead.46
It does not shine into darkness, and it neither illumines it nor is it blended
by it; it is rather the inwardly disrupted Notion, which as the unity of
light and darkness displays itself in the differences of its moments. This is
the gay realm of colors, the living movement of which brings forth a
variety of hues and constitutes, in its further development, the realized
actuality of color.47
In general, it may be said that the magic consists in so handling all the colors
that what emerges is an inherently objectless play of shining, which forms
the extreme hovering summit of coloring, an interpenetration of colors, a
shining of reflections that shine in other shinings and become so fine, so
fleeting, so soulful that they begin to pass over into the sphere of music.54
The sensibility of painting does not arise from the canvas surface but
from color’s coloring; indeed, a painting’s surface “is liberated from the
scaffolding of its mere materiality,”55 thus giving way to the shining of the
sensible. Based on the above passage, the shining is none other than
appearing, but an appearing that points to nothing material; it is, one can
say, the play of sensibility. Since art, for Hegel, “brings forth only a shadow-
world of shapes, sounds and sights . . . [it] affords satisfaction to higher
spiritual interests since it has the power to call forth from all the depths of
consciousness an echo and a resounding in the spirit.”56 Said spiritual
resounding does not commence with shining and proceed outward into the
world of objects whereupon it is imprinted as an image; rather, the shining
shines the image of consciousness.
We see something similar in the Chinese tradition, albeit without
dependency on the mind. The Zhuangzi speaks of the primal shining of Dao,
but unlike Hegel and his sensibility of human soul, the spirituality attained
by following Dao is onto-cosmological in nature:
All that have faces, forms, voices, colors—these are but mere things. How
could one thing and another be far removed from each other? How could
any thing be worth taking as a predecessor? They are forms, colors—
nothing more. But things are born from that which is formless and find
their end in that which is unchanging.57
Hegel’s argument that the goal of art is not to imitate Nature, which
would preclude the shining of the sensible, mirrors the Chinese view;
however, the preparation required of a painter before painting is a point of
divergence. According to Hegel, the painter should “get to know and copy
with precision the colors in their relation to one another, the effects of light,
reflections, etc., as well as the forms and shapes of objects in their most
minute nuances.”58 Given early Chinese painters did not openly embrace
working with color, and so had no need to realistically mimic shadows,
reflections, and the like, they could devote themselves to how best to
represent the intangible spirit of Dao. Herein lies the dilemma for Hegel: if
the non-reductive sensibility of painting consists of the shining of color, and
said shining illuminates the inwardness of spirit as “the mirror of
externality,”59 then removing color removes any hope of what John Sallis
calls “an affective disclosure of the inward spirit to itself.”60 If we truly wish
to resolve this dilemma, perhaps we should admit the fact that, in the words
of Jean-Luc Marion:
[Painting] breathes in the distance between the unseen and the visible
before presenting a new visible (and sometimes without presenting
anything), hides every object from the gaze, or better, delivers the gaze
from the objective restraints of an object. The painting confronts us with
a non-object, unavailable, unmanageable, unable to be (re)produced,
unable to be mastered. A non-object admittedly, a counter-object and not
a simple anti-object, where the successive destruction of all the dimensions
of the pictorial object reinforces by right the rule of objectivity, as its
horizon remains intact.61
5. Conclusion
Unlike the people of old, modern society takes color for granted. We color
the world as we wish it to be colored and pounce on those whose vision
differs from our own. Color is now so heavily symbolic and metaphorically-
laden that we have forgotten its original, non-human roots. Daoism has
shown us the pitfalls of color-dependency and we have seen how painters
and art theorists have applied this way of viewing the world to create
artworks that free one’s heart-mind and spirit of bias and blindness. Whereas
the Chinese subscribed to the doctrine of incompleteness in painting, Hegel
argued the opposite: to paint is to color and to color is to paint the
unhindered spirit. This is achieved by restoring the third dimension to
painting, to enrich and enliven what would otherwise be flat and stale.
Notes
1 See the opening pages of Pippin for textual issues surrounding Hegel’s
Aesthetics.
2 G.W.F. Hegel, Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art (London: Oxford University
Press, 1975), vol. 2: 799.
3 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 1: 74.
4 Qingfan Guo, ed., Collected Explanations to the Zhuangzi (Beijing: Zhonghua
Shuju, 1997), 719. Translations of Chinese texts are my own unless stated
otherwise.
5 Jean-Luc Marion, The Crossing of the Visible (Stanford: Stanford University
Press, 2004), 26–7.
6 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 1: 9.
7 Ibid., 31.
8 Victor Mair, “Xie He’s ‘Six Laws’ of Painting and their Indian Parallels”, in
Chinese Aesthetics: The Ordering of Literature, the Arts, and the Universe in
the Six Dynasties, ed. Zongqi Cai (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,
2004), 94–5; Jianhua Yu, ed., A Compilation of Texts on Chinese Art Theory
(Beijing: Renmin Meishu Chubanshe, 1986), 355.
9 Susan Bush and Xiaoyan Shi, Early Chinese Texts on Painting (Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press, 2012), 38–9; Yu, A Compilation of Texts, 585.
10 François Jullien, The Great Image Has No Form, or On the Nonobject
through Painting (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), 194.
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 Bush, Early Chinese Texts, 55; Zicheng Shen, ed., Historical Collection of
Treatises on Painting from Famous Works (Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe, 1982),
36.
14 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 2: 801.
15 Bush, Early Chinese Texts, 62–3; Shen, Historical Collection of Treatises, 38.
48 Bush, Early Chinese Texts, 62–3; Shen, Historical Collection of Treatises, 38.
49 Guo, Zhuangzi, 216–17.
50 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 2: 849.
51 Ibid., 841–5.
52 Ibid., 847.
53 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 1: 38.
54 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 2: 848.
55 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 1: 79.
56 Ibid., 39.
57 Guo, Zhuangzi, 634.
58 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 1: 45.
59 Hegel, Aesthetics, vol. 2: 801.
60 Sallis, Transfigurements, 93.
61 Marion, The Crossing, 42.
References
Bush, Susan and Xiaoyan Shi. (2012), Early Chinese Texts on Painting, Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Bush, Susan. (2012), The Chinese Literati on Painting: Su Shi to Dong Qichang,
Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Cai, Zongqi, ed. (2004), Chinese Aesthetics: The Ordering of Literature, the Arts,
and the Universe in the Six Dynasties, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Guo, Qingfan 郭慶藩, ed. (1997), Collected Explanations to the Zhuangzi
莊子集釋, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1970), Philosophy of Nature, M.J. Petry (trans.), London: George
Allen & Unwin.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1975), Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, T.M. Knox (trans.),
London: Oxford University Press.
Houlgate, Stephen. (2000), “Presidential Address: Hegel and the Art of Painting,”
in William Maker (ed.), Hegel and Aesthetics, 61–82, Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Jullien, François. (2009), The Great Image Has No Form, or On the Nonobject
through Painting, Jane Marie Todd (trans.), Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Mair, Victor. (2004), “Xie He’s ‘Six Laws’ of Painting and their Indian Parallels,”
in Cai Zongqi (ed.), Chinese Aesthetics: The Ordering of Literature, the Arts,
and the Universe in the Six Dynasties, 81–122, Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press.
Maker, William, ed. (2000), Hegel and Aesthetics, Albany: State University of New
York Press.
Marion, Jean-Luc. (2004), The Crossing of the Visible, James Smith (trans.),
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Pippin, Robert. (2014), After the Beautiful: Hegel and the Philosophy of Pictorial
Modernism, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sallis, John. (2008), Transfigurements: On the True Sense of Art, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Shen, Zicheng 沈子丞, ed. (1982), Historical Collection of Treatises on Painting
from Famous Works 歷代論畫名著彙編, Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe.
Yu, Jianhua 俞劍華, ed. (1962), Shitao’s Treatise on the Philosophy of Painting
石濤畫語錄, Beijing: Renmin Meishu Chubanshe.
Yu, Jianhua 俞劍華, ed. (1986), A Compilation of Texts on Chinese Art Theory
中國畫論類編. Beijing: Renmin Meishu Chubanshe.
Mary I. Bockover
1. Introduction
This chapter is divided into two main parts. The first part is Western in
perspective and begins by examining Brentano’s thesis, which attempts to
distinguish mental from physical phenomena. In sum, Brentano (1838–
1917) argues that mental or “intentional” phenomena entail objects “within
themselves” that are characterized by what is called “intentional inexistence,”
whereas physical phenomena are characterized by having extension and
spatial location. After discussing this distinction in depth, I offer a
clarification of Brentano’s view, as well as my own account of how conscious
experience forms an irreducible unity—where how one is conscious entails
what one is conscious of, or about—but not the other way around. The
object of each intentional event exists “within it” in this (unidirectional)
sense. Insights from the discussion of Brentano’s view are then applied to
how death might be understood and treated in the West.
Next, I transition to the second Daoist part of this chapter by critiquing
Brentano’s distinction between mental and physical phenomena in a way
that brings out what objectivity would mean in that context. Specifically, I
argue that all phenomena are a function of our conscious experience,
including physical phenomena that are experienced as if they have an
independent existence (i.e., outside of the mind). I also show how this lays
the groundwork for understanding dreams as intentional events that can
serve a unique function in helping us to consider who we are within the
larger context of this thing that we call “the real world.” This view is then
compared to the role of dreaming in the Zhuangzi 莊子, based on some
stories found therein. We end the first part of this chapter by finding, in light
of this comparison, that dreaming is a rich and engaging mental process that
can inform us about our own lives and the mysterious qualities of life and
death in general.
The second part of this chapter goes on to provide a Daoist understanding
and treatment of death based on two great Daoist classics, the Daodejing
道德經 and the Zhuangzi. This discussion shows how an adequate
understanding of the role of death in these texts first requires understanding
the worldview or “metaphysical”1 framework expressed therein; one which
sees things as being essentially interconnected or as being varying aspects of
the same thing, process, or way of change. A basic assumption of Daoism is
that Dao 道 (the “Way” or what I call the Great Maker) “contains” and
produces all things. For Daoists, Dao is the Ultimate Reality: what is
ultimately real and true about existence in general, and life and death in
particular.
This comparative discussion of metaphysics and phenomenology achieves
a number of goals. For one, it shows how our most basic assumptions will
deeply influence how we view reality, life and death. It will also show how
Daoist philosophy can be sharply contrasted with the Western view that
tends to focus on, and to privilege the life of the mind—conscious experience,
reason, or the pervasive sense of subjectivity that distinguishes us from other
people and things. Namely, we will see how the basic Western tendency to
conceive of ourselves as being self-contained, independent, or as existing
in isolation from other things both living and nonliving, differs from the
Daoist view that sees life as a mystery and a miracle populated with living
beings that are mutually connected and supporting. We will also see how
these two very different worldviews can be applied to what it means to live
and die well.
person may not feel warm at all to another. In addition, we know that our
senses can be notoriously deceptive and as such, that what we perceive as
real may actually be just an illusion. A similar view was previously held by
René Descartes (1596–1650) who also argued that the senses cannot be
trusted when it comes to establishing truth.4
Brentano’s concept of intentionality includes a huge variety of conscious
experiences; indeed, every conscious act is an intentional act, and “every
mental phenomenon includes something as an object within itself,” which is
what the experience is of, or about. We have also seen that intentional
objects are centrally defined by their “inexistence,” which means that they
are mental or psychological objects as opposed to physical ones, even when
referring to, or being directed upon physical objects. Brentano also held that
all intentional acts form a unity, which is to say that all of the various modes
by which one may experience a situation—such as seeing, smelling, feeling,
and even thinking about it—are taken together in the conscious act to create
one overall experience. For instance, I may be seeing and smelling some
lavender at the fields by Mount Shasta, while at the same time feeling the
texture of the plant and thinking about how nice it would be to plant some
at my own home. But I do not experience these phenomena—what I see,
smell, feel, and think about—as separate events. They are experienced as a
unified event.
I would like to offer another way to think about the unity of intentional
phenomena, which is this: mental events entail their objects but not the
other way around.5 That is, this entailment is unidirectional; the mental
event entails the object it is directed upon, but the intentional object does
not entail that a particular kind of experience is had in virtue of its content
alone. One can believe something, can fear the same thing, can hate or love
it, desire it, speculate about it, dream about it, and so on. The intentional
object—what the experience is of, or about—does not tell us about the kind
of mental state it is an object of. Quite clearly, mental events may also give
rise to radically different, even incommensurable experiences while being
directed at the same object. For instance, it would be difficult for one to be
happy and sad about the exact same thing at the same time, although one
may be happy about certain aspects of that thing and sad about others.
One’s feelings about that thing may also change with the passage of time
and the accumulation of new experiences.
I think Brentano’s view of intentionality can be further clarified by
looking more closely at the relation between mental events and their objects.
For while Brentano used “intentional object” and “content” interchangeably,
I suggest that this must be stipulated since there is a sense in which the
content of experience might be thought to include what kind of experience
it is or the more specific way something is experienced, which the object
alone typically leaves out. For example, consider this intentional object,
“that his friends will make good parents,” and notice that he may speculate
about this without necessarily believing that they will. He may also be happy
that his friends will make good parents, which does entail that he believes it
will be the case. He may also believe that they will make good parents but
need not be happy about it, for he may be envious of what he perceives to
be their potential to be better parents than he is. This example shows the
following about intentional events: stipulating that their “contents” and
“objects” can be used interchangeably, both only refer to what the experience
is of, or about, and not the way it is being experienced. Stated another way,
they form a unity that is unidirectional: each event must entail an intentional
object, but these objects do not in themselves account for the more specific
kind of experience being had. Quite often the object does not reveal anything
more than what the experience is directed upon.
This is also the case for sensory experiences, once we accept Brentano’s
distinction between mental and physical phenomena. Recall that in
Brentano’s view, physical phenomena would include warmth and cold.
Warmth and cold are physical phenomena that exist in the external world;
for example, the ice was cold (i.e., freezing) until it was warmed up enough
to become liquid. Warmth and cold are located in the ice and then the water
that the ice becomes after being warmed up. Given Brentano’s theory of
perception, however, the warmth and cold are physical phenomena that we
cannot know anything about based on feeling them because external sense
perception is so unreliable. If we want to get an objectively clearer idea
about how cold the ice is, or how warm the water is, we could use a reliable
thermometer to take their temperature. In this way, we gain evidence about
how warm or cold the object really is.
Physical pain is interestingly different than warmth and cold insofar as it
is an essentially embodied experience. Pain is located in the bodies of sentient
beings, all of which have extension and spatial location (this includes the
sense organs). But pain is also the way we describe what we feel—in this
case, it is an intentional sensory experience of certain bodily events. We also
use “warm” and “cold” in the same way: to refer to our experience of a
physical event. The difference, then, is that with physical pain, the object—
the pain—is in our living conscious bodies.
more or less access through our experience of it. This de facto world contains
physical objects that become intentional for us through our distinctively
human experience of them. This does not reduce the actual object to our
experience of it however. As discussed earlier, our experience is largely of, or
about the objective physical world. For instance, we judge that things are
true about the physical world with more or less accuracy (i.e., with more or
less evidence).
In effect, Brentano’s view does not deny that there is an independent,
objective world of physical phenomena; on the contrary, his distinction
between mental and physical phenomena depends on it. He would, however,
have us see that we cannot know anything conclusively about that world.
We can form hypotheses about it, share our experience of it, and construct
evidence about it, but we will never know it with the veracity of intentional
inner perception. When having an experience, we cannot doubt that the
experience is ours; that it is one’s “self” having the experience (as it is a
function of one’s own consciousness). Absolute truth is experienced only in
this “mental” or psychological domain of intentionality or inner perception,
while the objective physical world—although encountered and even
shared—will essentially remain a mystery.
What does this have to do with the phenomenology of death? More
specifically, how can Brentano’s view be applied to our encounter with
death? A fact about our nature as self-aware beings is that we develop a
sense of mortality. We can ask questions about our own mortality, about our
own death. Most of the time we ask such questions without having a clear
idea of what we mean by “death.” This should come as no surprise, since we
have no clear idea of what “life” is either. Ironically, life—the thing that
animates our bodies—can be just as mysterious as death. And like life, death
can be an object for various modes of conscious experience; we can fear
death, ponder death, and perhaps even sense death (etc.). Death as a
physiological phenomenon has been an object of scientific research as well.
But even when death is “observed” and rigorously studied in this way,
exactly what is being observed and studied in many ways remains an enigma.
Brentano’s view is consistent with this idea. When it comes to what we think
about death, various kinds of hypotheses may be offered, with some being
more or less empirically supported, but like our encounter with life, the real
“truth” of the matter will remain inescapably speculative.6
A distinct problem of giving a phenomenological account of death
should be apparent from the start. I call it the phenomenological paradox of
death: from the point of view of living persons, we are not able to say what
death is because we have not directly experienced it for ourselves. More
precisely, most of us have not experienced our own death and lived to tell
about it.
Our experience does tell (most of) us that we are embodied living
conscious beings. So how might we come to understand our own death? We
might think—or rather, speculate—that death brings a complete and final
end to our conscious experience.7 But again, it depends upon what is meant
by “death.” Consider that within the last half-century there have been cases
where “people” have physically undergone “higher brain death” and have
been given life support that only serves a “maintenance function,” or that
keeps other bodily functions active or alive but offers no reasonable hope of
returning them to sentient life. In the West, and based on such cases, the
biomedical definition of death itself changed along with the criteria used to
measure it. Previously death had largely been viewed as a bodily event based
on the presence or absence of cardiovascular activity, making death more
easily conceived as different in kind from life. One is alive at one moment
and dead the next—when their heart stops beating or they take their last
breath. But because death came to be defined and measured by brain activity,
it became easier to think of it as a process—where one is more or less dead
by being more or less brain dead. In addition to this, even with a healthy
body and brain, death is a vital part of maintaining our health and well-
being; for example, cells must die for new ones to be generated. As such,
death can be conceived as being essential to life instead of as being its
opposite, or instead of being conceived as an event that annihilates life
altogether.
To continue, and in light of recent brain death cases, the question about
what makes us persons is raised again. We do not have to conclusively know
what the connection is between mind and body, or more specifically between
consciousness and brain activity, to reasonably suppose that brain damage
goes hand-in-hand with diminished cognitive functions.8 Higher brain death
seems to go hand-in-hand with the cessation of consciousness, which for
Homo sapiens includes self-awareness and a whole host of intentional
experiences, such as the sensory experiences of pleasure and pain. We may
still be thought of as living human beings even after undergoing higher brain
death, but if our identity as persons depends on having higher brain
functions, when these are irreversibly lost then the once living person can be
thought of as having already died (even though in some sense the body may
still be alive).
In short, having a living human body may not be enough to make us
persons, or may not be enough to invest our lives with the kind of quality
and dignity vital to living a full human life. For that, self-awareness may be
required: the ability to see ourselves as the subject of our own experience.
Put another way, a certain type of consciousness is required, which gives us
the ability to experience ourselves as standing in relation to others—to other
people, life forms, and a whole host of other objects and events. This
reflective awareness is also essential to our being able to ask questions about
the meaning of death and life. Regardless of our questions though, it seems
fair to say that how we come to value life and death will intimately be
bound up with our subjective experience. And at least in the West, what
makes us fear death so often is that it may completely and irreversibly take
that subjective experience away.
Lady Li was the daughter of the border guard of Ai. When she was first
taken captive and brought to the state of Jin, she wept until her tears
drenched the collar of her robe. But later, when she went to live in the
palace of the ruler, shared his couch with him, and ate the delicious meats
of his table, she wondered why she had ever wept. How do I know that
the dead do not wonder why they ever longed for life?
He who dreams of drinking wine may weep when morning comes; he
who dreams of weeping in the morning may go off to hunt. While he is
dreaming, he does not know it is a dream, and in his dream, he may even
try to interpret his dream. Only after he wakes does he know it was a
dream. And someday there will be a great awakening when we know this
is all a great dream.11
We will see why this is the case in what follows in the second part of this
chapter, but let me suggest now that death may bring the great awakening
Zhuangzi refers to in this excerpt. From the point of view of the living, death
looks like something to weep over, as Lady Li did when she had her life as a
border guard’s daughter stolen from her. But if death allows us to return to
Dao, then the transformation from life to death may be a tremendous
benefit. This is supported later in the Zhuangzi with the following story:12
When Zhuangzi went to Chu, he saw an old skull, all dry and parched.
He poked it with his carriage whip and then asked, “Sir, were you greedy
for life and forgetful of the reason, and so came to this? Was your state
overthrown and did you bow beneath the axe, and so came to this? Did
you do some evil deed and were you ashamed to bring disgrace upon
your parents and family, and so came to this? Was it through the pangs of
cold and hunger that you came to this? Or did the springs and autumns
pile up until they brought you to this?” When he had finished speaking,
he dragged the skull over and, using it for a pillow, lay down to sleep. In
the middle of the night, the skull came to him in a dream and said, “You
chatter like a rhetorician and all your words betray the entanglements of
a living man. The dead know nothing of these! Would you like to hear a
lecture on the dead?” “Indeed” said Zhuangzi. The skull replied, “Among
the dead there are no rulers above, and no subjects below, and no chores
of the four seasons. With nothing to do, our springs and autumns are as
endless as Heaven and Earth. A king facing south on his throne could
have no more happiness than this!” Zhuangzi could not believe this and
said, “If I got the Arbiter of Fate to give you a body again, make you some
bones and flesh, return you to your parents and family and your old
home and friends, you would want that, would you not?” The skull
frowned severely, wrinkling up its brow. “Why would I throw away more
happiness than that of a king on a throne and take on the troubles of a
human being again?” it said.
Let me point out, in light of the previous excerpt, that Zhuangzi’s dream
could include an interpretation within it, but in the dream, he does not
experience this; the message comes from the skull and is something that
Zhuangzi “could not believe.” One question this story raises is: Where do we
draw the line between what is “real” and what is “illusory”? First, dreams—
with their transformative power to move us and inform us—are a type of
mental phenomenon. Moreover, the intentional content of dreams only
differs in degree from that of waking experience. Like Brentano, Zhuangzi
takes waking reality as it is ordinarily experienced to not be ultimately (or
absolutely) real at all, and he refers to people who believe that it is as
“stupid,”13 because they do not understand that compared to Dao, to
Ultimate Reality, this life—regardless of whether we are dreaming or
awake—is just a “great dream” or illusion.
Both the Daodejing and Zhuangzi describe a certain kind of subjective
experience—of Dao—as taking one beyond the illusory character of life as
it is ordinarily experienced. This will also be discussed in our examination
of these two classical Daoist texts. First though, I want to share a couple of
thoughts by comparing how the role of dreaming can be understood from a
Western subject-oriented view, with the Daoist Dao-oriented view that will
be discussed in more depth in the second part of this chapter.
As we can see in light of the material from the Zhuangzi above, Zhuangzi
did not take one’s dream life to be irredeemably illusory; on the contrary,
dreaming is potentially a source of great insight. Many are familiar with the
butterfly dream in which Zhuangzi cannot tell if “he was Zhuang Zhou who
had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuang
Zhou.”14 This is to say, in light of his subjective experience he cannot tell the
difference, although he goes on to say, “between Zhuang Zhou and a
butterfly there must be some distinction! This is called the Transformation
of Things.”15 The significance of this passage is not clear, but it may suggest
that as far as awareness or consciousness itself is concerned, we are essentially
the same despite our differences; we are conscious beings united in that fact.
But who is the subject here? Is it Zhuang Zhou, who upon waking
experienced himself as solidly and unmistakably Zhuang Zhou? Or is it the
butterfly “flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he
pleased”?16 Whoever was having the experience seemed to be the same in
either case, or the question could not have been raised, even in the context
of a dream, for it is the subject of the dream who is asking the question. This
is not to radically distinguish between embodied consciousness and the
bodies it imbues with the capacity for subjective experience. One cannot be
a subject of experience without being uniquely and existentially situated in
a world filled with all kinds of objects (whatever “world” is supposed to
mean here!). Rather, and as the passage suggests, I think it is meant to draw
our attention to Dao and its mysterious transformative powers. Namely,
regardless of the particular lives at hand or the bodies that they animate,
they are all the same in being united in Dao. Despite their differences, they
all have the power to change of their own accord in virtue of being alive.
I believe that the phenomenon of dreaming is extremely important, and
often because of what it doesn’t answer or resolve. I think dreaming acts as
a gateway to deeper mysteries, as Zhuangzi’s dream about the roadside skull
was for him. Dreams allow us to confront a part of ourselves that is a
mystery to us and that informs us that we are part of something larger—
something beyond the self that is also a part of the self, as Dao is in each of
us but is also (eternally) beyond any one of us.17 If we are lucky, our
reflections may bring insight to our waking lives, but the deeper insight is
that our lives, our experience, our very selves are a part of this great mystery
that Daoists simply refer to as Dao.
Why should we automatically privilege our waking life over our dream
life when it comes to forming a relationship with Ultimate Reality, which
goes beyond them both? Of course, this is completely anecdotal, but
numerous reports from near death experiences refer to a tunnel being
traversed in a dreamlike state, and of experiences happening during that
state that had bearing on one’s current life—even regarding things of
which one was previously unaware. In that state, something also happened
that brought that person back to the land of the living. Who knows what
we will experience (if anything) as we pass into death from life; as we will
see shortly, Daoism views life and death as mysteries that can be deeply,
even spiritually, appreciated so long as we open ourselves up to them. Both
the Zhuangzi and Daodejing tell us that in order to do this, we must
start from a place of not knowing—to be open to possibilities never
before experienced—and that preconceived notions will only keep us from
taking them in. Shall we welcome the mysteries even when death comes our
way?
The Dao that can be spoken of is not the constant Dao; the Dao that can
be named is not the constant name. The nameless was the beginning of
Heaven and Earth; the named was the mother of the myriad creatures.
Hence always rid yourself of desires in order to observe its secrets; but
always allow yourself to have desires in order to observe its manifestations.
These two are the same but diverge in name as they issue forth. Being the
same they are called mysteries, mystery upon mystery—the gateway of
the manifold secrets.19
The nameless Dao was the beginning of Heaven and Earth, the images of
the first two hexagrams of the Yijing 易經 (Book of Changes), which are
Creativity and Receptivity respectively.20 Dao birthed them as a mother gives
birth to her progeny. Dao is the mother of the myriad creatures—all that
was, is, and will be. These are the “manifestations” that we can observe, if we
desire to do so. But Dao includes more than what is made manifest and can
be named, for Dao includes “what is not” and “what will not be,” since all
non-things could also have existence if only Dao would make it so. In other
words, everything is possible for Dao, even if all things are not made actual
(or manifest); Dao has the de 德 or power to do anything, and through Dao
all things are done, even though not all things are done. These “things” (or
non-things) may have no observable existence, but they are real and “exist”
as possibilities, as the potential Dao has to bring things into existence or not.
We also read in chapter 42 of the Daodejing:
Dao begets one, one begets two, two begets three, and three begets the
myriad creatures. The myriad creatures carry on their backs the Yin and
embrace in their arms the Yang, and are the blending of the generative
forces of the two.21
There is a thing confusedly formed, born before Heaven and Earth. Silent
and void it stands alone and does not change, goes round and does not
weary. It is capable of being the mother of the world. I know not its name
so I style it “the Way.”22
The “thing” that “stands alone and does not change” is the changeless
change just explained, that was “born before Heaven and Earth” or before
anything was actually created. In fact, to say it was born may be off, since
Dao is consistently referred to as eternal or “always so.” What is this “way”
more specifically though? We go back to chapter 42 and see: from Dao came
something in contrast to it, which then became further differentiated into
two primal forces (Yin and Yang) that interact (“the three” that “goes round
and does not weary”) to produce everything else. In short, this is the way the
world changes. This is the way things move from the “silent and void” or
not being of Dao into being or observable reality. Ultimately though, the
primal forces of “what is not” and “what is” are absolutely interrelated, as
we will soon see in more depth. For now, we can see why the primal force of
Yin that powers all change is likened more to the silent emptiness of the
Primal Mother than to the ostensible and observable changes we can see and
name (Yang). Still, Yin and Yang are always interdependent, as these basic
metaphysical “ingredients” for change must interact for anything to change
at all.
To explain the view of reality found in the Daodejing in more depth, Yin
originally referred to “darkness” in contrast to the “lightness” of Yang, but
now the Yin–Yang relation applies to any pair of related “opposites” that
are in reality mutually implying complements. In fact, they are just different
aspects of the same “thing,” or more accurately, the same way of change. For
example, creativity (the image is Heaven) and receptivity (the image is Earth)
are simply different aspects of the same “creative” process. We focus on
what is created because we can see, hear, or experience it in a more tangible
way. But the Daodejing makes it clear that inactivity (wuwei 無爲) is a
necessary aspect of any activity (activity and inactivity are also mutually
entailing); nothing could be created without it possessing an element of
receptivity within itself. Something comes into being out of something it
was not, and the “place” into which it moves as an existing thing has
to be receptive to its being (there). For example, it is not possible to have a
creative thought without first being open to the possibilities of things not
yet thought. The mind has to be “silent and void” in order for something
new and different to enter. Similarly, it is the empty space between the
notes that makes manifest the sound. Here’s an excerpt from Daodejing
chapter 2:
Thus Something and Nothing produce each other; the difficult and easy
complement each other; the long and the short offset each other; the high
and the low incline toward each other; note and sound harmonize with
each other; before and after follow each other.23
becomes “dark” by comparison. These qualities refer to the same thing that
we call lightness or darkness depending on our focus and how we desire to
make use of them, but they are different only in degree, existing on a
continuum and manifesting as definite qualities because of what they are not
(and by contrast). Mainly, each thing or quality has a “way” that is useful
only in virtue of Nothing. Chapter 11 of the Daodejing makes clear this
point:
Thirty spokes share a hub. Adapt the nothing therein to the purpose at
hand, and you will have the use of the cart. Knead clay in order to make
a vessel. Adapt the nothing therein to the purpose at hand, and you will
have the use of the vessel. Cut out doors and windows in order to make
a room. Adapt the nothing therein to the purpose at hand, and you will
have the use of the room. Thus what we gain is Something, yet it is by
virtue of Nothing that this can be put to use.24
To conclude, the Dao cannot be fathomed in any ordinary way, for the
very reason that it is not an object of ordinary experience. However, if we
expand our focus beyond the specific purpose or desired end we may have
in mind, we can experience the mysteries of Dao on what could be called a
spiritual level.25 Experience on this level allows us to observe more than how
things and processes manifest in the world; it also allows us to feel our
connection with the magnificence of creation itself. The Daodejing does not
just critique our myopic human view of things; we can experience the unity
of things and how they have their source in Dao, if, like Dao, we make
our minds “silent and void.” Then our minds may be pervaded with a
profound appreciation for the mysteries of Ultimate Reality. In this way, we
have phenomenological access to the Mother of Creation that produces all
things and brings them to completion, not in knowing the details of the
process but in having our very being moved by being part of creation itself.
This may be the strongest sense of connection one can feel—that “one” is
not really one at all but a vital aspect of “something” that goes far beyond
the “self.”
Because of this, I think the central aim of the Daodejing is to evoke in us
a deep appreciation for what it is to be alive. We do not live our lives as
much as life is living us. From this perspective, we are not so much subjects
of consciousness as we are subjects of life, a life that is given to us, and it is
a false sense of agency and overabundance of desire that make us think that
we are the ultimate source of our own vitality. We live for as long as Dao
carries us, and then we return to that great source. This realization should
dramatically impact how we experience and value life: as for our own
existence, there was an almost infinitely greater chance of our not being, but
here we are. Life is truly a miracle, a dimly visible reality from which we
move, and breathe, and have our being. Life may be the most profound
mystery of all. Of it, how can we not stand in awe?
that life is perhaps the most miraculous of all created things, which is why
it is of such central importance in the Daodejing. But death is the process
whereby living things return to Dao. This is why both Dao and death are
almost always referred to with Yin language and imagery; they seem
changeless, empty, and darker than any mystery. Most critically, death is not
the absolute negation of life. As Dao is the essence of being, death is the
essence of life in being its source (we come into being from not being), its
sustainer (change requires the death of what came before), and its ultimate
secret. And this is nothing short of ironic.
The Daodejing is infused with paradoxes or apparent contradictions
designed to bring out the truly ironic quality of life. We have already seen
this in relation to Yin–Yang, inaction and action, nothing and something,
empty and full, etc. It is the inaction in action that activates change and
allows it to produce maximum results. Without death life would not be as
full, and this is nothing short of ironic, for death gives our lives value and
meaning exactly because we do not know just what it is or what it has in
store for us. “Death” is a word that refers to a change so mysterious that it
leaves us with no words, and no way to conclusively account for it. This is
profoundly ironic because if we think death is a mystery, what on earth do
we think life is!
relegated to the realm of Earth and the myriad creatures that Dao has
populated on it. We have seen this from the beginning of the text, wherein
the constant Dao birthed its primal progeny of Heaven and Earth—with no
mention of humanity; no metaphysical elevation of humanity above the
other myriad creatures.
Indeed, the Daodejing generally critiques the human way as having lost
its way by creating imbalance and disorder instead of harmoniously blending
with others in the human community and the rest of the world. We humans
were demoted in not living up to the calling, in not being true to the mandate
of Heaven. The Zhuangzi maintained the traditional language of the Dao—
of Heaven, Humanity, and Earth—but still offered a clearly Daoist solution
for restoring the good life: we must return to Heaven’s (or Nature’s) Way, to
harmoniously blend with the rest of life.
Why must we turn our attention to Heaven? So that we can gain power
over others? No, and this is precisely why we fail to hear the Dao. If our
lives are aligned with Dao, then we will be able to live a good life by
cultivating a general state of well-being on a personal, social, and spiritual
level. Zhuangzi characterizes this way of being as one of ease and true
contentment that comes from being lost in the Dao. In order to do this,
however, one must lose oneself. From chapter 2 of the Zhuangzi we see this
exchange between Ziqi and Ziyou:
to its power at all times. At the same time, we should be uplifted by the
realization that we can rest in that which gives us our life, what gives us our
very being and efficacy. We have been given this gift, and life will live itself
as sound produces itself. What rouses them all to action? Dao is truly the
Great Maker who will provide for us if only we let go of ourselves and turn
our attention to Heaven. This is key to cultivating a good life: to not let an
inflated sense of self-worth get in the way.
According to Zhuangzi, there is an unmediated spiritual knowledge that
the “perfect person” (i.e., the sage) experiences, that allows one to fully
appreciate the boundless unity and perfection of Dao that is foundational to
living a good life, and that naturally leads one to live a life of ease and
contentment. “Knowing” Dao so intimately is highly paradoxical though. It
does not entail knowing Dao in the sense that we gain immediate and total
access to all of the details of objective reality (that is, all that Dao creates). I
think the spiritual—or mystical—sense of “knowing” refers to an experience
for which an awareness of self does not get in the way of experiencing a
close and vital connection with Ultimate Reality. Such a spiritual experience
of Dao is “pure”—a kind of “unknowing” where the mind is filled up, but
not with ordinary objects, mental or physical. Instead, one becomes aware
of Dao’s miraculous creative potential, so that what is “dimly visible” or not
fathomed at all by most of us becomes illuminated. This experience is of the
infinite Way of change itself, which is beyond all (relative) perceptions and
distinctions. As the traditional account of the tripartite Dao suggests, we
humans are a vital part of creation and have a special role to play in it; to
fully appreciate our connection with the source and sustainer of reality and
to be naturally guided by it. Knowing “this” puts us at ease in feeling Dao’s
power to carry and support us where our own limited self-will cannot. In
this way, one can abide by the power to act not out of self-will but as a
vehicle for Dao and the harmonious blending and ease of action it makes
possible. Is this easy? . . . When it comes to our own dying? I think not, for
all we have to do is be at ease with losing our very “selves”!
possible results (or at least what appear to be). The Zhuangzi makes clear
that one has to have a “knack” for acquiring such skill; conversely, that for
some, no matter how much effort and practice they put into it, they may not
be able to acquire a particular skill, not to mention reach the perfected
ability possessed by true savants. Both texts discuss how extraordinary skill
can be applied to specific areas of action as well as to living life more
generally. As far as specific talents are concerned, actions become “second
nature” since we are creatures of artifact—we do not just act directly
according to what nature has given us. For us, life embodies this paradox:
nature gives us the ability to create of our own doing.29 We “by nature”
create realities, both material and conceptual. We construct our world, our
cultures, our roles, and our “selves.” We construct ideas and meanings. And
by nature, we try to grasp the meaning of life and death.
Excellence in action is not just a capacity in either text, however. In the
Zhuangzi, the knack for developing a skill is perfected by one’s being a
committed participant in the activity. It is a living embodiment of skill
always borne out in action, so consistently that persons possessing such skill
are often identified in virtue of it. This is the human way: we are creatures
of artifact who do not just directly respond to the promptings of nature;
rather, we take what nature provides and then imaginatively create something
out of it that fulfills some desired purpose.30 Some examples from the
Zhuangzi include fishermen, potters, cooks, woodworkers, and the like.
Here is what Cook Ding has to say about his skill in chapter 3:
What I care about is Dao, which goes beyond skill. When I first began
cutting up oxen, all I could see was the ox itself. After three years I no
longer saw the whole ox. And now—now I go at it by spirit and don’t
look with my eyes. Perception and understanding have come to a stop
and spirit moves where it wants. I go along with the natural makeup,
strike the big hollows, guide the knife through the big openings, and
follow things as they are. So I never touch the smallest ligament or tendon,
much less a main joint. A good cook changes his knife once a year because
he cuts. A mediocre cook changes his knife once a month because he
hacks. I’ve had this knife of mine for nineteen years and I’ve cut up
thousands of oxen with it, and yet the blade is as good as though it had
just come from the grindstone.31
Cook Ding describes how he has applied Dao to develop his special
talent. His knack is brought to life in an extraordinary way, not because he
is so great, but because his “perception and understanding have come to a
stop” for him, so the spirit or power of Dao itself can guide his action. His
action becomes an extension of Dao because his “self” does not interfere
with what he is doing and its aim. This truth can be generalized (more or
less) to any excellence in action. Dao can best act through us because the
focus is on the object and how to achieve it and not on how we are making
it happen.32 Consult your own experience. When you act in a way that today
might be referred to as “being in the zone,” when you “just do it” with ease
and skill but without thinking, notice that your perception of “you doing
the thing” has vanished. Your focus is “actionlessly” and spontaneously on
the action and its aim, in a way that does not involve an explicit awareness
of what you are doing or what you are aiming for. Truly, it is as if the “you”
does not figure into the experience at all. Your living conscious body—not
your “self”—becomes a conduit of Dao’s power to create, to produce, and
to achieve excellent results. This is how to live well, applied to specific skills
or talents. It also applies to the art of living and dying.
For contemporary purposes, I think the sage is a person who has come to
master life. To say that the sage has a “mastery” in the art of living may not
be using a very Daoist word, but the point is still made: the sage is a spiritual
being who is “pure” in focus, despite the challenges life might offer up;
“perfected” in the ability to be connected to, and to derive (even
extraordinary) strength from Dao. But like so many themes, “strength” here
is to be understood in its paradoxical fullness. In both texts, Daoist strength
may appear by conventional standards to be weak. In the Zhuangzi, the
sagely ability to “let go” of the self in order to take sustenance from Dao is
a prime example. The sage experiences Dao and its power directly—and is
humbled by experiencing the true nature of things, that inseparably creates
great ease and contentment with any change that Dao may bring their way.
But feeling at ease in the face of death? How can this be easy? Feeling at ease
with this change we call death can occur when one realizes that Dao or the
great Way of change is ultimately good. That truth is anticipated in the
following excerpt from chapter 6 of the Zhuangzi:
Life and death are fated—constant as the succession of dark and dawn, a
matter of Heaven. There are some things which man can do nothing
about—all are a matter of the nature of creatures. If man is willing to
regard Heaven as a father and to love it, then how much more should he
be willing to do for that which is even greater! If he is willing to regard
the ruler as superior to himself and to die for him, then how much more
should he be willing to do for the Truth!33
Soon afterward Zilai fell ill, was grasping for breath and was about to
die. His wife and children surrounded him and wept. Zili went to see him.
“Go away,” he said. “Don’t disturb the transformation that is about to
take place.” Then, leaning against the door, he continued, “Great is the
Creator! What will he make of you now? Where will he take you? Will he
make you into a rat’s liver? Will he make you into an insect’s leg?” Zilai
said, “Wherever a parent tells a son to go, whether east, west, south, or
north, he has to obey. The Yin and Yang are like man’s parents. If they
pressed me to die and I disobeyed, I would be obstinate. What fault is
theirs? For the universe gave me this body so I may be carried, my life so
I may toil, my old age so I may repose, and my death so I may rest.
Therefore to regard life as good is the way to regard death as good.”34
Feeling at ease in the face of death is one thing. But it is not disconnected
from what many if not most of us get practice in during our lives—how to
manage and even feel comfort in times of what by conventional standards
would be considered misfortune. Consider Cripple Shu who had his “chin
stuck down in his navel, shoulders above his head, pigtail pointing to the
sky, his five organs on the top . . .” Even crippled as he was, he went on to
“finish out the years that Heaven gave him” with “crippled virtue,” which I
take to be the skill of living one’s life as best one can despite such limitations.35
Then there is Shentu Jia without a foot, Mr. Lame-Hunchback-No-Lips, Mr.
Pitcher-Sized-Wen, and many others who populate the Zhuangzi and who
are True Persons or persons of virtue despite their abnormalities. We also
meet Master Yu who fell ill and was amazed when the Creator made him
“all crookedy.” He did not resent it at all, but instead was “calm at heart and
unconcerned.”36 He responded in awe, imaging all of the wonderful things
that he could do with whatever the Creator might make of him—such as
transforming his left arm into a rooster, or his right arm into a crossbow
pellet, or his buttocks into cartwheels. These seem like absurd possibilities,
but I think the point is this: life is unpredictable and can do anything. The
question is, what will we make of it? Will we live virtuously or the best we
can despite what life might throw at us?
These cases also communicate a crucial message: there is something
inherently good about life, come what may. Despite its spectacular variety
and unpredictability, life is still a gift—a miracle and mystery that gives us
the chance to act, change, and grow into something new and different. This
transformation can be extraordinary. Recall that the Zhuangzi begins with
a story of the Kun fish who transforms into the Peng bird—a radical
9. Conclusion
A question that may arise from the examples and stories in the Daodejing
and Zhuangzi is what the relation is between the self—our awareness of our
existence as living things—and the material form that our lives animate. In
the first part of this chapter, I critiqued Brentano’s thesis that mental and
physical events are different in kind; where mental events are thought to
exist in the mind only, while physical objects (such as our bodies) exist in the
external physical world. My point was that “physical phenomena” have to
be experienced by subjects in order for them to exist for us at all (they are
phenomena), and to that extent they are “mental” objects too, even though
they are experienced as if they have an independent existence. In addition,
the mental phenomenon of dreaming shows how even more varied and
ambiguous conscious experience can be—because until we wake up, dreams
can seem as real as any waking experience, while waking life can sometimes
feel like a dream. In any case, for humans, we are not only conscious of, or
about things; we can see ourselves as figuring into the content of our own
experience. This is where the sense of “I” comes from that Zhuangzi refers
to in various places.37 The Zhuangzi does not discuss the question of what
the relation is between our “selves” and our bodies in any depth however. I
think this is because our consciousness, mind, or experience, is never
conceived in isolation from our bodies, that are existentially necessarily for
us to have a place in the world and that are constantly changing. Nor are we
conceived as metaphysically separate from the other “external” people,
places, things, and events that make up our ever-changing world.
To explain further, my focusing on, and defining the “self” as a self-aware
subject of experience displays a cultural bias. We have seen that the Zhuangzi
refers to actual embodied characters no matter how extreme or absurd—
who in each case cannot be understood in absence of their story or situation.
I think if we could ask Zhuangzi, he might reply that ideas such as mind or
self are just abstractions, and perhaps misleading ones when considering
what is real. Exactly what does it mean to have a mind or self? Of course,
we are able to be aware and to act according to the limitations of our nature,
which for humans mean we can reflect on our experience and actions, as
well as our role in bringing them about or changing them in the future. But
do these concepts merely refer to certain species-specific capacities? Then
where is the real person in this, when what is most essential to our having a
particular life is abstracted away? Life is to be lived and not just postulated.
I think Zhuangzi might say that such abstractions, especially when taken
to be independent realities, fail to do justice to our experience as living
human beings. We are not minds with selves; and even if we posit that
we have these, they will not define what makes us who we most essentially
are; they will not capture what makes existence unique for each and every
one of us.
To continue, I think Zhuangzi might say that the subject–object distinction
as Brentano saw it, or as I have redefined it, does more than fail to do justice
to our experience. While we might agree that experience has to be of, or
about something, there is no good reason to privilege the experience of our
own minds or conscious activities over the things that make up our world—
the one we live and die in. I see the overall matter this way: Western
metaphysics or accounts of reality tend to be biased or lodged in a
“mentalistic” and hence “individualistic” worldview. So, we become
preoccupied with what might happen to our individual (self) consciousness
when we die. By contrast, Daoist worldviews tend to be biased in favor of
the concept of Dao or framed in a perspective that sees this Ultimate Reality
that produces and sustains all things as needing no explanation. Dao and its
power to create is ultimately what is real. Moreover, if we consult our
experience, we can clearly observe that nothing real exists alone or in
isolation, which would include our so-called minds or selves.38 Dao or the
unfathomable way of change is ultimately real, so all other questions, such
as ones about the self are of secondary or no real importance. To state the
matter simply: for Daoists we are subjects of life, not subjects of objects.
We do know that both the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi see life as a
miracle and mystery that cannot be fathomed. We can appreciate it fully and
be at ease with its changes, but we cannot know the infinite Dao as we might
“know” definite things. As the Daodejing says in its opening chapter, we can
“observe” Dao’s secrets, which I take to mean that we can “see” and be
awed by them, but we cannot know them. We can only know that they are
good in coming from Dao. In effect, we can have faith in Dao and its power
to change us into whatever it will. Dao is the way of change, including the
change of life into death. So there is nothing to fear; nothing ultimately to
be sad about.
old,” said Huizi. “It should be enough simply not to weep at her death.
But pounding on a tub and singing—this is going too far, isn’t it?”
Zhuangzi said, “You’re wrong. When she first died, do you think I did
not grieve like anyone else? But I looked back to her beginning and the
time before she was born. Not only the time before she was born, but
the time before she had a body. Not only the time before she had a
body, but the time before she had a spirit. In the midst of the jumble of
wonder and mystery a change took place and she had a spirit. Another
change and she had a body. Another change and she was born. Now
there’s been another change and she’s dead. It’s just like the progression
of the four seasons, spring, summer, fall, winter. Now she’s going to lie
down peacefully in a vast room. If I were to follow after her bawling and
sobbing, it would show that I don’t understand anything about fate. So
I stopped.”39
Zhuangzi’s wife dies, then she “lies asleep in the great house (the
universe).”40 This passage expresses Zhuangzi’s faith in the workings of Dao,
in Heaven or Nature, and in our destiny within that larger context—of
human life and the death it necessarily entails. So, what can we say about
death according to the Zhuangzi? We are told that death is peaceful, restful,
and perhaps the greatest transformation in the process or way of change that
living things undergo. Dao or the Great Maker made life, and human life
evolved from that, which now includes each one of us as well as those we
care about. We also are told that the Great Maker is Good, and that anything
it does is all right, even though it may not seem that way from a human
perspective. Zhuangzi wept for his wife, and presumably we will weep for
those we love if their time comes to pass into the Great Unknown before us.
The Great Maker also made us so that we might try to know ourselves—
to plumb the depths of our being even if we come up with just a deeper
mystery. Now imagine this as a kind of thought experiment. Imagine that
your time to die has come and the door to the vast room, the great house,
opens in front of you. If you could, if it was within your power to do so,
would “you” willingly pass through that door with eyes wide open and ears
attuned? Would you choose to go and see?
Notes
1 I put the word “metaphysics” in quotes since the worldview in ancient China
did not see the distinction between the physical and so-called metaphysical
world as being one of kind.
2 Mental objects need not be real or physically exist either; for example, we can
be conscious of fictitious or abstract ideas, images, and objects too.
3 Franz Brentano, Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint (London:
Routledge, 1995), 88–9.
23 Ibid., chapter 2.
24 Ibid., chapter 11.
25 This “spiritual” level may actually be most basic and primal—while human
objectification may disconnect or alienate us from each other and the world we
live and die in.
26 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 6.
27 This is very much the case around the Warring States Period (475–221 bce).
28 Wing-Tsit Chan (trans.), “The Mystical Way of Chuang Tzu,” in A Source
Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963),
179–80.
29 One could point out that non-humans also creatively respond to the callings of
nature, such as female Grizzlies who will “act against their nature” in order to
protect their young [see the video, Bear 71]. But humans take this to a different
level, and both the Daodejing and Zhuangzi cite this as being potentially very
problematic. I think both texts indicate that the problem lies in the fact that
nature has given us a sense of “self” that we then misconceive as deserving far
too much power. That is, the problem lies in our seeing our elevated
metaphysical status as being a product of our own efforts instead of as being
a gift from Dao. We have transformed this gift into an Achilles’ heel that will
lead to our downfall as a result—precisely because we abuse instead of
nurture our lives and our special connection to Dao.
30 Recall chapter 1 of the Daodejing, “always rid yourself of desires in order to
observe its [Dao’s] secrets; but always allow yourself to have desires in order to
observe its manifestations”; that is, so we can make use of them to accomplish
some imagined purpose.
31 Zhuangzi, Basic Writings, 46.
32 Self-consciousness may actually interfere with our ability to “just do” the
action with excellent results.
33 Zhuangzi, Basic Writings, 76.
34 Chan, “The Mystical Way of Chuang Tzu,” 197–8.
35 Zhuangzi, Basic Writings, 61–2.
36 Ibid., 80.
37 Ibid., 32–3.
38 This culturally biased assumption has many moral and political implications.
In the West, conceiving of oneself as independent and autonomous has
unpleasant results despite the positive ones.
39 Zhuangzi, Basic Writings, 115.
40 Chan, “The Mystical Way of Chuang Tzu,” 209.
References
Alexander, Eben. (2012), Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Journey into the
Afterlife, New York: Simon & Schuster Inc.
Bockover, Mary. (1991), Emotionally Relevant Feelings, Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California at Santa Barbara.
Brentano, Franz. (1995), Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint, Linda
McAlister (trans.), London: Routledge.
Chai, David. (2016), “On Pillowing One’s Skull: Zhuangzi and Heidegger on
Death,” Frontiers of Philosophy in China, 11.3: 483–500.
Chan, Wing-Tsit, trans. (1963), “The Mystical Way of Chuang Tzu,” in A Source
Book in Chinese Philosophy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Descartes, René. (1960), Meditations on First Philosophy, Laurence Lafleur (trans.),
Indianapolis and New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.
Graham, A.C. (1989), Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient
China, La Salle: Open Court.
Kant, Immanuel. (1998), Critique of Pure Reason, Paul Guyer and Allen Wood
(trans.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laozi. (1963), Daodejing, D.C. Lau (trans.), London: Penguin Books.
Yijing. (1950), Richard Wilhelm and Cary Baynes (trans.), Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Zhuangzi. (2003), Zhuangzi: Basic Writings, Burton Watson (trans.), New York:
Columbia University Press.
Graham Parkes
Zhuangzi and Nietzsche. The names have similar cadences and rhyme on the
last syllable.2 But what is the point of the and? In a context like this, it sounds
like a compare-and-contrast exercise. But again—so what? Well, with
Nietzsche and Zhuangzi the consonances are remarkable, between what they
say and how they say it. These have been remarked on before, in the first
comparison (as far as I know) of these two thinkers’ ideas: an article called
“The Wandering Dance: Zhuangzi and Zarathustra,” published in Philosophy
East & West in 1983. But before considering this essay, whose point is “to
enhance our understanding of both philosophies,” let’s first ask the question,
which the essay fails to ask, whether Nietzsche was familiar with Zhuangzi’s
ideas. Then, after comparing Zhuangzi’s and Nietzsche’s views on what’s
going on at the deepest philosophical level, we’ll inquire into how a
comparison might highlight aspects of their thought that have generally gone
unnoticed—especially on the question of whether and how perspectives
beyond the human might be attainable. Finally, I’ll point to a correspondence
between the physical practices underlying their philosophical ideas.
The values that inform our world, the points on which a people overcomes
itself, are collective interpretations, different in different cultures, of what
is good, or praiseworthy, holy, or evil.
But this only gives us “will to power as interpretation” in the human
realm, which needs to be extended to the non-human as well—and that’s
where “The Wandering Dance” takes us.
only in his texts but also in (what we know of) his experience as a plausible
basis for the ideas found in his works.
A reason to suppose that there is such a sense there comes from a well-
known note from 1885 that prefigures Nietzsche’s paramount presentation
of the teaching of will to power in Beyond Good and Evil 36. “This world,”
he writes, is
an ocean of energies . . . flowing out from the simplest forms into the
most manifold, from the stillest, most rigid, and coldest into the most
incandescent, wildest, and most self-contradictory, and then again
returning home from abundance to the simple, from the play of
contradictions to the pleasure of harmony.17
Upon a meadow hidden among the woods he sees the great God Pan
asleep; all the things of nature have fallen asleep with him, an expression
of eternity on their faces—so it seems to him. He wants nothing, he frets
about nothing, his heart stands still, only his eyes are alive—it is a death
with open eyes. Now the man sees much that he has never seen before,
and for as far as he can see everything is spun into a net of light, and as it
were buried in it.20
The world as a net of light, ein Lichtnetz: things of nature buried in the
light, the Earth illumined, everything dissolved into a network of
interactions—a field of dao and de.
Letting the heart stand still and not wanting anything is a way of getting
beyond the all-too-human perspective: “To think oneself away out of
humanity, to unlearn desires of all kinds: and to employ the entire abundance
of one’s powers in looking.”21 The Daoists engage in a corresponding
practice, which Zhuangzi calls “fasting the heart”—a matter of emptying
the mind of what we humans bring to our engagement with the world in the
way of prejudices and preconceptions, inclinations and aversions, all of
which get in the way of our experiencing what is actually going on. Talking
of hearing rather than seeing (which Nietzsche as an “ear” rather than an
“eye” person would appreciate), Zhuangzi recommends (through the person
of “Confucius”) “coming to hear with the vital energy [qi] rather than the
heart” because “the heart is halted at whatever verifies its preconceptions.”
This fasting of the heart bypasses human prejudices and lets one experience
through the openness of qi “the presence of beings.”22
Returning to Nietzsche, another world of light, “pure and crisp,” shines
forth in another passage that evokes the mountain landscapes of the
Engadine, Et in Arcadia ego: “Even here, I [death] am.” The ground is
“bright with flowers and grasses” yet also shadowed by death, as in the
painting by Poussin that Nietzsche alludes to. He describes a scene of beauty
that “made one shudder and mutely worship the moment of its revelation,”
a “pure, crisp world of light, in which there was no longing, expecting, or
looking forward and back.”23 Another “enjoyable horror,” a shudder in the
face of light—reminiscent of the shuddering and divine delight that Lucretius
experienced on understanding Epicurus’ vision of natural activity going on
throughout the void.24
But how is it that the everyday world seems so much more substantial
than light most of the time, so full of things, some of which can get in the
way? It’s a matter of where our attention is: on figures (things we have to
cope with to survive) or ground (the background contexts). The Zhuangzi’s
The habits of our senses have woven us into the lies and deceptions of
sense-perception . . . from which there is no escaping, no hidden bypaths
into the actual world! We are in our own nets, we spiders, and whatever
we may catch in it, we cannot catch anything that does not allow itself to
be caught in our own net.27
As spiders we spin webs of concepts from our own mental substance and
project them into the world—also images, schemata, narratives, categories,
persons—where they support the fleeting stuff of our lives and lend it some
kind of structure, providing some measure of regularity on which we can
depend.
In a context where preconceptions prevent us from being flexible in the
perspectives we entertain, and in the uses for things that we envision,
Zhuangzi describes this situation as “a lot of tangled weeds clogging up the
mind.” He uses similar terms to characterize the obscuring effects of notions
of right and wrong, and ingrained Confucian virtues such as humaneness
and responsibility—effects that Nietzsche would also regard as restrictive.
In one of the Zhuangzi’s Outer chapters there’s the question: “What is the
use of throwing humaneness and responsibility into the midst of the Course
[dao] and its virtuosity [de], trying to fasten everything together as if with
glue and knotted cords? All it does is cast the world into confusion.”28
Projections of moral values and attempts to fix things into some kind of
conceptual framework are fruitless exercises—because as Nietzsche as well
as Zhuangzi will say: they are already fastened together. We would see this
if we opened up and paid closer attention.
On another level of description Nietzsche highlights the crucial role of
the drives (Triebe) in constituting our experience—for example, the drives
for distinction, understanding, predominance, security, play, peace and quiet,
justice, truth, and so forth.29 On the basis of the play of nervous stimulation
on the system, the drives interpret nerve-impulses by imagining their
causes—and they do this as much, and more freely, when we are asleep and
dreaming as when we’re awake.30 In contrast to the spider’s web of dry
concepts, the play of drives produces images, and is described in terms of
images—especially of vegetation. The activity of the drives introduces a
strong dose of poetic or imaginative invention into our experience.
In one of his more incisive provocations, Nietzsche invokes the power of
past experience as he ridicules the realists’ naïve belief in their ability to be
totally objective:
That mountain there! That cloud there! What is “real” about those? Try
taking away the phantasm and the entire human contribution, you sober
ones! Yes, if only you could do that! If you could forget your heritage,
your past, your training—your entire humanity and animality! For us
there is no “reality”—nor for you either, you sober ones.31
Nietzsche apparently stayed with the idea of “seeing with other eyes”
through to his later work, as exemplified by the often-cited sentence from
On the Genealogy of Morality:
That makes sense. But if we forget about concepts and the intellect that
employs them, can’t we attain a complete experience of things as they are?
A reason to suppose that we can is Zarathustra’s saying, at “Midday,” that
“The world is complete.”36 So how does it get that way?
To be a good “student of nature,” Nietzsche writes in The Joyous Science,
one needs to “get out of one’s human corner” and go beyond the “one-
sided” view that sees life as “a struggle for existence,” in order to appreciate
the overflowing abundance of the natural world as “will to power.”37 To get
out of one’s Winkel is to open up the human angle on things to 360 degrees,
as it were, while somehow shifting the center so that the perspective is no
longer anthropocentric. And this is a point at which a comparison with
Zhuangzi raises a further question: yes, multiplying perspectives all around
is enlightening—but can’t we thereby go further to some kind of
perspectiveless experience?
perspective. It’s worth noting that Nietzsche makes a similar rhetorical move
when he accuses the physicists of his day of misunderstanding the natural
world through their anthropomorphic perspective: they only see nature as
“lawful” because they project “the democratic instincts of the modern soul”
onto the object of their study. “Everywhere equality before the law!” From
his beyond-anthropocentric perspective Nietzsche understands the natural
world as “will to power,” as having a “necessary” and “predictable” course
[Verlauf], not because laws reign in it but because laws are absolutely absent,
and every power draws its ultimate consequence in every moment.
Every particular thing or process, as a configuration of interpreting will
to power, is at every moment construing all other things and is the product
of their manifold interactions. The Daoist sage would understand this talk
of the course of nature as both “necessary” (which is “freedom itself,”
Zarathustra says, “blissfully playing with the thorn of freedom”) and
“predictable” (intuitively, once you understand the rhythms and cadences).39
But having dismissed the physicists’ “naïvely humanitarian” interpretation
of nature and proposed his own view of the world as will to power instead,
Nietzsche then adds this final twist: “Given that this is also only an
interpretation—and you will be eager enough to raise this objection?—well,
all the better.—”40 The last dash is there to give us time to reflect on what
he’s doing here.
Both Zhuangzi and Nietzsche say the world unfolds in an array of diverse
perspectives and interactions—and acknowledge their claims as perspectival,
though proffering not just any perspective but one that affirms the plurality
of perspectives and the possibility of entertaining that plurality. In both
cases: yes, another interpretation—but in each case so powerful as to be not
just any other interpretation. Their interpretations make good sense of
what’s going on—but on the understanding that it’s in the nature of
interpretations to be superseded. After all, the secret of life as will to power,
which the figure of Life herself intimates to Zarathustra, is this: that she is
“that which must always overcome itself.”41
Returning to “the broad daylight of Heaven”: the Daoist sage goes along
with the play of perspectives it reveals, “using various rights and wrongs to
harmonize with others and yet remaining at rest in the center of the Potter’s
Wheel of Heaven.” Zhuangzi explains what’s going on here by elaborating
the image:
The same point can be made with reference to the other great classic of
philosophical Daoism—the Daodejing—which uses the image of a cartwheel:
“Thirty spokes are united in one hub. It is in its emptiness that the usefulness
of the cart resides.”43 Just as a wheel can only rotate if its center is empty
(otherwise you’d only have a disc or a potter’s wheel), so the world can go
round, and things come and go in cyclical fashion, only thanks to emptiness
within it. We generally experience through perspectives on the rim of the
wheel, as it were, and often fail to appreciate that with a turn of the world—
in a day, or a year, or a sequence of years in a lifetime—we can find ourselves
on the opposite side, where “there” has become “here,” and “that” has
become “this.” Most experience affords this opportunity, and with practice
we realize there’s a point in the middle from where we can appreciate both.
If it’s a circle cycling, the calmest place is the center—as long as you rotate
on your axis.
After extension and expansion to the peripheries, this withdrawal to the
center, the axis of the Course, the still point of the turning world (where the
dance takes place), allows us to go beyond our customary, restricted, all-too-
human perspectives, and get a sense of the whole. Not a transcendence to a
God’s-eye view, nor a view from everywhere or nowhere, this drive to the
heart of things, or withdrawal to the center, may let us see “the world from
the inside,” as Nietzsche puts it when he writes of “the world as will to
power—and nothing besides.”
The Daoist sage is wise thanks in part to his virtuosity in changing
perspectives. In one of his last works, Nietzsche congratulates himself on
a corresponding ability, acquired through long practice, to “switch
perspectives.”44 And just as the sage can let all those perspectives bask in
that way because he has made himself “one with Heaven,” so Zarathustra
“Before the Sunrise” is on the deck of a ship out on the open sea, where the
horizon affords the greatest expanse of sky—so vast as to be absorbing. By
casting himself up into the light-abyss of the sky he is able to merge with his
“friend,” with which he has so many things “in common.” Here and in “At
Midday” depth and height “are no longer coupled as opposites” but come
together in a coincidentia oppositorum.
“You do not speak,” Zarathustra remarks: this is how Heaven reveals its
“wisdom.” Openness and reticence are likewise a central characteristic of
Heaven in the Chinese philosophical tradition. Early on, when a student of
Confucius asked him why he wished he didn’t have to speak, the Master
replied: “Does Heaven ever speak? And yet the four seasons turn and the
myriad creatures are born and grow within it. Does Heaven ever speak?”46
The reticence of the Chinese Heaven comes from its impartiality: it casts
its light, not to mention rain, evenly on all things. A remarkable feature of
the pre-dawn sky (also true of post-sunset dusk) is the quality of light in the
absence of direct sun: more so than on an overcast day, things appear to
shine with their own light. When they are illuminated by the sun (symbol of
the Idea of the Good) the light always comes from a particular direction,
making one side of things bright and leaving the other in shadow. This
would correspond in the Zhuangzi to perspectives that afford us a “this”
and a “that.” By contrast the illumination of the pre-dawn sky is uniform
and without directionality: no bias, no light casting dark shadow, and
instead of exclusive opposites a smooth continuum.
Rising into the light-abyss of Heaven, Zarathustra reaches the ranks of
those who “bless”:
And this is my blessing: to stand over each and every thing as its own
Heaven, as its round roof, its azure bell and eternal security: and blessed
is he who blesses thus!
For all things are baptized at the fount of eternity and beyond good
and evil.
A few episodes later in the Zhuangzi, there is this description of the sage:
—Again turning out to be just like Zarathustra, who realized early on there
was no point in wasting his time with followers: “Companions the creator
seeks, and fellow harvesters: for all that is with him stands ripe for the
harvest. But the hundred sickles are lacking.”49 And Zarathustra later affirms
the rightness of all things on the grounds of their being “beyond good and
evil.”
“Before the Sunrise” ends with Heaven’s blushing and Zarathustra’s
realizing that the pre-dawn sky is about to disappear, to give way to day and
its light. It’s then that he says: “The world is deep—and deeper than ever the
day has thought.”50 The day and life perspectives reveal things we need to
know to get through, to make it; while the night and death perspectives—
deeper because they reveal the underworld we inhabit nightly in our dreams
and dreamless sleep—complement and complete our experience. They
round it out. Just as in the Zhuangzi, where life and death are often said to
belong together, and waking life and dream are interchangeable.51
Do not sing! Still! The world is complete . . . a moment’s glance [Augen-
Blick]—a little makes for the best happiness. What? Did the world not
just become complete? Round and ripe? Oh the golden round hoop—
whither does it fly? . . . Still! Did the world not just become complete? Oh
the golden round ball!52
The golden round hoop is a larger version of the ring of eternal recurrence,
which is generated by those moments when life assumes such fullness that
one can want it to come around again, and innumerable times again. If you
can get into the gateway of the moment the right way—behind which “all
things have happened, and been done, and passed by already”—you realize
that “all things are fastened together so tightly that this moment draws after
it all things that are to come.”53 And so by affirming this moment, you are in
a position to affirm all things.
There’s a passage in the Zhuangzi that resonates with the Potter’s Wheel
of Heaven image discussed earlier, and seems strangely to anticipate
Nietzsche’s thought of eternal recurrence. In the course of a description of
the sage, who “gets through to the intertwining of things, so that everything
forms a single body around him,” the text invokes the intense joy of
contemplating “the old homeland, the old neighborhood.” (Perhaps also a
matter of realizing one’s original nature.) And how much greater the joy “if
you could still see what you had once seen and hear what you had once
heard there”—which could happen if those moments came around again, if
they recurred. How this might happen is suggested by a reversion to the sage
who “found the center of the ring”:
When the center of the ring was found back in the second chapter of the
Zhuangzi, the Axis of the Way was able “to respond to all the endless things
it confronts, thwarted by none.”
The center of the ring can accommodate the axis and its endless turning
because it’s empty, and we can find a place there only if we are empty of
tangled weeds and conceptual clutter. The Zhuangzi suggests that you know
you’ve fasted the heart well enough if what moves you to activity is not your
self, but the forces of Heaven and Earth moving through the body unimpeded.
Here are the final pieces of advice concerning the practice of dealing with
things—and people—after emptying the mind:
Concentrate on the hollows of what is before you, and the empty chamber
within you will generate its own brightness. Good fortune comes to roost
in stillness. To lack this stillness is called scurrying around even when
sitting down . . . This is the transformation of all things, the hinge on
which [the sage-emperors of old] used to move.
As one of the Outer chapters advises: “Let your body be moved only by
the totality of things.”55 Paying attention to the openness that’s before us is a
matter of realizing that things are empty of essences, that they are what they
are only in relation to others and thanks to “the affinities and antagonisms”
among them. Just as one can scurry around even when sitting down, one can
also, with practice, stay still while moving about. The benefits of finding still
points are praised in the Daodejing as well as the Zhuangzi. And to get in
touch with our inner stillness, it helps to sit still for a while every now and
then. A few words, then, on practice, before we conclude.
Illness gradually liberated me, cleaning me out . . . Illness likewise gave
me the right to a complete change in my habits . . . it bestowed on me the
needfulness to lie still, to be idle, to wait and be patient . . . But that’s
what is called thinking!58
to look upon life without desire and not like a dog with its tongue
hanging out . . . To love the Earth as the moon loves her, and to touch her
beauty with the eye alone . . . [and to be able to say] “I want nothing from
things, except that I may lie there before them like a mirror with a
hundred eyes.”
Fully realize whatever is received from Heaven, and never have personal
gain in sight. It is just being empty, nothing more. The utmost man uses
his mind like a mirror, rejecting nothing, welcoming nothing: responding
but not storing. Thus he can handle all things without harm.61
Without harm to him or to them. As long as the mirror reflects the broad
daylight of Heaven, it impartially lets the things it reflects show themselves
as they are, rather than as the partial mind would have them be—insofar as
the partial mind rejects bad stuff and welcomes good things, and stores by
holding on.
A lot depends of course on where the utmost man situates his mirror-
mind. Think of the creativity of the great photographer, who gets the
camera in the right place at the right time, and pointing in the right direction,
before clicking the shutter. This is the registration moment of experience,
but there is also the activation moment, which makes for creativity. The
“Fathoming Life” chapter says that, if one is able to “let go of the world”
and not hold on,
you are reborn along with each presence that confronts you . . . When the
body is intact and the seminal quintessence of vitality restored, you are
one with Heaven . . . Making the quintessence of vitality still more
concentrated and quintessential, you return to the source, thereby
assisting in the operations of Heaven.62
In this way, the good Daoist can expand her awareness throughout the
whole field, and through “sympathetic resonance” (ganying 感應) get the
hang of what’s really going on.
This passage is followed by accounts of the awe-inspiring virtuosities of
a cicada catcher, a ferryman, a maker of bell-stands, a charioteer, and an
artisan. At the conclusion of these stories, a Master says of the conduct of
the Consummate Person (or Daoist sage): “This is called taking action but
not relying on it for any credit, helping things grow but not controlling
them.”63 There are of course passages in the Zhuangzi that can be cited in
favor of a more quietist reading, where the sage is detached from the human
realm. But the comparison with Nietzsche reveals a more engaged aspect of
the philosophy, where the sage practices non-attachment rather than
detachment. I find this aspect more appealing, and more relevant, because
the way things are going these days, they need all the help we can give them.
The last sentence of Parkes (1983) trusts that “at least a few steps have
been made along the way of the wandering dance.” The Dionysian move out
of oneself, and into other persons and things of nature, requires a “lightness
of foot” that’s attuned to the music of the world. As Zarathustra says, “the
dancer has his ear—deep down in his toes!”64 Zhuangzi, wandering freely
among diverse perspectives, is foremost among those few well-attuned
thinkers who were able to go beyond talking the talk, and even walking the
walk, to dancing the dance—in the light of the Heavens above and around.
Notes
1 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Joyous Science, 339 (KSA, 3: 569). Translations of
Nietzsche’s texts are my own, for the sake of preserving the imagery.
References to the published works are by section number, so that the passages
can be found in any edition, followed by the volume and page number of the
Kritische Studienausgabe (KSA) of the collected works. References to the
unpublished notes are in the KSA, by volume and page number, and to the
letters in the Kritische Studienausgabe of the Briefe (KSB).
2 The last syllables of both names rhyme with the last syllable of “feature”
without the “r” sound, rather than with “(kim)chee.” In citations I have
changed Wade-Giles romanization to Pinyin for the sake of consistency.
3 Nietzsche, letter to Heinrich Köselitz, May 31, 1888 (KSB, 8: 325); The
Antichristian, 32.
4 Laozi, Lao-Tse’s Tao Te King (Leipzig: Fleischer Verlag, 1870), xxxii–xxxvii;
see also the commentary to the first chapter on page 3.
5 Graham Parkes, “The Wandering Dance: Zhuangzi and Zarathustra,”
Philosophy East and West, 33.3 (1983): 237.
6 Zhuangzi, Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings with Selections from Traditional
Commentaries Brook Ziporyn (trans.) (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing,
2009), 22 (86); Nietzsche, KSA, 11.610 = Will to Power, 1067 (1885).
References to the Zhuangzi are to the chapter, followed by the page in Brook
Ziporyn’s translation in parentheses.
7 Zhuangzi, Essential Writings, 22 (86).
8 Parkes, “The Wandering Dance,” 240.
9 Nietzsche, Zarathustra, 1:15, “On the Thousand Goals and One.” For more on
will to power as interpretation, see xxi–xxii.
10 Parkes, “The Wandering Dance,” 246–7.
11 Roger Ames, “Nietzsche’s ‘Will to Power’ and Chinese ‘Virtuality’ (De): A
Comparative Study,” in Nietzsche and Asian Thought, ed. Graham Parkes
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 133, 134 (emphasis added), 136.
12 Ibid., 143–4.
References
Ames, Roger. (1991), “Nietzsche’s ‘Will to Power’ and Chinese ‘Virtuality’ (De): A
Comparative Study,” in Nietzsche and Asian Thought, Graham Parkes (ed.),
130–50, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hadot, Pierre. (1995), Philosophy as a Way of Life, Michael Chase (trans.),
Cambridge: Blackwell.
Lampert, Laurence. (2001), Nietzsche’s Task: An Interpretation of Beyond Good
and Evil, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Laozi. (1870), Lao-Tse’s Tao Te King. Victor von Strauss (trans.), Leipzig: Fleischer
Verlag.
Laozi. (2007), Daodejing. Hans-Georg Moeller (trans.), La Salle: Open Court
Publishing.
Moeller, Hans-Georg. (2004), Daoism Explained: From the Dream of the Butterfly
to the Fishnet Allegory, La Salle: Open Court Publishing.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1980), Sämtliche Werke: Kritische Studienausgabe, München:
de Gruyter.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1986), Sämtliche Briefe: Kritische Studienausgabe, München:
de Gruyter.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. (2005), Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for Everyone and
Nobody. Graham Parkes (trans.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parkes, Graham. (1983), “The Wandering Dance: Zhuangzi and Zarathustra,”
Philosophy East and West, 33.3: 235–50.
Parkes, Graham, ed. (1991), Nietzsche and Asian Thought, Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Parkes, Graham. (1994), Composing the Soul: Reaches of Nietzsche’s Psychology,
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Parkes, Graham. (2012), “Awe and Humility in the Face of Things: Somatic
Practice in East-Asian Philosophies,” European Journal for Philosophy of
Religion, 4.3: 69–88.
Parkes, Graham. (2013), “Zhuangzi and Nietzsche on the Human in Nature,”
Environmental Philosophy, 10.1: 1–24.
Early Encounters:
Nourishing the
Sprouts of
Possibility
Elements of a Phenomenological
Reading of Zhuangzi
Kwok-Ying Lau
shares that common and elusive feeling that the whole is more than the
sum of its parts, that analysis always leaves something out, that neither
side of the dichotomy is wholly true.4
If we follow our prejudices and take them as our guide [or teacher], who
will not have his own guide [or teacher]? Why should only those who are
intelligent enough to know the laws of change by heart maintain their
own guiding principle? The foolish do the same thing. If one makes an
affirmation or a negation prior to the judgment by the cognitive mind, it
is just as [absurd as] saying that one sets out for the Southern lands today
but arrived there yesterday. To do so is to make something out of nothing.
Making something out of nothing is a state of affairs that even the sage
Yu is unable to understand. How could I alone make sense of it?15
In any event, it should have been easy to teach the Dao of a sage to
someone with the ability of a sage. Still, I had to instruct him and watch
over his practice. After three days, he could get rid of all mundane
preoccupations. Once he was able to get rid of mundane preoccupations,
I continued to watch over his practice. After seven days, he was able
to remain unaffected by the concern of external things. Once he was
life interests.20 Toward the end of his life, notably in the unfinished but
important work The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental
Phenomenology, Husserl explicitly recognizes the convergence between the
phenomenological epoché and religious conversion by stating that “the total
phenomenological attitude and the epoché belonging to it are destined in
essence to effect, at first, a complete personal transformation, comparable in
the beginning to a religious conversion.”21 So there is a profound proximity
between the usage of epoché in the epistemological domain, the aesthetic
domain, as well as the religious domain in terms of their common attitude
in relation to mundane life interests: abstention or indifference. If we take
into account the fact that this attitude is also at the basis of the ascetic
attitude of Stoicism as a philosophic school prevalent in Western antiquity,
we can see that the attitude underlying the epoché is both a cross-cultural
phenomenon (as shown in Chinese pre-Qin Daoism, Indian Buddhism,
Greek-Roman Stoicism, and contemporary European phenomenology) and
a multi-domain technique of the self (technique de soi), to use the terminology
of Foucault, observable in philosophical reflection, aesthetic contemplation,
and religious practice, because all these activities necessitate a pre-requisite
process of self-transformation experienced through and through by the
subject of philosophical meditation, aesthetic appreciation and religious
askesis.
Our analyses of the Zhuangzi passages above show that the practice of
the epoché through spiritual exercise is not only a guiding principle for the
formation of true and sound cognitive judgments, it is also the condition
sine qua non for achieving enlightenment of the mind as a pre-requisite for
envisioning the Dao and gaining access to the state of spiritual immortality.
In this regard, Zhuangzi shows a great sense of rigor in terms of
methodological considerations with respect to ascertaining sound and true
cognitive judgments, as well as securing systematic execution of progressive
practical steps which lead to spiritual self-transformation as the precondition
to the learned acquisition of the Dao.22
Cook Ding was cutting up an ox for Lord Wenhui. Wherever his hand
touched, his shoulder leaned, his foot stepped, his knee nudged, the flesh
would fall away with a swishing sound. Each slice of the cleaver was right
in tune, zip zap! He danced in rhythm to the Mulberry Grove; moved in
concert with the strains of the Managing Chief. Ah, wonderful! said Lord
Wenhui, that skill can attain such heights! The cook put down his cleaver
and responded, what your servant loves is Dao, which goes beyond mere
skill. When I first began to cut oxen, what I saw was nothing but whole
oxen. After three years, I no longer saw whole oxen. Today, I meet the ox
with my spirit rather than looking at it with my eyes. My sense organs
stop functioning and my spirit moves as it pleases. In accord with the
natural grain, I slice at the great crevices, lead the blade through the great
cavities. Following its inherent structure, I never encounter the slightest
obstacle even where the veins and arteries come together or where the
ligaments and tendons join, much less from obvious big bones. A good
cook changes his cleaver once a year because he chops. An ordinary cook
changes his cleaver once a month because he hacks. Now I have been
using my cleaver for nineteen years and have cut up thousands of oxen
with it, but the blade is still as fresh as though it had just come from the
grindstone. Between the joints there are spaces, but the edge of the blade
has no thickness. Since I am inserting something without any thickness
into an empty space, there will certainly be lots of room for the blade to
play around in. That is why the blade is still as fresh as though it had just
come from the grindstone. Nonetheless, whenever I come to a complicated
spot and see that it will be difficult to handle, I cautiously restrain myself,
focus my vision, and slow my motion. With an imperceptible movement
of the cleaver, plop! and the flesh is already separated, like a clump of
earth collapsing to the ground. I stand there holding the cleaver in my
hand, look all around me with complacent satisfaction, then I wipe off
the cleaver and store it away. Wonderful! said Lord Wenhui. From hearing
the words of the cook, I have learned how to nourish life.23
If the need was felt to introduce this new word [body-schema], it was in
order to express that the spatial and temporal unity, the inter-sensorial
unity, or the sensorimotor unity of the body is, so to speak, an in principle
unity, to express that this unity is not limited to contents actually and
fortuitously associated in the course of our experience, that it somehow
precedes them and in fact makes their association possible . . . the body
schema will no longer be the mere result of association established in the
course of experience, but rather the global awareness of my posture in the
inter-sensory world, a “form” in Gestalt psychology’s sense of the word.29
There is a global form which gives unity to the different senses distributed
over the body-subject, such that these different bodily senses can coordinate
with one another to achieve the execution of an action. But how is this
global form generated? The body-subject is a subject-in-the-world who is
polarized by her tasks to be accomplished through her non-representational
body movement. “Psychologists often say that the body schema is dynamic.
Reduced to a precise sense, this term means that my body appears to me as
a posture toward a certain task, actual or possible.”30
With the concept of body-schema, not only can we understand the
possibility of basic bodily gestures, which the practical necessity of daily life
requires us to accomplish at the pre-reflective level, we can also better
which is best understood as arising out of his body-schema, and not from a
cognitivist or intellectualist mode of thinking, the only mode of thinking
that Duke Huan has in mind. Thus both the examples of Cook Ding and
Wheelwright Pian show the anti-cognitivist or anti-intellectualist approach
of Zhuangzi.
Confucius was observing the cataract at Spinebridge where the water fell
from a height of thirty fathoms and the mist swirled for forty tricents. No
tortoise, crocodile, fish, or turtle could swim there. Spotting an older man
swimming in the water, Confucius thought that he must have suffered
some misfortune and wished to die. So he had his disciples line up along
the current to rescue the man. But after the man had gone several hundred
yards, he came out by himself. With disheveled hair, he was walking along
singing and enjoying himself beneath the embankment. Confucius
followed after the man and inquired of him, saying: I thought you were a
ghost but when I looked more closely, I saw that you are a man. May I
ask if you have a special way for treading the water? No, I have no special
way. I began with what was innate, grew up with my nature, and
completed my destiny. I enter the very center of the whirlpools and emerge
as a companion of the torrent. I follow along with the way of the water
and do not impose myself on it. That is how I do my treading. What do
you mean by began with what was innate, grew up with your nature, and
completed your destiny? asked Confucius. I was born among these hills
and feel secure among them—that is what is innate. I grew up in the
water and feel secure in it— that is my nature. I do not know why I am
like this, yet that is how I am—that is my destiny.32
6. Conclusion
In the reading and analysis exposed above, we have shown that certain
passages of the Zhuangzi text demonstrate a meticulous sense of method.
Zhuangzi emphasizes the necessary change of attitude, namely the getting
rid of prejudices and pre-reflective mundane opinions and interests in order
Notes
1 A.C. Graham, Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China
(La Salle: Open Court, 1989), 176.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid., 178.
4 Ibid., 180.
5 Ibid., 186.
6 See, for example, Paul Kjellberg and P.J. Ivanhoe, eds., Essays on Skepticism,
Relativism, and Ethics in the Zhuangzi (Albany: State University of New York
Press, 1996).
7 One of the first full English translations of the Zhuangzi was published by
Herbert Giles under the title: Chuang Tzu, Mystic, Moralist, and Social
Reformer (Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh, 1889). James Legge (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1891), the other early English translator of the Zhuangzi, uses
the generic title of “The Sacred Books of China” before the specific title of
“The Texts of Daoism” in his translation of the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi.
Legge thus presented these works as belonging to religion, comparable to
works of Christianity. Martin Buber was among the few Western thinkers in
the early twentieth century to have presented Zhuangzi as a philosopher in his
own right. This is expressed in the “Afterword” to his 1910 German translation
(Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1910) of the Zhuangzi (Reden und Gleichnisse des
Tschuang-tse): “Zhuangzi may perhaps be compared to the entirety of Greek
philosophy, which completed that which he only adumbrated—the Greek
philosophy which expanded the teachings from the sphere of the real life to the
sphere of the explanation of the world, of the knowable, and of the ideological
construct, and thereby indeed created something very individual and very
powerful of its own.” Buber, 103. For an in-depth discussion of Buber’s relation
to Zhuangzi, see Jonathan Herman, I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with
Chuang Tzu (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996).
8 Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen, III. “Zur Lehre von den Ganzen
und Teilen,” II/1 (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1901), 225–93. For the
English translation, see Edmund Husserl, Logical Investigations, J.N. Findlay
(trans.), vol. 2, Investigation III, “On the Theory of Wholes and Parts”
(London: Routledge, 1970), 435–89.
9 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la Perception (Paris: Gallimard,
1945), 12. For the English translation, see Maurice Merleau-Ponty,
Phenomenology of Perception, Donald Landes (trans.), (London: Routledge,
2012), 6.
10 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Signes (Paris: Gallimard, 1960), 202. For the English
translation, see Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Signs, Richard McCleary (trans.),
(Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 160 (translation modified).
11 Ibid.
12 Husserl himself has explained this motto in different places. In the Logical
Investigations, he writes: “Meanings inspired only by remote, confused,
inauthentic intuitions—if by any intuitions at all—are not enough: we must go
back to the ‘things themselves.’ ” Husserl, Logical Investigations, vol. 2, 252;
German original: “Bedeutungen, die nur von entfernten, verschwommenen,
uneigentlichen Anschauungen—wenn überhaupt von irgendwelchen—belebt
sind, können uns nicht genug tun. Wir wollen auf die ‘Sachen selbst’
zurückgehen.” Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen, Bd. II.1, 6. In Ideas Pertaining
to a Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book (The
Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1982), Husserl says: “But to judge rationally or scientifically
about things signifies to conform to the things themselves or to go from words
and opinions back to the things themselves, to consult them in their self-givenness
and to set aside all prejudices alien to them.” Husserl, Ideas, 35; German original:
“Vernünftig oder wissenschaftlich über Sachen urteilen, das heißt aber, sich nach
den Sachen selbst richten, bzw. von den Reden und Meinungen auf die Sachen
selbst zurückgehen, sie in ihrer Selbstgegebenheit befragen und alle sachfremden
Vorurteile beiseitetun.” See Edmund Husserl, Ideen zu einer reinen
Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch, Allgemeine
Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag,
1913), 35. See Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer
Verlag, 1927), 27. For the English translation, see Martin Heidegger, Being and
Time, John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson (trans.), (New York: SCM Press,
1962), 50. See also Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la Perception, iii /
Phenomenology of Perception, 8.
13 Husserl, Ideen I, 56–7 / Ideas I, 60–1.
14 Ibid., 139–41 / Ibid., 167–70.
15 For the Chinese, see Guying Chen, ed., Modern Commentary and Annotations
to the Zhuangzi (Hong Kong: Zhonghua Shuju, 1997), 49. Although the
translations in this chapter are my own, I have benefitted from those by Victor
Mair, A.C. Graham, Burton Watson, and Brook Ziporyn.
16 For the Chinese, see Chen, Zhuangzi, 184.
17 Ibid., 117.
18 Ibid., 205.
19 See Kwok-Ying Lau and Thomas Nenon, eds., “Aesthetic Attitude and
Phenomenological Attitude: From Zhu Guangqian to Husserl,” in Logos and
Aisthesis: Phenomenology and the Arts (Cham: Springer, 2020).
20 See Kwok-Ying Lau, Phenomenology and Intercultural Understanding: Toward
a New Cultural Flesh (Dordrecht: Springer, 2016), 56–9.
21 Edmund Husserl, Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die
Transzendentale Phänomenologie (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1954), 140. For the
English translation, see Edmund Husserl, The Crisis of European Sciences and
Transcendental Phenomenology, David Carr (ed.) (Evanston: Northwestern
University Press, 1970), 137.
22 The step-by-step sense of progression of the technique of self-cultivation
leading to enlightenment by the Dao is also shown in the following descriptive
passage in chapter 6 (dazongshi 大宗師): “Wherever did you learn all this?
asked Sir Sunflower of Southunc. I learned it from the son of Assistant Ink.
Assistant Ink’s son learned it from the grandson of Ready Reciter. Ready
Reciter’s grandson learned it from Bright Vision. Bright Vision learned it from
Agreeable Apprehension. Agreeable Apprehension learned it from Ascetic
Service. Ascetic Service learned it from Sighing Chanter. Sighing Chanter
learned it from Murky Mediation. Murky Meditation learned it from
Contemplating the Unique. Contemplating the Unique learned it from
Commencing Doubt.” For the Chinese, see Chen, 184. This step-by-step
process of progression can be retrieved in the following order: from writing
or script (fu mo 副墨) back to reading aloud (ge song 洛誦), then back to
understanding (zhan ming 瞻明), then back to apprehension by the mind
(nie xu 聶許), then back to ascetic practice (xu yi 需役), then back to chanting
admiration before the universe (yu ou 於謳), then back to meditation (xuan
ming 玄冥), then back to contemplation of Unique (can liao 參寥), then back
to the commencing doubt (yi shi 疑始). It is interesting to note that the term
“the commencing doubt” reminds us of the thaumazein, i.e., wonder and
puzzlement as the origin of the philosophical attitude in Plato and Aristotle.
23 For the Chinese text, see Chen, 95–6.
24 Paul Ricoeur, Soi-Même comme un Autre (Paris: Seuil, 1990), 137–66.
25 Ibid., 167–98.
26 For a concise presentation and critical evaluation of Ricoeur’s contribution to
the issue of personal identity, see Philippe Cabestan, “Qui suis-je? Identité-ipse,
identité-idem et identité narrative,” Le Philosophoire, 1 (2015): 151–60.
27 Merleau-Ponty, Signes, 217 / Signs, 172.
28 Ibid.
29 Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la Perception, 115–16 / Phenomenology of
Perception, 102.
30 Ibid.
31 For the Chinese text, see Chen, 357–8.
32 For the Chinese text, see Chen, 486–7.
33 See Jan Patočka, “La Surcivilization et son Conflit,” in Liberté et Sacrifice:
Ecrits Politiques (Grenoble: Jérôme Millon, 1990), 99–177.
34 Chen, 228.
35 Merleau-Ponty, Signes, 228 / Signs, 180.
References
Buber, Martin. (1991), Chinese Tales, Zhuangzi: Sayings and Parables and Chinese
Ghost and Love Stories, Alex Page (trans.), London: Humanities Press
International.
Cabestan, Philippe. (2015), “Qui suis-je? Identité-ipse, identité-idem et identité
narrative,” Le Philosophoire, 1: 151–60.
Chen, Guying, ed. (1997), Modern Commentary and Annotations to the Zhuangzi
莊子今注今譯, Hong Kong: Zhonghua Shuju.
Graham, A.C. (1989), Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient
China, La Salle: Open Court.
Heidegger, Martin. (1927), Sein und Zeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Heidegger, Martin. (1962), Being and Time, John Macquarrie and Edward
Robinson (trans.), New York: SCM Press.
Herman, Jonathan. (1996), I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with Chuang Tzu,
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Husserl, Edmund. (1901), Logische Untersuchungen, III. “Zur Lehre von den
Ganzen und Teilen,” II/1, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Husserl, Edmund. (1913), Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und
Phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch, Allgemeine Einführung in die
reine Phänomenologie, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Husserl, Edmund. (1954), Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die
Transzendentale Phänomenologie, W. Biemel (ed.), The Hague: M. Nijhoff.
Husserl, Edmund. (1970), The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental
Phenomenology, David Carr (ed.), Evanston: Northwestern University
Press.
Husserl, Edmund. (1970), Logical Investigations, vol. 2, Investigation III, “On the
Theory of Wholes and Parts,” J.N. Findlay (trans.), London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Husserl, Edmund. (1982), Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and
Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book, General Introduction to Pure
Phenomenology, F. Kersten (trans.), The Hague: M. Nijhoff.
Kjellberg, Paul and P.J. Ivanhoe, eds. (1996), Essays on Skepticism, Relativism, and
Ethics in the Zhuangzi, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Lau, Kwok-Ying. (2016), Phenomenology and Intercultural Understanding:
Toward a New Cultural Flesh, in Contributions to Phenomenology (vol. 87),
Dordrecht: Springer.
Lau, Kwok-Ying and Thomas Nenon, eds. (2020), “Aesthetic Attitude and
Phenomenological Attitude: From Zhu Guangqian to Husserl,” in Logos and
Aisthesis: Phenomenology and the Arts, Cham: Springer.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1945), Phénoménologie de la Perception, Paris:
Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1960), Signes, Paris: Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1964), Signs, Richard McCleary (trans.), Evanston:
Northwestern University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (2012), Phenomenology of Perception, Donald Landes
(trans.), London: Routledge.
Patočka, Jan. (1990), “La Surcivilization et son Conflit,” in Liberté et Sacrifice:
Ecrits Politiques, Erika Abrams (trans.), Grenoble: Jérôme Millon.
Ricoeur, Paul. (1990), Soi-même comme un Autre, Paris: Seuil.
Eric S. Nelson
(healing) and heilig (holy), Buber identified the “holy” with that which
heals the wound, and with a restorative becoming whole in the face of
brokenness.62
This “turning” is a process of transformation: in the movement through
negativity and opposition, there is no “return” to or pure reproduction of
the condition of the spontaneous automatic law that is enacted in things.
Buber maintained that the law’s fulfillment occurs in the genuine love and
responsiveness of the living communicative kingdom.63 Buber’s dao proceeds
from the law to love via the moment of human brokenness. The dao is an
anarchistic originary ethics of the good in and for itself.64
What is the logic of the dao’s motility? Laozi’s Daoism does not promote
a return as a reduction to the primitive in Buber’s account. The Daodejing’s
language of return is a discourse of transitions and transformations that
does not abandon humanity in the movement toward fulfillment in the dao
nor multiplicity in the return to the one.65 Given this attention to transitions
and transformation, and resting in mobility, the Daodejing offers models of
dynamic relational wholes instead of a monistic static unitary oneness.
How then should the notion of “return” be interpreted? Fan 反 (return,
reversal) only appears four times in the standard version of the Daodejing
(chapters 25, 40, 65, and 78). Due to its being identified with the movement
of the dao itself in chapter 40 (反者道之動;弱者道之用), it serves as a
central concept in interpreting the Daodejing’s logic or dialectic. As noted
previously, in Buber’s exposition return (Rückkehr) signifies turning. It is
misinterpreted when taken as a mere arrival back at a prior or previous
point in a series; it is a point of transition, a turning around (Umkehr) as
culmination.66
Thus to briefly introduce the examples of the newborn and the seed
considered in Buber’s commentary: (1) The Daodejing’s images of the
flexibility, spontaneity, and vitality of the newborn baby do not entail a
return to that initial state; and (2) Nor is it a return to the state of being
a seed in the origin. Comparing it to the primordial light (Urlicht) described
in the Talmud, “return” is a resting in the origin and the movement of the
whole relational nexus of things.67 “Return” is for that reason not a
reduction to an embryonic or primeval original condition. The movement of
the dao through reversals and returns is the formation by humans (sphere
two) of a fulfilled life in the good (sphere three) that is no longer merely law
(sphere one).
the Daodejing is employed as a model for how the West can encounter and
learn from the teaching of the dao.68 As in his other works examining early
pre-Qin Daoism, Buber repeatedly—in 1909, 1924, and 1928—connects the
Daoism of Laozi and Zhuangzi to the dilemmas of modern technological
civilization, contending that the teaching of the way addresses the
contemporary European precisely in this sense of “turning around” rather
than demanding a return to a supposedly more primitive and primordial
way of living.69
Further, as Buber noted in reflecting on chapter 29 of the Daodejing, this
“turning around” toward the thing and the other is a practical question. The
possibility of genuine community is not only confronted with individual
self-absorption and estranged separation. Buber presciently noted that it is
all the more needful given the willfulness and sickness of peoples in
nationalism and racism.70
Can classical Chinese philosophies such as Confucianism and Daoism
resolve the destructiveness of the modern West, as experienced by Buber in
the crisis-ridden Weimar Republic? Buber explicitly began “China and Us”
with the argument that they cannot.71 Nevertheless, he added, Daoist wuwei
is the teaching that Western modernity, in its willfulness and will to dominate
persons and things, lacks and is in need of learning in its own sense and
context in dialogue with this Chinese discourse.72 To this extent, intercultural
dialogue is a moment in this “turning around,” revealing previously
unrecognized paths. This is not a return, in the narrow sense of the concept,
as the path is to be encountered and enacted anew.
In addition to intercultural communication and philosophizing, a turn to
a phenomenology of the encounter and the communicative relational event
is required. Buber described in his 1924 discussion, explored in this
chapter, how the Daodejing provides a model of the encounter. This poses
us with a significant question in Buber’s analysis: how can we encounter
what the Daodejing is modeling? Buber concluded his 1928 essay with
the demand to encounter for ourselves the reality exhibited in the
Daodejing and that is indicated by expressions such as “non-doing.”73 What
is called for to “turn around” is the encounter with things and persons
themselves, and therefore a philosophy that is a phenomenology of the
encounter itself. Buber’s classic work I and Thou is such a phenomenology
of the encounter in which self and other are recognized as fundamentally
relational realities.
In conclusion, Buber’s interpretations of the Daodejing (examined in this
chapter) as well as the Zhuangzi (which was not discussed here) remain an
evocative historical example of intercultural hermeneutics. His readers
can trace how Buber honed his own unique philosophical project in
intercultural dialogue with Daoist and a diverse variety of philosophical and
religious discourses. His art of philosophy, as an interculturally informed
phenomenology of the encounter and the communicative event, can itself be
interpreted as an exemplary model to be enacted and transformed anew.
Notes
1 As I demonstrated in my book: Eric S. Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist
Philosophy in Early Twentieth-Century German Thought (London:
Bloomsbury Academic, 2017).
2 Originally published as: Martin Buber, Reden und Gleichnisse des Tschuang-
Tse (Leipzig: Insel, 1910); and Martin Buber, Chinesische Geister- und
Liebesgeschichten (Frankfurt: Rütten und Loening, 1911).
3 See Martin Buber, Werke I: Schriften zur Philosophie (Kösel: Lambert
Schneider, 1962), 8. There are a number of works exploring Buber’s
engagement with Daoism and Chinese thought: Irene Eber, “Martin Buber
and Taoism,” Monumenta Serica, 42.1 (1994): 445–64; Maurice Friedman,
“Martin Buber and Asia,” Philosophy East and West, 26.4 (1976): 411–26;
Jonathan Herman, I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with Chuang Tzu
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996); and, in this volume,
Jason Wirth, “Martin Buber’s Dao.” On the fascination with China among
Central European Jewish intellectuals, see Shuangzhi Li, “‘Wenn ich ein
Chinese wäre’: The Austrian-Jewish Imagination of China around 1900
revisited,” Austrian Studies, 24 (2016): 94–108.
4 See Israel Aharon Ben-Yosef, “Confucianism and Taoism in The Star of
Redemption,” Journal for the Study of Religion, 1.2 (1988): 25–36; Nelson,
Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy, 213–15.
5 Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy, 115.
6 Although Buber did not accept the artificial and ahistorical division between a
“philosophical” and “religious” Daoism, he does distinguish “early” and “late”
Daoist texts. His few remarks on later Daoist sources such as the Book of
Purity and Rest (Qingjing Jing 清靜經) indicate that he considered them
limited and narrower in their understanding of the Way and language. See
Martin Buber, Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie und Literatur, ed. Irene
Eber (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2013), 117.
7 Note that I examine these issues in the early Daoist context further, and contest
the dichotomy of humanism and anti-humanism, in: Eric S. Nelson,
“Questioning Dao: Skepticism, Mysticism, and Ethics in the Zhuangzi,”
International Journal of the Asian Philosophical Association, 1 (2008): 5–19;
Eric S. Nelson, “The Human and the Inhuman: Ethics and Religion in the
Zhuangzi,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 41.S1 (2014): 723–39.
8 On early Daoist notions of the thing, see the helpful analyses of David Chai,
“Meontological Generativity: A Daoist Reading of the Thing,” Philosophy East
and West, 64.2 (2014): 303–18; Sai-Hang Kwok, “Zhuangzi’s Philosophy of
Thing,” Asian Philosophy, 26.4 (2016): 294–310.
9 Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy, 109–29.
10 See Irene Eber’s introduction in Buber, Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie, 23.
11 Compare Jeffrey S. Librett, “Neo-Romantic Modernism and Daoism: Martin
Buber on the ‘Teaching’ as Fulfilment,” in China in the German Enlightenment,
eds. Bettina Brandt and Daniel Purdy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,
2016), 181–98.
37 Ibid., 232.
38 Ibid., 230, 270.
39 Ibid., 230, 234.
40 Ibid., 230.
41 Ibid., 231.
42 Ibid., 235.
43 Ibid., 243–4.
44 Ibid., 234.
45 Ibid., 231, 235.
46 Martin Buber, The Letters of Martin Buber: A Life of Dialogue (Syracuse:
Syracuse University Press, 1996), 275.
47 On Buber’s “theopolitics” or “political theology,” see Samuel H. Brody, Martin
Buber’s Theopolitics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018).
48 Buber, “BMB” in Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie, 255.
49 Ibid., 231.
50 Ibid., 254–5, 266.
51 Ibid., 255.
52 Ibid., 251.
53 Martin Buber, Pointing the Way: Collected Essays, ed. and trans. Maurice S.
Friedman (New York: Harper and Row, 1957), 163. See also Nelson, Chinese
and Buddhist Philosophy, 36.
54 Buber, “BMB” in Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie, 235, 238.
55 Ibid., 238.
56 Ibid., 242.
57 Ibid., 250.
58 Ibid., 242–3.
59 On Daoism and social critique, see Mario Wenning, “Daoism as Critical
Theory,” Comparative Philosophy, 2 (2011): 50–71.
60 Buber, “BMB” in Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie, 247, 250.
61 Ibid., 250.
62 Ibid., 257.
63 Ibid., 247–8.
64 Ibid., 250–1.
65 Ibid., 240.
66 Ibid., 263.
67 Ibid., 240–1.
68 Ibid., 263.
69 See chapter four of Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy, for an account
of the thematic of Daoism and technology in Buber and Heidegger.
70 Buber, “BMB” in Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie, 261.
References
Ben-Yosef, Israel Aharon. (1988), “Confucianism and Taoism in The Star of
Redemption,” Journal for the Study of Religion, 1.2: 25–36.
Brody, Samuel H. (2018), Martin Buber’s Theopolitics, Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 2018.
Buber, Martin. (1910), Reden und Gleichnisse des Tschuang-Tse, Leipzig: Insel.
Buber, Martin. (1911), Chinesische Geister und Liebesgeschichten, Frankfurt:
Rütten und Loening.
Buber, Martin. (1942), “Lao Tzu al hashilton,” Hapo’el Hatsa’ir, 35: 6–8.
Buber, Martin. (1957), Pointing the Way: Collected Essays, Maurice S. Friedman
(ed. and trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Buber, Martin. (1962), Werke I: Schriften zur Philosophie, Kösel: Lambert
Schneider.
Buber, Martin. (1996), The Letters of Martin Buber: A Life of Dialogue, Syracuse:
Syracuse University Press.
Buber, Martin. (2002), Ich und Du, Stuttgart: Reclam.
Buber, Martin. (2013), Mythos und Mystik: Frühe Religionswissenschaftliche
Schriften, David Groiser (ed.), Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus.
Buber, Martin. (2013), Schriften zur Chinesischen Philosophie und Literatur, Irene
Eber (ed.), Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus.
Chai, David. (2014), “Meontological Generativity: A Daoist Reading of the Thing,”
Philosophy East and West, 64.2: 303–18.
Eber, Irene. (1994), “Martin Buber and Taoism,” Monumenta Serica, 42.1: 445–64.
Friedman, Maurice. (1976), “Martin Buber and Asia,” Philosophy East and West,
26.4: 411–26.
Gueye, Cheikh M. (2011), Ethical Personalism, Berlin: De Gruyter.
Herman, Jonathan. (1996), I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with Chuang Tzu,
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kwok, Sai-Hang. (2016), “Zhuangzi’s Philosophy of Thing,” Asian Philosophy,
26.4: 294–310.
Levinas, Emmanuel. (1994), Outside the Subject, Michael B. Smith (trans.),
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Li, Shuangzhi. (2016), “ ‘Wenn ich ein Chinese wäre’: The Austrian-Jewish
Imagination of China around 1900 revisited,” Austrian Studies, 24: 94–108.
Librett, Jeffrey S. (2016), “Neo-Romantic Modernism and Daoism: Martin Buber
on the ‘Teaching’ as Fulfilment,” in Bettina Brandt and Daniel Purdy (eds.),
China in the German Enlightenment, 181–97. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press.
Nelson, Eric S. (2008), “Questioning Dao: Skepticism, Mysticism, and Ethics in
the Zhuangzi,” International Journal of the Asian Philosophical Association,
1: 5–19.
Nelson, Eric S. (2014), “The Human and the Inhuman: Ethics and Religion in the
Zhuangzi,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 41.S1: 723–39.
Nelson, Eric S. (2017), Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy in Early Twentieth-
Century German Thought, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Nelson, Eric S. (2020), Levinas, Adorno, and the Ethics of the Material Other,
Albany: State University of New York Press.
von Strauss, Victor. (1870), Lao Tse’s Tao Te King, Leipzig: Verlag von Friedrich
Fleischer.
Wenning, Mario. (2011), “Daoism as Critical Theory,” Comparative Philosophy,
2: 50–71.
Wilhelm, Richard. (1921), Tao te King: Das Buch des Alten vom Sinn und Leben,
Jena: E. Diederichs.
Jason M. Wirth
1. Introduction
What are we to make of Martin Buber’s (1878–1965) occasional but
enduring, although somewhat apprehensive, relationship to the Daoist
teaching of Laozi 老子 and Zhuangzi 莊子? The grounds for answering such
a question demand that we first articulate the grounds upon which we
would evaluate any of his claims.
The difficulty of doing so is unavoidable with Buber’s seminal work, Ich
und Du (1923). Are its claims true to lived experience? This approach would
relegate the issue at the heart of the book to the confines of the I–It attitude
in which an inquiring subject evaluates the veracity of a given object. “The
world as experience belongs to the grounding word [Grundwort] I-It.”1 Does
one then seek recourse to some privileged mystical access? This would ignore
the work’s trenchant critique of mystical absorption and its sublation (in the
sense of Hegel’s Aufhebung) of the I–You relationship. Moreover, nothing is
gained by replacing the experiences that govern the I–It relationship with a
special class of “mysterious” experiences. “O furtiveness without mystery
[Heimlichkeit ohne Geheimnis], o amassment of information! It, it, it!”2
Does one then have to assume some sort of fidelity to a particular religion in
order to render Buber’s approach credible, even intelligible? Buber counters
that he is speaking of a reality that no religion owns, including Judaism.
Even language itself is fraught with obstacles. “Pathetic are those who leave
the grounding word unspoken, but miserable are those who instead of that
address these ideas with a concept or a catchphrase as if that were their
name.”3 One rather can only utter the grounding word—I and You—“with
the whole of being [mit dem ganzen Wesen].”4
It is not that I experience something in particular or that I endeavor to
transcend the particularities of experience by making an effort with the
fullness of my own being. Rather, the fullness of my being stands in
relationship to the bi-fold fullness of being itself. One neither sinks into this
fullness nor absorbs it. Out of the abstract petrification of the subject–object
relation emerges the intimacy of non-dual unity—not oneness, but a bi-fold
unity that, as such, is always two without resolution into a higher unity.
Although this opposition cannot be reconciled, it is not because its poles are
discrete, self-standing, and separable. They are themselves by virtue of each
other. Buber’s great work hints at and speaks from this all-encompassing
non-duality, that is always two, but also not just two, but somehow one, in
an effort to awaken the reader to its living reality and to the reality of its life.
My emphasis on a language of non-duality also intentionally evokes
major strands of Asian thought, most of which too often languish in
disciplines like religious studies or area studies and still struggle in many
circles to establish that they matter as philosophy. Buber’s own thought
exemplifies this challenge to philosophy in three ways: (1) It does not
originate in discursivity, personal experience, or the intellectual assent that
comes with religious belief; (2) As such, it is steeped in non-dual approaches,
ancient and contemporary; and (3) Standing in relationship to these
traditions, Buber’s “philosophy” challenges us to reconsider both the ground
upon which we engage non-dual traditions philosophically and what it
means to evaluate them. In what follows, I will engage this problem via a
case study: Martin Buber’s formative and lifelong relationship to the Daoism
of Laozi and Zhuangzi.
This is not to imply, however, that his engagement with the Zhuangzi is a
kind of Chinese mirror in which he gazes upon his own thinking or unduly
appropriates Chinese thought for his own purposes. As Jonathan Herman
argues, “his linguistic and historical limitations do not prevent him from
evincing a tremendous sensitivity to the subtleties of Chinese thought.”8
How then do we characterize the manner of this confrontation when it is
neither an early exercise in Sinology nor an assimilation of the Zhuangzi
into Buber’s early Hassidic ontology?
values lack certainty, even though each person tends to falsely assume the
universality of their own language and considers their own concepts and
values to be the concepts and the values. The zhenren does not look at the
ten thousand things as various things, but rather regards them from the
unity of Erkenntnis, from the non-discriminating lens of the Dao-Lehre or
Dao-teaching. It elevates each thing that it “contemplates [betrachtet] out of
its appearance [Erscheinung] and into being [Sein].”23
Such contemplation is an all-embracing love and affirmation, above
and beyond all contradictions and oppositions. Beyond the partiality and
deontological obedience of justice and ethical commands, the zhenren’s
“love” spontaneously, effortlessly, and inclusively affirms the whole of
being out of its own shared unity. It is “entirely free and unrestricted”
and knows “no choice,” and, as such, is unbedingt.24 The complex
deployment of the latter term merits brief embellishment. One detects three
interlocking threads in Buber’s use of this standard term from German
Idealism: (1) in the conventional sense, we can say this is unconditional
love,” ἀγάπη, love that loves without restriction; (2) it does so because it is
unconditioned, that is, absolute, love; it is not love that emerges from
human motives or from conditional appearances; it loves the conditioned
from an unconditioned perspective; in a different idiom, we could say that
it loves the world the way God loves the world; and (3) it is literally a love
that has not been turned into a thing (Ding) and, as such, it incipiently
anticipates Ich und Du where love absolutely loves all beings (Wesen)
intimately and relationally, that is, not as things and not in an I–It relationship.
Love is not a motivated activity, but rather the wuwei 無爲 of unity where
all beings (Wesen) are affirmed intimately and spontaneously both in their
unknowable depths and in their dynamically evolving manifestations. Love
absolutely and without action affirms the ten thousand—all Wesen—as
expressions of Dao.
and the ten thousand, that is, refining not only their non-duality, but also the
manner of their unified duality. He does this in at least two critical ways: a
criticism of mystical immersion and an ontological engagement with the
problem of good and evil.
into Hebrew chapters 17, 29, 30, 31, 57, 58, 66, and 67 of the Daodejing,
chapters that eschew the use of violence in governance.46
From this we can already detect Buber’s second refinement, namely, his
efforts to suggest what he called in 1952 “the foundation of an ontological
ethics.”47 Robert Allinson argues that Buber’s Hasidic perspective that “one
should right wrongs” points to “what is lacking in all Daoist ones: One must
include the other in the unity, then one has a good influence on him.”48 Just
as love cannot be blind, only hate can, and just as the I–You relationship
cannot be partial, only the I–It one can, the good is born of a recuperation
of the unity of I–You. Buber did not regard anything as intrinsically evil, nor
is ethics a simpleminded dedication to doing good things and avoiding evil
things. “Evil is lack of direction,”49 born of the abundance of human
contingency and possibility. Good is the directionality of actions. From the
Daoist perspective, one could say that it is to love the ten thousand things
just as they are and, as such, to take responsibility for them, even to enter, as
the mature Buber does, into dialogue with both them and Dao itself. From
the Buddhist perspective it is suchness, things just as they are, and hence a
calling to embrace and illuminate them as such. From the Hindu perspective,
every Atman expresses Brahman and hence is precious and worthy of
cherishment and care.
7. Conclusion
The directionless plight of Adam and Eve in the Garden, of the little minded
ones before the zhenren, or the somnolence of the Buddhist marketplace, is
however not yet radical evil. This happens when flowing water freezes and
we take ownership of ourselves and lock the world into the I–It in order to
put it at our disposal. The unitary spiritual ethicality of Daoism, of
Heraclitus, of Advaita Vedanta, of Buddha Dharma, yields not only to the
directionless confusion of the marketplace, but more deeply to the radical
evil of sophistry. Soon, humans, as Protagoras infamously held, are the
measure of all things, and Thrasymachus’s world where might makes right
begins to hold sway.50 This is the great lie at the heart of radical evil: to
knowingly and willingly bear false witness to being. As we teeter on the
verge of ecological collapse, what better description of the prevailing global
order than Buber’s reflections on Psalm 12:51 “they spin a way of thinking
for them which they themselves do not follow . . . Liars as it were manufacture
a special heart, an apparatus which functions with the greatest appearance
of naturalness, from which lies well up to the ‘smooth lips’ like spontaneous
utterances of experience and insight . . . Their tongues maintain them in
their superiority.”52
In response to our irresponsibility to each other and the Earth itself,
Buber hints at the wuwei at the heart not only of his exploration of what is
living in Daoist teaching, but in world philosophy itself.
Notes
1 In general, I have relied on existing translations, although sometimes I slightly
emend them. Buber’s language is quite singular and poetic and nowhere is this
more prevalent than in Ich und Du. It is easy to lose the force of his singular
locutions and so for this work I have relied on my own translations, and have
used the original edition: Martin Buber, Ich und Du (Leipzig: Insel Verlag,
1923), 12.
2 Buber, Ich und Du, 12.
3 Ibid., 21.
4 Ibid., 9.
5 Martin Buber, “Die Lehre vom Tao,” Hinweise: Gesammelte Essays (Zürich:
Manesse Verlag, 1953), 44–83. There are at least three versions of this essay in
English translation: Jonathan Herman’s I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter
with Chuang Tzu; Maurice Friedman’s 1957 edition of Pointing the Way:
Collected Essays, drawn from the 1953 collection, Hinweise: Gesammelte
Essays; and the version found in Martin Buber, Chinese Tales, Zhuangzi:
Sayings and Parables and Chinese Ghost and Love Stories, trans. Alex Page
(New Jersey and London: Humanities Press International, 1991). I cite the
Page translation, often with emendations and alterations, followed by the
German citation.
6 Thomas Merton, The Way of Zhuangzi (New York: New Directions, 1965).
Merton called his own efforts “free interpretive readings.” See Merton, 9.
7 Buber, Chinese Tales, 3.
8 Jonathan R. Herman, I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with Chuang Tzu
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), 127–8.
9 Irene Eber, “Martin Buber and Taoism,” Monumenta Serica, 42 (1994): 454.
10 Ibid., 464.
11 Eric S. Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy in Early Twentieth-Century
German Thought (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), 117.
12 Buber, Chinese Tales, 86; Buber, “Die Lehre vom Tao,” 52
13 Ibid.; Ibid.
14 Ibid.; Ibid., 53.
15 Laozi tends to speak of the shengren 聖人 or sage. Zhuangzi’s zhenren was
also later used to translate arhat, a Buddhist awakened person. I think it
imprudent to suggest a great gap between shengren and zhenren and to hold
the former as somehow more grounded.
16 Buber, Chinese Tales, 84; Buber, “Die Lehre vom Tao,” 50; also, Buber, Chinese
Tales, 89; Buber, “Die Lehre vom Tao,” 57
17 Ibid., 84; Ibid., 49.
18 Ibid., 85; Ibid., 51.
19 See Buber, Chinese Tales, 89; Buber, “Die Lehre vom Tao,” 57. I here differ
from the Page translation, which elides the presence of an utterly solitary I
(before its division into I and You) before the days of creation.
References
Allinson, Robert. (2016), “Zhuangzi and Buber in Dialogue: A Lesson in Practicing
Integrative Philosophy,” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy, 15.4:
547–62.
Buber, Martin. (1923), Ich und Du, Leipzig: Insel Verlag.
Buber, Martin. (1942), “Lao Tzu al hashilton,” Hapo’el Hatsa’ir, 35: 6–8.
Buber, Martin. (1952), “Religion and Ethics,” in Eugene Kamenka and Maurice S.
Friedman (trans.), Eclipse of God: Studies in the Relation Between Religion and
Philosophy, 83–99, New York: Harper.
Buber, Martin. (1953), “Die Lehre vom Tao,” Hinweise: Gesammelte Essays,
44–83, Zürich: Manesse Verlag.
Buber, Martin. (1953), Good and Evil, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Buber, Martin. (1957), Pointing the Way: Collected Essays, Maurice S. Friedman
(ed. and trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Buber, Martin. (1991), Chinese Tales, Zhuangzi: Sayings and Parables and Chinese
Ghost and Love Stories, Alex Page (trans.), London: Humanities Press
International.
Eber, Irene. (1994), “Martin Buber and Taoism,” Monumenta Serica, 42: 445–64.
Herman, Jonathan. (1996), I and Tao: Martin Buber’s Encounter with Chuang Tzu,
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Huston, Phil. (2007), Martin Buber’s Journey to Presence, New York: Fordham
University Press.
Merton, Thomas. (1965), The Way of Zhuangzi, New York: New Directions.
Nāgārjuna. (2013), The Middle Way (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā), Mark Siderits and
Shoˉryū Katsura (ed. and trans.), Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Nelson, Eric S. (2017), Chinese and Buddhist Philosophy in Early Twentieth-
Century German Thought, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Mario Wenning
motivation was thus no longer to get to the things themselves, as the rallying
cry of the phenomenological movement had proclaimed, but to transcend
one’s cultural origin and reach out to the culturally diverse origins of those
universal “things” which, for Jaspers, pointed to global potentials of human
existence.
While Husserl and Heidegger responded to the crisis of the European
sciences by turning to the origin of Western metaphysics, Jaspers’s pursuit
is more radical and self-critical.14 He digs to the roots of the reflection on
the human condition in the three cultural realms of China, India, and the
Mediterranean, to broaden the scope of human possibilities and transcend
cultural provincialism. However, it would be a mistake to reduce Jaspers’s
reach beyond the traditional focus on Europe to be limited to the specific
war and postwar disillusionment in Europe. Unearthing European as well as
non-European origins presents nothing short of a methodological revolution
or paradigm shift. From the perspective of comparative philosophizing,
Jaspers’s approach offers important insights for an intercultural philosophy
that is historically informed and normatively sound. The starting point for
this quest was not primarily archeological curiosity or the sense of Oriental
exoticism that has often guided the turn to Asia for European philosophers.
The systematic study of the traditions of Asia—especially Buddhism,
Confucianism, and Daoism—was guided by a genuine philosophical interest
with a double purpose.
First, this interest was aimed at discovering a new perspective on the
limits of Europe. In many respects, Jaspers was a precursor to the ongoing
process of provincializing the narrow set of categories and experiences that
have influenced the development of Europe and contributed to its arrogance.
As Aleida Assmann has argued, “the axial age has the same meaning for the
history of mankind as the ‘limit situation’ has for an individual’s life span.”15
A focus on non-European cultural origins allows one to first become aware
of the constitutive limits and thereby the very meaning of one’s particular
historical conditions. Decentering European philosophy from its alleged
singular beginnings in Greek antiquity and its pretension to absoluteness
allows the exposure of the claim to singularity of Occidental rationality as
an unwarranted imposition. Jaspers was convinced that this cosmopolitan
project would lead to a better understanding of Europe and pave the way
for a peaceful and liberal world order, a project that is timely at a historical
moment where countries and cultural spheres are claiming their distinctive
moral identities against such cosmopolitan approaches. Tracing the
methodological origin and impact of the axial age theorem to his conception
of limit situations, Aleida Assmann also exposes the limits of Jaspers’s
project. In particular, Jaspers singles out only three cultural centers and
ignores other potential candidates (Egypt, Mesoamerican cultures, etc.).
He also adopts certain Hegelian assumptions in considering the axial
breakthrough as a progress over pre-axial cultures. Moreover, according to
Jaspers’s historico-existential ontology, Assmann diagnoses, “the cultural
search for such a ground has become after the end of classical metaphysics.
He continues in a prophetic tone of voice:
Was aber alle verehren, das darf man nicht ungestraft beiseitesetzen. O
Einöde, habe ich noch nicht deine Mitte erreicht? Die Menschen der
Menge sind strahlend wie bei der Feier großer Feste, Wie wenn man im
Frühling auf die Türme steigt: Ich allein bin unschlüssig, noch ohne
Zeichen für mein Handeln. Wie ein Kindlein, das noch nicht lachen kann!
Ein müder Wanderer, der keine Heimat hat! Die Menschen der Menge
leben alle im Überfluß: Ich allein bin wie verlassen! Wahrlich, ich habe
das Herz eines Toren! Chaos, ach Chaos! Die Menschen der Welt sind
hell, so hell: Ich allein bin wie trübe! Die Menschen der Welt sind so
wißbegierig: Ich allein bin traurig, so traurig! Unruhig, ach, als das Meer!
Umhergetrieben, ach, als einer der nirgends weilt! Die Menschen der
Menge haben alle etwas zu tun: Ich allein bin müßig, wie ein Taugenichts!
Ich allein bin anders als die Menschen: Denn ich halte wert die spendende
Mutter.28
That which everyone praises one may not set aside without punishment.
O solitude, have I not reached your center yet? Men of the crowd are
radiant as if celebrating a great festival, as if climbing the towers in the
spring: I alone am undecided, yet without a sign for my action. As if being
a child, which is not yet capable of laughing! A weary wanderer without
a home! Men of the crowd all live in abundance: I alone am as if deserted!
Truly, I have the heart of a fool! Chaos, oh chaos! Men of the world are
bright, so bright: I alone am as if obscure! Men of the world are so thirsty
for knowledge: I alone am sad, so sad! Anxious, oh, as the ocean. Drifting
around like someone who never rests. Men of the crowd always have
something to do: I alone am idle like a good-for-nothing. I alone am
different from men: because I hold dear the nourishing mother.
way of linguistic denotation, since it is both prior and beyond the subject–
object distinction. This absolute is, Jaspers claims in a rather indiscriminate
manner echoing Richard Wilhelm, referred to as God or Dao. It cannot be
fabricated or even evoked or followed at will. The mystic cultivates non-
action in order to break the spell of willful action. For Jaspers, this emphasis
on non-action and passivity is problematic when it is being absolutized and
is being transformed into a method. Adopting passivity as a method leads to
an irresponsible combination of escapism and quietism that is expressed in
the mystic’s conscious or unconscious, taking leave from logic, and revealed
in his insincere attitude toward existential dissonance and self-contradictions:
That they do not invoke reasons, principles, and tasks and that, therefore,
no discussion is possible with them . . . Rather they invoke a real
community with God as well as God’s will, which reveals itself to them in
an incomprehensible way . . . The mystic does not develop, he suspends
development in favor of timelessness.36
5. Conclusion
By way of conclusion and outlook, let me anticipate likely objections to
Jaspers’s engagement with Laozi as it has been laid out in this chapter. It
could be argued that Jaspers’s view of the limits of Laozi indirectly exposes
the limits of Jaspers’s own philosophical faith in the possibility of world-
philosophy. In their greatness—as well as in their ultimate failure—these
human sages appear as distant yardsticks of a mysterious past, which is
presented by Jaspers as an eternal present and future. The axial age is thereby
situated beyond time and space. Equally detached from concrete historical
conditions and from the effective history the received texts have given rise
to, these paradigmatic sages are also infinitely distant from the contemporary
reader who, Jaspers suggests, is nevertheless to consider them as contemporary
interlocutors. Indeed, Jaspers’s evocation of a communication in an empire
of solitary spirits can be perceived as an ahistorical and transcultural form
of philosophical elitism. The gates to the empire of spirits threaten to remain
closed for ordinary men and women who can, at best, peek through them
and admire these geniuses from afar and in awe.
One may also object that Jaspers is indebted to some of the Eurocentric
assumptions his cosmopolitan project intends to overcome, or at least put
into perspective. Not only does he apply Judeo-Christian, ancient Greek,
and existentialist categories in his evaluation of classical Chinese texts and
authors; the philosophical approach developed in The Origin and Goal of
History is hardly imaginable outside of an eschatological view of a history
with a clear beginning and end that is foreign to classical China. Moreover,
sinologists are likely to contend, Jaspers’s idealization of the historical
personality of Laozi and the emphasis on the legendary account of his
conversation with Confucius separates the imagined authors writing in their
name from actual historical fact, and ignores a complex textual corpus and
the receptive history it has given rise to.
Notes
1 While it is frequently mentioned that Heidegger attempted to translate the
Daodejing 道德經 with the Chinese student Paul Shih-Yi Hsiao (Xiao Shiyi 蕭
師毅), he eventually dismissed this plan due to what he considered to be an
unbridgeable linguistic gap. Heidegger rejected the transformative potential of
a philosophical turn to and engagement with the East in an interview with Der
Spiegel in 1966: “Only in the same place where the modern technical world
took its origin can we also prepare a conversion (Umkehr) of it. In other
words, this cannot happen by taking over Zen-Buddhism or other Eastern
experiences of the word.” See Martin Heidegger, “‘Only a God Can Save Us’:
The Spiegel Interview (1966),” in Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker, ed.
Thomas Sheehan (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2010), 62. In
contrast, Jaspers emphasizes in a letter to Heidegger that he (Jaspers) considers
the opening up to the East essential in spite of barriers to “knowing very well
that I cannot truly (eigentlich) penetrate, but am inspired in a mysterious way
from there.” See Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers, Briefwechsel 1920-1963
(Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1990), 178. On Heidegger’s relationship to Asian
philosophy in general and Daoism in particular, see: Graham Parkes, ed.,
Heidegger and Asian Thought (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1987);
Reinhard May, Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His
Work, trans. Graham Parkes (London: Routledge, 1996); Guenter Wohlfahrt,
“Heidegger and Laozi: Wu (Nothing): On chapter 11 of the Daodejing,”
Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 30.1 (2003): 39–59; Lin Ma, Heidegger on
East-West Dialogue: Anticipating the Event (New York: Routledge, 2007); Bret
W. Davis, “Heidegger and Asian Philosophy,” in The Bloomsbury Companion
to Heidegger, eds. François Raffoul and Eric S. Nelson (New York: Bloomsbury
Academic, 2013), 459–71; David Chai, “Nothingness and the Clearing:
Heidegger, Daoism and the Quest for Primal Clarity,” The Review of
Metaphysics, 67.3 (2014): 583–601; and Mario Wenning, “Heidegger and
Zhuangzi on the Nonhuman: Towards a Transcultural Critique of (Post)
Humanism,” in Rethinking the Non-Human, eds. Chloë Taylor and Neil Dalal
(New York: Routledge, 2014), 93–111. Noteworthy exceptions to the general
omission of Jaspers’s engagement with Daoism include Young-Do Chung, “Karl
Jaspers und Laotse: Parallelen zwischen den Begriffen Transzendenz und Tao,”
Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Karl-Jaspers-Gesellschaft, 11 (1998): 28–43;
Jean-Claude Gens, “Jaspers’ Begegnung mit und sein Verhältnis zu China,” in
10 As stated in a letter Jaspers wrote to Hannah Arendt on January 8th, 1947. See
Hannah Arendt and Karl Jaspers, Briefwechsel: 1926–1969 (Munich: Piper,
2001), 108.
11 For a nuanced reconstruction of the reception of Chinese philosophy in early
twentieth-century Germany, see Eric S. Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist
Philosophy in Early Twentieth-Century German Thought (London:
Bloomsbury Academic, 2017). For the specific transformation of Daoist motifs
in Western philosophy see J.J. Clarke, The Dao of the West: Western
Transformations of Daoist Thought (London: Routledge, 2000).
12 See Emmanuel Levinas, Le temps et l’autre (Montepellier: Fata Morgana, 1979);
Theo Sundermeier, Den Fremden verstehen: Eine praktische Hermeneutik
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1996); and Bernhard Waldenfels, Grundmotive einer
Phänomenologie des Fremden (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2016).
13 Hannah Arendt calls the axial age “the great historical discovery” and the
“foundation” of Jaspers’s philosophy of history. See Hannah Arendt, “Laudatio
auf Karl Jaspers,” in Menschen in finsteren Zeiten, ed. Ursula Ludz (Munich:
Piper, 2002), 109. For an overview of research perspectives invoking the axial
age, see Hans Joas, Was ist die Achsenzeit? Eine Wissenschaftliche Debatte als
Diskurs über Transzendenz (Basel: Schwabe, 2014); Johann Arnason, S.N.
Eisenstadt, and Björn Wittrock, eds., Axial Civilizations and World History
(Leiden: Brill, 2005); Robert Bellah and Hans Joas, eds., The Axial Age and its
Consequences (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012); Mario
Wenning, “Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Zweiten Achsenzeit”, Jahrbuch der
Österreichischen Jaspers Gesellschaft, 30 (2017): 111–29; and Jan Assmann,
Achsenzeit: Eine Archäologie der Moderne (Munich: Beck, 2018).
14 On Husserl’s and Heidegger’s eurocentrism, see Nelson, Chinese and Buddhist
Philosophy, chapters 5 and 6.
15 Aleida Assmann, “Einheit und Vielfalt in der Geschichte: Jaspers’ Begriff der
Achsenzeit neu betrachtet,” in Kulturen der Achsenzeit, ed. S.N. Eisenstadt
(Frankfurt: Suhrkamp), vol. 2: 334.
16 Ibid., 337.
17 Jaspers, Rechenschaft und Ausblick, 237–8.
18 See François Jullien, Detour and Access: Strategies of Meaning in China and
Greece (New York: Zone Books, 2004).
19 This is a slight variation of Jürgen Habermas’s (1988) description of Jaspers’s
project as a search for “the unity of reason within the diversity of its voices.”
20 Jaspers, Rechenschaft und Ausblick, 340.
21 Ibid.
22 Assmann, Achsenzeit, 165.
23 Ibid., 281.
24 One attempt to build on Jaspers’s conception of the axial age is that of Jürgen
Habermas’s recent work in which he, drawing on Jaspers, reconstructs the
normative preconditions for a post-secular world society. See Jürgen
Habermas, Nachmetaphysisches Denken II: Aufsätze und Repliken (Berlin:
Suhrkamp, 2012).
References
Arendt, Hannah. (2002), “Laudatio auf Karl Jaspers,” in Ursula Ludz (ed.),
Menschen in finsteren Zeiten, 101–16, Munich: Piper.
Arendt, Hannah and Karl Jaspers. (1993), Correspondence 1926–1969, San Diego:
Harvest.
Arendt, Hannah and Karl Jaspers. (2001), Briefwechsel: 1926–1969, Munich:
Piper.
Arnason, Johann, S.N. Eisenstadt, and Björn Wittrock, eds. (2005), Axial
Civilizations and World History, Leiden: Brill.
Assmann, Aleida. (1992), “Einheit und Vielfalt in der Geschichte: Jaspers’ Begriff
der Achsenzeit neu betrachtet,” in S.N. Eisenstadt (ed.), Kulturen der Achsenzeit,
vol. 2, 330–40, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Assmann, Jan. (2018), Achsenzeit: Eine Archäologie der Moderne, Munich: Beck.
Bellah, Robert and Hans Joas, eds. (2012), The Axial Age and its Consequences,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cesana, Andreas, ed. (2016), Cross-Cultural Conflicts and Communication:
Rethinking Jaspers’ Philosophy Today, Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.
Chai, David. (2014), “Nothingness and the Clearing: Heidegger, Daoism and the
Quest for Primal Clarity,” The Review of Metaphysics, 67.3: 583–601.
Chung, Young-Do. (1998), “Karl Jaspers und Laotse: Parallelen zwischen den
Begriffen Transzendenz und Tao,” Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Karl-Jaspers-
Gesellschaft, 11: 28–43.
Clarke, J.J. (2000), The Dao of the West: Western Transformations of Daoist
Thought, London: Routledge.
Davis, Bret W. (2013), “Heidegger and Asian Philosophy,” in François Raffoul and
Eric S. Nelson (eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Heidegger, 459–71, New
York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Eisenstadt, Shmuel Noah. (2000), “Multiple Modernities,” Daedalus, 129.1: 1–29.
Gens, Jean-Claude. (2016), “Jaspers’ Begegnung mit und sein Verhältnis zu China,”
in Andreas Cesana (ed.), Cross-Cultural Conflicts and Communication:
Rethinking Jaspers’ Philosophy Today, 161–71, Würzburg: Königshausen and
Neumann.
Habermas, Jürgen. (1988), “Die Einheit der Vernunft in der Vielheit ihrer
Stimmen,” Merkur, 467: 1–14.
Habermas, Jürgen. (2012), Nachmetaphysisches Denken II: Aufsätze und Repliken,
Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Heidegger, Martin. (2010), “‘Only a God Can Save Us’: The Spiegel Interview
(1966),” in Thomas Sheehan (ed.), Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker, 45–68,
New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Heidegger, Martin and Karl Jaspers. (1990), Briefwechsel 1920–1963, Walter
Biemel und Hans Saner (eds.), Frankfurt: Klostermann.
Jaspers, Karl. (1919), Psychologie der Weltanschauungen, Berlin: Springer.
Jaspers, Karl. (1947), Von der Wahrheit, Munich: Piper.
Jaspers, Karl. (1949), Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte, Munich: Piper.
Jaspers, Karl. (1951), Rechenschaft und Ausblick: Reden und Aufsätze, Munich: Piper.
Jaspers, Karl. (1956), Philosophie, Berlin: Springer.
Jaspers, Karl. (1957), Die großen Philosophen, Munich: Piper.
Jaspers, Karl. (1963), “Lionardo als Philosoph,” in Philosophie und Welt: Reden
und Aufsätze, 211–72, Munich: Piper.
Jaspers, Karl. (1999), Die geistige Situation der Zeit, Berlin: de Gruyter.
Jaspers, Karl, Dominic Kaegi, and Reiner Wiehl, eds. (2016), Korrespondenzen,
Göttingen: Wallstein.
Jaspers, Karl and Heinrich Zimmer. (1993), “Briefe 1929–1939,” Jahrbuch der
Österreichischen Karl-Jaspers-Gesellschaft, 6: 7–32.
Joas, Hans. (2014), Was ist die Achsenzeit? Eine Wissenschaftliche Debatte als
Diskurs über Transzendenz, Basel: Schwabe.
Jullien, François. (2004), Detour and Access: Strategies of Meaning in China and
Greece, Sophie Hawkes (trans.), New York: Zone Books.
Kroll, Jörn. (forthcoming), “Open Sky: Open Society: Zhuangzi and Jaspers on
Understanding and Communicating without Closure,” Existenz.
Levinas, Emmanuel. (1979), Le temps et l’autre, Montepellier: Fata Morgana.
Ludz, Ursula, ed. (2002), Menschen in finsteren Zeiten, Munich: Piper.
Ma, Lin. (2007), Heidegger on East-West Dialogue: Anticipating the Event, New
York: Routledge.
May, Reinhard. (1996), Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His
Work, Graham Parkes (trans.), London: Routledge.
Meyer, Thomas. (2017), “Mit leichter Hand,” Zeit, 23 February. Available online
at: https://www.zeit.de/2017/07/karl-jaspers-korrespondenzen-gesamtausgabe-
philosophie
Nakayama, Tsuyoshi. (1998), “Jaspers und die Mystik,” in Richard Wisser and
Leonard Ehrlich (eds.), Karl Jaspers’s Philosophy: Rooted in the Present,
Paradigm for the Future, 179–84, Würzburg: Könighausen and Neumann.
Mature
Encounters:
A Forest of Ideas
Bret W. Davis
1. Introduction
The intent of this chapter is to unfold—to bring to light and further
develop—the largely implicit dialogue that Heidegger began with the two
foundational texts of Daoism, the Daodejing 道德經 and the Zhuangzi 莊
子. Heidegger’s familiarity with these Daoist texts goes back to at least the
1920s. In fact, one of the key expressions of Being and Time (1927), “In-
der-Welt-sein” (being-in-the-world), was coined not by Heidegger but by the
German translators of Okakura Kakuzo’s The Book of Tea,1 a copy of
which Heidegger reportedly received in 1919.2 In a chapter entitled “Daoism
and Zennism,” Okakura wrote that “Chinese historians have always spoken
of Daoism as the ‘art of being in the world,’ ”3 a phrase that Marguerite and
Ulrich Steindorff rendered into German as “Kunst des In-der-Welt-Seins.”4
Heidegger revealed his familiarity with Martin Buber’s 1910 edition of the
Zhuangzi in 1930 when in conversation he referred to the story of the happy
fish in chapter 17 of the Zhuangzi in order to explain his understanding of
being-with (Mitsein) others.5
As interesting as such evidence of early contact may be, Heidegger’s
dialogue with Daoist thought really gets underway in the pages—even
if kept mostly between the lines—of Country Path Conversations (Feldweg-
Gespräche), a set of three dialogues Heidegger composed at the end of
the war (1944–45).6 Country Path Conversations is a pivotal text in
Heidegger’s path of thought; in it one finds Heidegger critically rethinking
of what Heidegger once called “the inevitable dialogue with the East Asian
world.”9
It is the prerogative of great poets, thinkers, and artists that they alone
are capable of letting themselves be influenced . . . Whatever the Greats
give they do not have by way of their originality, but rather from another
origin [Ursprung], one that makes them sensitive to the “influence” of
whatever is originary in other Greats.24
estimate. One thinks of the centuries it required for the radically different
traditions that stem from Athens and Jerusalem to be interwoven in Europe,
and for the Indian tradition of Buddhism to be appropriated by the Chinese.
To be sure, advances in transportation and communication technologies
have drastically sped up the pace of cross-cultural encounters. But speed and
ease are hardly any guarantee of depth; in fact, they may well be inimical to
it. As Heidegger would say, technological facility can make cross-cultural
encounters facile, and geographical proximity is no guarantee of genuine
nearness.
In any case, Heidegger did not only cautiously approach but on a number
of occasions boldly ventured into dialogue with East Asian thought. Most
explicitly in “From a Conversation on Language,” and mostly implicitly in
texts such as Country Path Conversations, we find Heidegger not just
preparing for but actually engaging in what he called “the inevitable dialogue
with the East Asian world.”
Heidegger’s longstanding interest in Daoism led to his collaboration with
a Chinese scholar who had translated the Daodejing into Italian. After
meeting Heidegger in 1942, Paul Shih-Yi Hsiao (Xiao Shiyi 蕭師毅) recalls
having “Now and then . . . handed him parts of my translation of the
[Daodejing] into Italian,” and during the summer break of 1946, their plans
to work on a collaborative translation of the Daodejing into German
materialized when Hsiao “met [with Heidegger] regularly every Saturday in
his cabin on top of Todtnauberg.”34 They began to translate the “chapters
concerning the [dao],” but only managed to translate eight such chapters,
and unfortunately their translations have not been recovered. Years later,
Heidegger reportedly said that it was Hsiao who did not want to continue.
This may have been because of what Hsiao referred to as “a slight anxiety
that Heidegger’s notes might perhaps go beyond what is called for in a
translation.”35
Heidegger himself wavered on whether to venture to translate or to
respect the untranslatability of terms such as dao. At one point in his later
writings Heidegger refers to dao—alongside logos and his own Ereignis—as
an example of a “guiding word” that cannot be translated.36 Yet elsewhere
Heidegger is not only willing to translated dao as Weg, he even goes so far
as to say that “The Dao could thus be the Way that moves everything [der
alles be-wëgende Weg], that from which we might first be able to think what
reason, mind, meaning, logos properly—i.e., from their own essence—mean
to say.”37 In the word dao, Heidegger seems to have heard, on the cusp of an
originary silence, an indication of what he calls in his “From a Conversation
on Language” the “single source” that makes dialogue and translation
among even the most different languages possible.38
For our part, triangulating between the sibling languages of German
and English on the one hand and Chinese, a language belonging to a very
different language family on the other, we need to take care that we remain
hermeneutically attuned to both the perilous pitfalls and fecund possibilities
walling action of the walls and their surfaces. The walls and surfaces are
merely what is radiated out by that original open realm.” Setting it on par
with Plato’s cave allegory, and in place of “the guiding notion of light,”
Heidegger uses the emptiness of the jug as a way to speak not just of the
essence of a thing but of “the openness of the open” as a “clearing for self-
concealment.”48 Here the emptiness of the jug is used as an allegory for the
recessive yet vital dimension not just of a being (ein Seiendes) but of the
open-region of being (Sein) or, as Heidegger writes using an archaic spelling,
of beyng (Seyn). In order to emphasize being’s difference from beings,
Heidegger sometimes refers to it as “the nothing” (das Nichts).49 The nothing
is not a nihilistic privation of being but rather, as Heidegger writes in
Contributions to Philosophy, “the essential trembling of beyng itself and
therefore is more than any being.”50
In order to emphasize the temporally dynamic character of being,
Heidegger sometimes refers to it as “the way.” Daoists also understand the
dao in terms of an indeterminate nothingness or emptiness that engenders
and harbors determinate beings. In the Daodejing we are told that “beings
are engendered by the nothing [you sheng yu wu 有生於無],” and that “the
dao is an empty vessel [chong 沖], yet use can never fill up its abyssal depth.”51
Among the many other references to the dao in the Daodejing, let me
single out two more passages for their resonances with Heidegger’s later
thought:
The Great Way flows everywhere, able to move left and right. The ten
thousand things depend on it for their existence and it does not reject
them. It accomplishes its work while remaining anonymous. It clothes
and nourishes the ten thousand things, without becoming their master
[zhu 主].52
The Way never coercively does anything [wuwei], and yet it leaves nothing
undone. If princes and kings can abide by this, the ten thousand things
will naturally develop of their own accord.53
scholar: Which indeed means that it brings us onto that path which
seems to be nothing other than releasement [Gelassenheit] itself.
Daoist sages are able to see the movement of returning to stillness that is
the way-being of beings because they have attuned themselves to the stillness
that is at the heart of this movement.
At the end of the second of the Country Path Conversations, the Teacher
says: “We have long been moving ourselves [uns . . . bewegen] on a between-
field [Zwischenfeld],” and the conversation continues:
What is the “it” which moves us? Evidently it is the field-path of the
open-region. Yet if we understand this path or this region as a being, perhaps
as the highest being, then we are still thinking in terms of an ontic opposition
of beings and thus in terms of the activity or passivity of one being vis-à-vis
another. What is at stake is not a matter of obeying the Will of the Way—
as if it were a transcendent subject who lords its will over us—but rather a
matter of attuning ourselves to and thus participating in its spontaneous
movement.
Heidegger accordingly distances his notion of Gelassenheit from the use
of this term in Christianity, where its sense remains within “the domain of
the will.” For German Christian mystics, Gelassenheit signifies the serene
state of mind attained through a releasement from one’s own egoistic
self-will and a corresponding releasement unto the Will of God. Even
Meister Eckhart, according to Heidegger, thinks of Gelassenheit within the
domain of the will.66 The Scholar in the first of Heidegger’s Country Path
Conversations says that “what we are calling releasement evidently does not
mean the casting off of sinful selfishness and the letting go of self-will in
favor of the divine will.”67 He later asks, “but how is releasement related to
what is not a willing?” and the following exchange ensues:
sage: After all that we have said of the bringing to abide of the abiding
expanse, of the letting rest in the return, and of the regioning of the
open-region, the open-region can hardly be spoken of as will.
scholar: That the open-region’s enregioning and bethinging
essentially exclude themselves from all effecting and causing already
shows how decisively all that pertains to the will is foreign to them.68
[T]he way belongs in what we are here calling the region. Intimatingly
said, the region is the regioning of the clearing that frees, wherein all that
is cleared and freed, and all that conceals itself, together attain the free
expanse. The freeing and sheltering character of this region is the way
making movement [Be-wëgung] that yields those ways that belong to the
region . . . The region is first a region in that it provides ways. The region
moves [us] along a way [Sie be-wëgt] . . . The word “way” probably is a
primordial word [Urwort] of language that speaks to the meditative mind
of humans. The guiding word in the poetic thinking of Laozi is Dao and
means “properly” way . . . The Dao could thus be the Way that moves
everything [der alles be-wëgende Weg] . . . the Way that draws everything
onto its path. All is Way.69
The Daodejing tells us that all beings depend on the Way and yet, “being
always without desire [wuyu 無欲],” it “does not become their master.”70
Insofar as one is “capable of non-coercive action [wuwei],” we are told, one
is able to “lead without lording over.”71 In doing so we are following the
manner of the dao, whose movement is compared with the inconspicuous
power of water that “benefits the ten thousand things without contending
with them.”72 People are to model themselves on the Earth, which in turn
models itself on Heaven, which in turn models itself on the Way. The Way,
for its part (which is not in fact a part but rather the dynamic whole in
which everything else participates), models itself only on its own “natural
spontaneity” (ziran 自然).73
For Heidegger, in order to return to an attentive attunement to the
natural movement of this non-willful Way, one has to let go of the will
(Wille). As a transitional step toward this releasement of and from the will,
one must paradoxically “will non-willing.” That is to say, one must move
through and beyond “willfully renouncing willing” in order to release
oneself to a mode of being that “does not at all pertain to the will.”74
Analogously, the Daodejing says that “sages desire to be without desire” in
order to return to the Way that is “always without desires.”75 In this freedom
from desire, the sage returns to a state of “unhewn wood [pu 樸].”76 “Without
desire one attains peaceful tranquility, and the world settles itself of its own
accord.”77
Yet this peaceful tranquility does not issue in an inactive quietism. Rather,
as we have seen Heidegger say, this “rest is the hearth and reign of all
movement.”78 By attuning ourselves to this hearth of stillness in the midst of
movement, we can stir up a different kind of motivation. By returning to the
root, the empty hub of the wheel of the Way, we can allow our desires to
stem from and be guided by that movement of the Way which is itself
without desire. The opening chapter of the Daodejing, after saying that the
nameless dao is the beginning of Heaven and Earth—i.e., of the primal
distinction that opens up a world of differences—says that the named dao is
the mother of the myriad things. It then tells us that whenever we are
“without desire we observe its mystery,” and whenever we are “with desire
we observe its delimited manifestations.”79
The crucial questions for practice as well as thought are: How can we
move among the Way’s manifestations without masking over its mystery?
How can we remain attuned to the heart of stillness that allows for the most
efficacious movement? In the words of the Daodejing that Heidegger
especially asked to be written out in decorative calligraphy: “Who can,
settling the muddy, gradually make it clear? Who can, stirring the tranquil,
gradually bring it to life?”80 How can we act without a subjective will and
without subjecting ourselves to a transcendent Will? How can we let
ourselves into an engagement (Sicheinlassen) with a letting-be (Seinlassen)
that, it turns out, is the very source of our releasement (Gelassenheit)? How
can we let our desires stem from and remain rooted in that which is without
desire? In refining such questions and thereby intimating answers, both the
Daodejing and Heidegger’s path of thought bring us, step by step and again
and again, to the limits of what we are able to think and say; in other words,
to the limits as well as to the delimiting power of language.
Historically, the Daoist sage has been described as a member of the daojia
道家, that is, one who belongs to the school, family, or house of the dao.
Only one who houses and is housed by, embodies and inhabits the Way is
able to serve as a guide to others. A guide is intimately familiar with a way
and thus can lead others down it, as distinct from a “scholar” who studies
pathways traveled by others or a “scientist” who follows an established
method of knowing and measuring things objectively. Heidegger uses the
term Weiser in the first of the Country Path Conversations in the sense of
a “guide” rather than its typical meaning of a “wise man” who possesses
wisdom (Weisheit). Heidegger’s Weiser is someone who can show (weisen)
the way, the manner (Weise) of doing something, in this case the manner of
proceeding down a path of thought that leads into unknown regions.81
In contrast to previous and contemporaneous uses of the term dao to
mean a method of achieving some end, whether it be a method of farming
or of cultivating virtue, the Daoists used the word somewhat ironically
to indicate that which cannot be reduced to a set method to achieve a
preconceived end. The ultimate Way precedes and exceeds our human
intentions to contrive and control. How, then, can the Way be known or
shown when it is not a specific method for achieving a definite end? Like
Heidegger’s Weiser, the Daoist sage does not seek to objectively know and
definitively name the ultimate Way, but rather to “go-into-nearness” to it
and let it guide our thought and action.82
The Daodejing famously begins by saying that “the dao that can be said
[literally dao-ed] is not the abiding dao.”83 This inceptual text of Chinese
thought begins, in contrast to the Gospel of John, with the self-effacing
claim that in the beginning was not the Word, that the Way and the Life
cannot be identified with the Logos. And yet, the opening chapter of the
Daodejing goes on to say, this nameless origin of the primal distinction
between Heaven and Earth, when named, is the mother of the ten thousand
things. Language allows things to be; but language itself springs from
something nameless, something that can only be named with a pseudonym,
such as “dao.”
There is something nebulous yet whole, born before Heaven and Earth.
Tranquil and void, it stands alone, unchanging. Going around everywhere,
it is never exhausted or endangered. It may be regarded as the mother of
all under Heaven. I do not know its name. Sheltering it with a pseudonym,
I call it dao.84
the concealed dimension of being (or beyng, Seyn) which enables that
linguistic disclosure to eventuate in the first place.
In the “Essence of Language,” Heidegger meditates on Stefan George’s
lines: “So I renounce and sadly see: Where word breaks off no thing may be
[So lernt ich traurig den verzicht: Kein ding sei wo das wort gebricht].”85 It
is language that allows things to be. Language is the house of being. Poetry
is the temple in the center of the “precinct” (Bezirk, templum) wherein
the determinations of a clearing of unconcealment are first marked off
(bezirkt, temnein, tempus) by the word.86 Language, in other words,
domesticates being; it allows the world to be meaningful and thus
makes our lives livable. But what about the wider field, the open-region,
in which the poetic precinct is marked off and the linguistic house of
being is built? What about what Maurice Merleau-Ponty calls “the wild
region” (la région sauvage) that frees one from being a prisoner in one’s
own culture and enables one to communicate with other cultures?87
If “language is the house of being,”88 as Heidegger claims, a house is a
home, replies the Zen philosopher Ueda Shizuteru (1926–2019), only in the
process of leaving and returning to it; otherwise it is a bird cage or a prison
house.89
Heidegger, in fact, does not simply equate language with being. Language,
he says, is “the language of being like clouds are the clouds of the sky.”90 The
clouds in this image are like visible, delimited configurations of the wide
open—and in itself invisible—sky. The blueness of the sky is, as it were, a
trace, a subtle determination, that hints back into the pure openness of
the sky, the sky that withdraws from all perception, like the darkness of a
starless and moonless night. The poet can name being only because he or she
“reaches sooner into the abyss” of this starless night. “The poet could never
go through the experience he undergoes with the word if the experience
were not attuned to sadness [die Trauer], to the mood of releasement
[Gelassenheit] into the nearness of what is withdrawn but at the same time
held in reserve for an originary advent.”91
In the final paragraph of the first of his solitary manuscripts, Contributions
to Philosophy, Heidegger writes: “Language is grounded in silence.”92 Near
the beginning of that text he writes: “Words fail us; they do so originally and
not merely occasionally.” And yet, he goes on to say, “this failing us is the
inceptual condition for the self-unfolding possibility of an original (poetic)
naming of being.” He then asks himself: “When will such a time come?”93
Some eight years later, in a note included in the supplements to the first of
the Country Path Conversations, he writes: “Of all goods the most dangerous
is language, because it cannot keep safe the unspoken—(not because it veils
too much, but rather because it divulges too much).”94 Language is the house
of being; it domesticates a world for us. But in doing so it covers over the
originary ground of silence; speaking inevitably betrays the unspoken. And
yet, in an adjacent note Heidegger writes: “Where else could the unspoken
be purely kept, heeded, other than in true conversation.”95
Older Man: In other words, that factual sense of reality which they
claim lets humans first stand with both feet squarely on the ground.
Younger Man: That sense which drives peoples to secure a place for
themselves on the earth, a place on which they can stand fast and
The unnecessary is not what we need in the manner of all the daily
necessities that drive us about in the business and busyness of our lives in a
world of predetermined meanings and goals. Rather, “the unnecessary
requires us and our essence like the sound . . . requires the instrument which
gives it off.”102 It would be the calling of the Germans to “learn to know the
necessity of the unnecessary and, as learners, teach it to the peoples [den
Völkern] . . . And for a long time this may perhaps be the sole content of our
teaching: the urgent need and the necessity of the unnecessary.”103
It is thus all the more striking that, in this context of speaking of the
special historical endowment and task of the German people, the Older
Man concludes the conversation by quoting a conversation he claims to
have copied down in his student days from “a historiological account of
Chinese philosophy”:
We generally attend only to the limited ground directly under our feet at
this moment, that is, only to what is deemed useful or necessary in our
current horizon of understanding; and we understand and use things
according to their position in the network of meanings, according to the role
they play in our concerned dealings with things. But “is it not absurd to
judge [the tree] by whether it does what is or is not called for by its position,
by what role it happens to play?”111
According to the early Heidegger of Being and Time, we understand
beings first and foremost as “equipment” (Zeuge) in a world, that is to say,
in a “totality of significations” structured by a chain of “in-order-to” links
leading to an ultimate “for-the-sake-of-which” (Umwillen), the life-project
projected by our will (Wille).112 However, in Country Path Conversations,
having turned away from the voluntaristic undertones of his earlier thought
to a fundamental attunement of Gelassenheit, in implicit consonance with
the Daoist wuwei and with explicit reference to a passage from the Zhuangzi,
Heidegger now stresses that without the surrounding undisclosed and
apparently “useless” and “unnecessary” expanse of earth113—the “open-
region” or “open nowhere”—we could not move, that is to say, we
could not look out beyond our current horizons to open up new ways
of understanding and experiencing the world. And this includes new
ways of seeing trees. Rather than first and foremost seeing the forest as
“timber,”114 the later Heidegger calls on us “for once to let [the tree]
stand where it stands . . . Because to this day, thought has never let the
tree stand where it stands.”115 Where it stands, Zhuangzi would say, is not
In this sense, all our scientific and everyday dealings with “facts,” with
things as they are disclosed within our current horizons of understanding,
depend on philosophy’s wider outlook, which must remain ever attuned to
the usefulness of the useless. Lost in the rat race of managing apparent
necessities, we cover over the more profound need we have of “the
unnecessary.” “Running around amidst beings” (Umtrieben an das
Seiende),117 we remain oblivious of our primal relation to being (Sein).
Around the time he was writing Country Path Conversations (the last
conversation bears the date May 8, 1945), Heidegger wrote to his wife, in a
letter dated March 2, 1945: “On the essence of the unnecessary (which is
what I mean by ‘Being’) I recently found the short conversation between
two Chinese thinkers that I’m copying out for you.”118 On June 27 of that
year, just before departing Messkirch and Wildenstein to return to what had
become occupied Freiburg, Heidegger gave a talk entitled “Poverty” (Die
Armut) to a small audience, a talk in which he developed further the idea of
the necessity of the unnecessary by way of interpreting the following two
passages from Hölderlin’s essays:
Neither from himself alone, nor solely from the objects that surround
him, can the human being have the experience that more than a mechanical
course, that a spirit, a god, is in the world. But he can indeed experience
this in a more lively relationship, exalted above pressing needs, in which
“he” stands with that which surrounds him.120
not arise out of a necessity or need [Not], that is, what does not arise out
of compulsion [Zwang], but out of what is free and open [das Freie] . . .
What is freed is what is released into its essence and protected from the
compulsion of necessity. What frees in freedom averts or overturns in
advance necessity. Freedom is that which [in this sense] turns necessity
[Das Freiende der Freiheit wendet zum voraus die Not ab oder um. Die
Freiheit ist das die Not Wenden] . . . Freedom means averting or
overturning necessity [Not-Wendigkeit], insofar as what frees is not
necessitated by a need and is thus what is unnecessary . . . Now, beyng is
what lets each and every being be what it is and how it is, and is thus
precisely that which frees, that which lets each being rest in its essence,
thus safeguarding it.121
When the Way is seen clearly, that just means that it has not really been
encountered, so debate about it is no match for silence. The Way cannot
be learned, so hearing about it is no match for plugging up your ears . . .
The Way cannot be heard; whatever is heard is not it. The Way cannot be
seen; whatever is seen is not it. The Way cannot be spoken; whatever is
spoken is not it. Know that what forms has no form. The Way corresponds
to no name.126
The Way, the dao, as we have seen both the Daodejing and Heidegger say,
is a provisional name for the unspoken “mystery of mysteries” that allows
“thoughtful saying.” Hence, what is at issue is a circulating movement
between silence and speech or, as the Zen philosopher Ueda Shizuteru puts
it, an irreducible movement of “exiting language and exiting into language.”127
The Daodejing says that “inversion [fan 反] is the movement of the dao,”128
and in the Zhuangzi we read of “the Great Return [da gui 大歸]”: “The
formless goes into form; the formed goes back into the formlessness.”129
This circulating movement characterizes the relation between silent
attentiveness to the nameless and nebulous dynamic whole of the dao and
linguistic determinations of its provisional parts.
According to the Zhuangzi, words ensnare us; in using them we all too
easily end up getting used by them, caught in our own trap. “A fish trap is
there for the fish. When you have got hold of the fish, you forget the trap . . .
Words are there for the intent. When you have got hold of the intent, you
forget the words.”130 This is why Zhuangzi wants to have a few words with
a man who has forgotten words. His emphasis is on the forgetting of the
words in order to return to the fluidity of the dao, in order to freely move
with and within the movement of the world. Words come and go as a natural
part of this spontaneous process, but in holding on to them they end up
holding us up.
The understanding of the ancients really got all the way there. Where had
it arrived? To the point where, for some, there never had existed so-called
things . . . Next, there were those for whom things existed but never any
definite boundaries between them. Next were those for whom there were
boundaries but never any rights and wrongs. When rights and wrongs
waxed bright, the Way began to wane.145
Notes
1 Kakuzo Okakura, Das Buch vom Tee (Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1919).
2 Tomonobu Imamichi, In Search of Wisdom: One Philosopher’s Journey,
(Tokyo: LTCB International Library, 2004), 123.
3 Kakuzo Okakura, Cha no hon / The Book of Tea (Tokyo: Kodansha, 1998),
92–3. “Taoism” has been changed to “Daoism.” The Japanese translator of
Okakura’s English text renders this phrase as yo ni sho suru no jutsu 世に処す
るの術, a Japanese parsing of the Chinese-Japanese (kanbun 漢文) phrase
Okakura presumably had in mind, sho sei jutsu 処世術.
4 Okakura, Das Buch vom Tee, chapter 3; accessed online at: http://gutenberg.
spiegel.de/buch/das-buch-vom-tee-9294/4. See Dennis Hirota, “Okakura
Tenshin’s Conception of ‘Being in the World’,” Ryūkoku Daigaku Ronshū , 478
(2011): 11. Hirota claims that the phrase chushi 處世 (Japanese: shosei; note
that 処 is the modern Japanese simplification of 處) can be found in chapter 9
of the Zhuangzi, but I have been unable to find it there or indeed anywhere
in the Zhuangzi. It seems to have first appeared in later texts such as
the Huainanzi (second century bce). See https://ctext.org/pre-qin-and-
han?searchu=處世. David Chai informs me that the term subsequently
appeared in many of the traditional commentaries on the Zhuangzi, starting
with Cheng Xuanying 成玄英 (fl. seventh century).
5 Heinrich Wiegand Petzet, Encounters & Dialogues with Martin Heidegger
1929–1976, trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1993), 18.
6 Martin Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 77; Martin Heidegger, Country Path
Conversations, trans. Bret W. Davis (Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
2010).
7 On this crucial turn in Heidegger’s path of thought, see Bret W. Davis,
Heidegger and the Will: On the Way to Gelassenheit (Evanston: Northwestern
University Press, 2007); and Bret W. Davis, “Returning the World to Nature:
Heidegger’s Turn from a Transcendental-Horizonal Projection of World to an
Indwelling Releasement to the Open-Region,” Continental Philosophy Review,
47.3 (2014): 373–97. For an introduction to this topic, see Bret W. Davis, “Will
and Gelassenheit,” in Martin Heidegger: Key Concepts, ed. Bret W. Davis (New
York: Routledge, 2014), 168–82.
8 Martin Heidegger, Letters to His Wife: 1915–1970, ed. Gertrud Heidegger,
trans. R.D.V. Glasgow (Cambridge: Polity, 2008), 187.
9 Martin Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (Pfullingen: Neske, 1994), 43; Martin
Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, trans.
William Lovitt (New York: Harper and Row, 1977), 158. For an attempt to
concisely present the relevance of Heidegger’s thought to cross-cultural
philosophy, and vice versa, see Bret W. Davis, “East-West Dialogue after
Heidegger,” in After Heidegger?, eds. Gregory Fried and Richard Polt (London:
Rowman & Littlefield, 2018), 335–45.
10 Other than Country Path Conversations and “From a Conversation on
Language (1953/54): Between a Japanese and an Inquirer” (Martin Heidegger,
115 Martin Heidegger, Was heißt Denken? (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1984), 18;
Martin Heidegger, What is Called Thinking?, trans. J. Glenn Gray (New York:
Harper and Row), 44.
116 Martin Heidegger, Denkerfahrungen 1910–1976 (Frankfurt am Main:
Vittorio Klosterman, 1996), 18.
117 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 9, 116; Heidegger, Pathmarks, 92.
118 Heidegger, Letters to His Wife, 187.
119 Martin Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 73/1, 5; Martin Heidegger, “Poverty,”
trans. Thomas Kalary and Frank Schalow in Heidegger, Translation and the
Task of Thinking, ed. Frank Schalow (New York: Springer, 2011), 3.
120 Ibid., 7; Ibid., 5 (translation modified).
121 Ibid., 8–9; Ibid., 6–7 (translation modified).
122 In particular, I will not be able to pay due attention either to the mellowing
tone and attunement in Heidegger’s thought between the later 1930s and the
1960s or to the significant differences in tone and attunement between the
Daodejing and the Zhuangzi.
123 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 16; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 18.
124 Ibid., 233; Ibid., 114.
125 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 12, 27; Heidegger, Poetry, Language,
Thought, 207.
126 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 184; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings,
89–90. Here and in other quotations from this text, I have changed Ziporyn’s
translation of dao as “Course” to “Way.”
127 See Davis, “Expressing Experience.”
128 Daodejing, chapter 40.
129 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 181; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 89
(translation modified).
130 Ibid., 233; Ibid., 114.
131 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 71, 330; Heidegger, The Event, 286
(translation modified).
132 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 65, 22 and 395–6; Heidegger, Contributions
to Philosophy, 19 and 313–14.
133 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 39, 94–5; Heidegger, Hölderlin’s “Germania”
and “The Rhine,” 85–6.
134 Ibid., 182; Ibid., 166.
135 Heidegger, Erläuterung zu Hölderlins Dichtung, 77; Heidegger, Elucidations
of Hölderlin’s Poetry, 98.
136 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 77, 137; Heidegger, Country Path
Conversations, 89.
137 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 146; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 78
(translation modified). Ziporyn translates tian 天 more literally as “the
Heavenly.” As he tells us in his Glossary of Essential Terms, in the Zhuangzi
this term refers to “the spontaneous and agentless creativity that brings forth
all beings” and whose “action is effortless and purposeless.” Zhuangzi, The
Essential Writings, 217.
138 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 182; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 89.
139 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 65, 7; Heidegger, Contributions to
Philosophy, 8. It is important to point out that Heidegger is decidedly not
calling for a ground in the “metaphysical” sense of “beingness” as a bedrock
of constant presence. Noting a passage where Heidegger says of the grounders
of the abyss that “their seeking loves the abyss, in which they know the oldest
ground” (Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 65, 13; Heidegger, Contributions to
Philosophy, 13), John Sallis comments: “For those who question, being
grounders of the abyss does not mean installing a ground that would cancel
the abyss as archaic ground, as an abysmal ground older than beingness as
ground.” John Sallis, “Grounders of the Abyss”, in Companion to Heidegger’s
Contributions to Philosophy, eds. Charles Scott et al. (Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 2001), 189.
140 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 9, 364; Heidegger, Pathmarks, 276.
141 Ivanhoe and Van Norden, Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 127.
142 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 13 (my translation); Zhuangzi, The Essential
Writings, 16.
143 Daodejing, chapter 38.
144 Ibid., chapter 51.
145 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 11–12; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 14.
146 Ivanhoe and Van Norden, Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 248.
147 Daodejing, chapter 25.
148 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 11; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 14.
149 Ibid.
150 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 10; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 12.
151 See Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 65, 107; Heidegger, Contributions to
Philosophy, 85.
152 Heidegger, Letters to His Wife, 182; see also Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol.
9, 364; Heidegger, Pathmarks, 276.
153 See Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 77, 164; Heidegger, Country Path
Conversations, 106.
154 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 17.
155 Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, vol. 77, 206; Heidegger, Country Path
Conversations, 132.
156 Ibid., 226; Ibid., 147.
157 Zhuangzi, The Complete Works, 182–3; Zhuangzi, The Essential Writings, 89.
Here I have combined and modified the translations by Watson and Ziporyn.
158 Ibid. 183; Ibid. (translation modified).
159 Ibid., 3; Ibid., 6.
References
Buchner, Harmut, ed. (1989), Japan und Heidegger. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke.
Davis, Bret W. (2007), Heidegger and the Will: On the Way to Gelassenheit,
Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Davis, Bret W. (2013), “Heidegger and Asian Philosophy,” in François Raffoul and
Eric S. Nelson (eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Heidegger, 459–71, New
York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Davis, Bret W. (2013), “Heidegger’s Orientations: The Step Back on the Way to
Dialogue with the East,” in Alfred Denker et al. (eds.), Heidegger-Jahrbuch 7:
Heidegger und das ostasiatische Denken, 153–80. Freiburg/Munich: Alber
Verlag.
Davis, Bret W. (2014), “Returning the World to Nature: Heidegger’s Turn from a
Transcendental-Horizonal Projection of World to an Indwelling Releasement to
the Open-Region,” Continental Philosophy Review, 47.3: 373–97.
Davis, Bret W. (2014), “Will and Gelassenheit,” in Bret W. Davis (ed.), Martin
Heidegger: Key Concepts, 168–82, New York: Routledge.
Davis, Bret W. (2016), “Heidegger on the Way from Onto-Historical Ethnocentrism
to East-West Dialogue,” Gatherings: The Heidegger Circle Annual, 6: 130–56.
Davis, Bret W. (2018), “East-West Dialogue after Heidegger,” in Gregory Fried and
Richard Polt (eds.), After Heidegger?, 335–45, London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Davis, Bret W. (2019), “Expressing Experience: Language in Ueda Shizuteru’s
Philosophy of Zen,” in Gereon Kopf (ed.), Dao Companion to Japanese
Buddhist Philosophy, 713–38, New York: Springer.
Hartig, Willfred. (1997), Die Lehre des Buddha und Heidegger: Beiträge zum
Ost-West-Dialog des Denkens im 20 Jahrhundert, Konstanz: Universität
Konstanz.
Heidegger, Martin. (1962), Being and Time, John Macquarrie and Edward
Robinson (trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1968), What is Called Thinking?, J. Glenn Gray (trans.), New
York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1969), Identity and Difference, Joan Stambaugh (trans.),
New York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1971), On the Way to Language, Peter D. Hertz (trans.), New
York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1975–), Gesamtausgabe. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio
Klostermann. Cited by the following volume numbers: (5) “Holzwege”, (9)
“Wegmarken”, (12) “Unterwegs zur Sprache”, (39) “Hölderlins Hymnen
‘Germanien’ und ‘Der Rhein’ ”, (40) “Einführung in die Metaphysik”, (53)
“Hölderlins Hymne ‘Der Ister’ ”, (65) “Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom
Ereignis)”, (71) “Das Ereignis”, (73/1) “Zum Ereignis-Denken” (vol. 1), (75)
“Zu Hölderlin / Griechenlandreisen”, (77) “Feldweg-Gespräche (1944/45)”.
Heidegger, Martin. (1977), The Question Concerning Technology and Other
Essays, William Lovitt (trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1984), Was heißt Denken?, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Heidegger, Martin. (1993), “Europa und die deutsche Philosophie,” in Hans-
Helmut Gander (ed.), Europa und die Philosophie, 31–41. Frankfurt: Vittorio
Klostermann.
Heidegger, Martin. (1993), Sein und Zeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Okakura, Kakuzo. (1919), Das Buch vom Tee, Marguerite Steindorf and Ulrich
Steindorf (trans.), Leipzig: Insel-Verlag.
Okakura, Kakuzo. (1998), Cha no hon / The Book of Tea (a bilingual edition),
Asano Akira (trans.), Tokyo: Kodansha.
Parkes, Graham, ed. (1987), Heidegger and Asian Thought, Honolulu: University
of Hawaii Press.
Petzet, Heinrich Wiegand. (1993), Encounters & Dialogues with Martin Heidegger
1929–1976, Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (trans.), Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Sallis, John. (2001), “Grounders of the Abyss,” in Charles Scott et al. (eds.),
Companion to Heidegger’s Contributions to Philosophy, 181–97. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Ueda, Shizuteru 上田閑照. (2001), Zen—kongen-teki ningen 禅―根源的人間 [Zen:
Originary Human Being], volume 4 of Ueda Shizuteru shū 上田閑照集 [Ueda
Shizuteru Collection], Tokyo: Iwanami.
Zhuangzi. (2009), Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings with Selections from
Traditional Commentaries, Brook Ziporyn (trans.), Indianapolis: Hackett.
Zhuangzi. (2013), The Complete Works of Zhuangzi, Burton Watson (trans.), New
York: Columbia University Press.
Patricia Huntington
1. Introduction
In the Zhuangzi 莊子, we find a text that is both delightful in its literary
fancy and demanding as an orientative guide to life.1 The phenomenological
method here adopted aligns itself with other literary, hermeneutic, and
metaphorical treatments. Without ignoring the skeptical aspects of the text,
such approaches demonstrate that the Zhuangzi promotes a rich program of
spiritual transformation as an art of living. These delightful stories issue
powerful challenges through a series of jolts that deprive the reader of
commonsense (natural) attitudes, expose the relativity of customs and local
perspectives, brush aside artificial labels, befuddle knowledge that is
commonly inherited and relied upon, and even arrest analytical acumen.
There have been detailed applications of the Husserlian forms of the
phenomenological, eidetic, and transcendental reductions to various Eastern
philosophies and meditative practices.2 My aim will be conservatively
limited to treating the phenomenological reduction, in its hermeneutic
rendition in Heidegger and as applied to the Zhuangzi, as a practice of de-
cultivation rather than of psychological and moral cultivation that builds up
capacities developmentally under the design and direction of critical reason.
The Zhuangzi can be read as enacting a practice of reduction in both textual
and soteriological terms. My explicit aim will be to show that a program of
un-learning generates newfound virtues and powers (de 德) that escape the
purview of a life directed exclusively by the power of rational discernment.
know facts outside subjective consciousness. These include the basic notions
that encompass our sense of being-in-a-world: (1) that we are isolated selves
who first exist substantially before socialization; (2) that we stand in a world
like an object placed in yet separate from a container; (3) that the preexisting
empirical world is a brute and uninterpreted datum; and (4) that we
manufacture language as a tool to represent this otherwise brute and mute
reality. All four of these operative assumptions reflect dichotomized
abstractions or, as Zhuangzi might put it, artificialities that cover over
the nature of their production and of our primordial non-dichotomous
experience of phenomenal existence.
However useful these everyday assumptions may be to collective survival
and individual success, they create in conceptual terms a false division
between self and world. And in practical terms, they produce a fractured
and alienating sense of separation from others and the lifeworld. These
conceptual dichotomies uproot us from the elemental experience of the
creative co-constituting and interpretive nature of being-in-a-world (human
existence) before it reifies into dualities. At this point Heidegger converges
in broad terms with the Zhuangzi: critical disputes over the worldviews and
ideological commitments that are built upon this uprootedness begin from a
faulty starting point and cannot repair alienation from self, others, life, and
the world.
Heidegger’s version of a phenomenological reduction confronts us with a
hermeneutic dilemma. Can there be a science of being if Dasein is its world?
Being and Time answers in the affirmative. Because the step-back engages us
in the phenomenal reality that human experience emerges out of nothingness
or the inexhaustibility of horizons of meaning, it seems to leave us with only
competing worldviews. Yet Dasein can become transparent to its existence
by projecting the horizon of interpretation upon our outermost possibility,
death.13 Death awareness, when lifted to the surface and brought to bear on
our lives, thrusts us back upon the nature of human finitude. There are two
intertwined levels to the projective nature of human existence, ontic and
ontological. Ontic projections pertain to specific goals, aims, and purposes,
while the ontological articulates the fact that human existence reaches
projectively beyond any one world-horizon into the very font of
unconcealment or disclosedness as such. The generative condition for the
possibility of all world-horizons of interpretation is that we reach into
nothingness at both the point of origination (the upsurge of life) and
cessation (death). Actively living out of death awareness, while strenuous,
roots us in a fragile, ever-elusive, and enigmatic compliance with the fact
that we know things only finitely within our field of awareness.
Although in Husserl, the phenomenological reduction ultimately leads to
the transcendental study of the noetic structures of consciousness, the
hermeneutic turn in phenomenology treats the subject in holistic terms as an
affective, embodied, and driven being and as embedded in the forces of
culture and history. This turn thickens our grasp of the depth and force of
however much it might jolt one uncomfortably into yet new shifts in
perspective. It progressively dissolves the psychic protections of artificial
constructs and defensive patterns of ideation. “Solitude is a condition not of
escaping the world but of encountering it.”21 Lawrence Vogel accentuates
the arduous nature of living authentically. To take up one’s finitude
authentically, rather than hide behind social conventions and the limitations
of the adult mind, means to stand “open to the structures of existence” and
to take “hold of . . . existence in light of the constraints of history,
embodiment, and morality.”22 Because social conventions seem to “disburden
one of the anxiety-producing responsibility,” we resist holding ourselves
open in the vulnerabilities of finitude.23 Nelson’s insightful explication
enables us to comprehend how commitments to a worldview, even when
rationally developed, can be pinned to a near-untouchable set of assumptions
and psychic formations that ward off angst. These inevitably harden beneath
the adult capacity to be self-governing; they uproot and restrict the power
of rational life by producing a zone of indifference that proves incorrigibly
difficult to dislodge. Everyday modes of being make one “indifferent to
that which would throw light on the character and plight of [one’s] own
existence.”24
The step-back, understood as a practice of authentic individuation,
fosters not simple psychological acceptance of finitude but an active
comportment, a “taking up, safeguarding, and preserving of finitude.”25
Critical suspension of beliefs does not suffice to eradicate anxiety and
indifference. The reduction can only fulfill itself through a strenuous practice
that fosters the elemental power, in solitariness, to remain aware of finitude,
to sustain an attitude of willingness to persist in being shown one’s finitude
(illusions), and to bear it well. This willingness expresses itself in the virtuous
receptivity that welcomes what comes without defensive or indifferent
acts of rational repudiation. Such stability does not come from socialized
character but instead from the genuine dissolution of angst and the
restoration of child-like wonder in non-discriminate openness.26 One might
hear in these Heideggerian concerns the echo of Zhuangzi’s radical mockery
of such patterns of “rational” development. Such a bearing might also
capture Zen Master Dōgen’s view that life is one continuous mistake because
it shows that, however rational we may be, we can and often are mistaken
in our way of being-in-the-world, and not simply through lapses in a logical
process of ideation.27
To further develop an understanding of the reduction as a constant return
to openness that fosters an elemental de requires that we supplement
Heidegger in two directions, one social and one spiritual. By turning to the
Zhuangzi, I directly address the latter but not the former. The Heideggerian
step-back takes us to the fact that our individual identities are bound up
with “cultural heritage—its possibilities, its patterns of living and doing, its
stories and interpretations.”28 Each of our cicada-and-dove belief systems
is related to that larger historical horizon of interpretation or, as Charles
In the Zhuangzi, the step-back does not merely suspend but ultimately
deposes discrimination and desire as the faculties that play the governing
roles in action. Taken as a practice of reduction, the fasting of the mind
empties out the senses, the heart, the mind, the desire to correct the
misguided. “Don’t listen with your ears, listen with your mind. No, don’t
listen with your mind, but listen with your spirit. Listening stops with the
ears, the mind stops with recognition, but spirit is empty and waits on all
things. Dao gathers in emptiness alone. Emptiness is the fasting of the
mind.”43 The cicadas and doves in our minds balk at the idea that a non-
purposively-oriented life could form a sustained way to be in the world. It
seems utterly naïve to commandeer life without the protections of knowledge,
without developing strategies for survival, and without reliance upon past
experience to show us how to handle new situations.
Edward Slingerland’s notion that there is a “normative order” (tianji) and
an irrepressible force of Dao buried beneath all interpreted and linguistic
horizons is important in this context. Freedom from goal-oriented and
desire-driven lifestyles rests on the experience of the Dao or the Heavenly
mechanism as a guiding force and as a font of action.44 A non-purposive
orientation need not land us in aimless pursuits because action can stem
from a font other than desire and be guided by powers other than the
discriminating intellect. This font and power emerge through an alignment
between the self and life. That Heaven proves “normative,” in the sense that
following it might prove the best way to live, must be discovered along the
way and cannot be known in advance by discrimination, abstract judgment,
or even divination.
Cook Ding, like other stories of skilled know-how, exemplifies this
process of developing an intuitive orientation that is no longer suppressed
and controlled by the reflective capacity. Cook Ding’s skill emerges through
a progressive series of epoché from the ears to the heart-mind to qi 氣 (vital
breath, energy). Slingerland details this as a movement that first relinquishes
ordinary sensory responses (I don’t look with my eyes), then releases
“discriminating knowledge” (listening with the heart-mind) until Cook
Ding can listen “with the qi” or spirit. Listening with the heart-mind
articulates the standard way we acquire skill through reliance on knowledge
of the parts of the ox. The Zhuangzi, however, considers this kind of
knowledge to be a blunt instrument that easily “butchers” the outcome
because a preconceived and set plan cannot adapt to the concrete fact that
this particular ox does not fit neatly into a scheme or ideal essence of ox.
Listening with spirit, by contrast, allows the cook effortlessly to sense spaces
between the joints and thus gracefully avoid clumsy mistakes and butchered
results.45
One could gloss this path of reduction, following Husserl, as a return to
pure subjectivity and a primordial intuition that apprehends things-in-
themselves. But what matters in the Zhuangzi is that contact with the
irrepressible Heavenly mechanism releases, stimulates, and nourishes one’s
irrepressible “spiritual” powers or de. For this reason, an entirely new form
of life becomes possible. A.C. Graham argues that “Zhuangzi’s ideal is to
have no choice at all, because reflecting the situation with perfect clarity you
can respond in only one way.”46 James Sellmann emphasizes the organismic
power to live and die with the alterations of things.47 There may be, even for
Zhuangzi, multiple fitting responses and certainly multiple variations of
the authentic person’s (zhenren 真人) virtuosic style of cutting an ox, yet
Graham and Sellmann converge on the point that an apt response arises out
of the interplay between life and the person, and is not rooted in planning,
knowledge, and past experience. Slingerland underscores that such a non-
rational or unknowing manner of being can be likened to that of the artist
who sees the creative process more as one of discovery than attainment. One
discovers rather than designs “the proper way pigments on a canvas are to
be combined to reflect a landscape, or the way a knife is to be wielded if an
ox is to be butchered.”48
This co-creativity does not rest exclusively upon primordial intuition
(Husserl) or the mystery of disclosure (Heidegger) but upon the power of
this generative matrix and our own natural inherence in it. That the way of
unknowing is not a prescription for an irrational, impulsive, and blind life,
or “a purely egotistic pastime,” as Robert Allinson argues, can be explained
through the virtues it produces.49 By relinquishing a projective pattern for
decision, the fasting of the mind inaugurates a more intelligent way of living.
However ironic it may seem, the Zhuangzi counsels that one begins to
“know the limits of things” or acquire authentic understanding only through
this dynamic engagement with life.50 Proof of the superiority of this non-
rational way can be found in the dynamic, soft, and adaptable capacity to
respond in a fitting manner, and not force or “butcher” things, overwhelm
the field of action, or press people beyond their breaking point. By contrast,
the discriminating mind, bent on its preconceived agenda, inevitably
overrides the natural flow and presses past what the situation can bear. Such
a manner of moving against life inevitably retards growth. The ambitious
underpinnings of a self-directed life gather everything into its domain of
rational mastery. The “natural” way, though not without artistry or even
elements of deliberate intent, reverses and undoes this habitual and self-
conscious pattern of lording over life.
The fasting of the mind grows credible when we articulate the growth it
engenders. The “forgetting the self”—by fasting away the seemingly essential
power to make distinctions and “do” action—nurses the virtues of trust and
delight.51 Trust is an elemental form of virtue that grows out of receptivity
because one discovers through practice, and retrospectively, that things
progress better if one does not overpower but rather meets what the situation
calls forth and permits. Trust in tian (illumination) engenders trust in the
authentic life through strengthening the virtue of being able to follow, sense,
apprehend, and delight in the wild, strange, and fortuitous alterations of
things. It solidifies a non-anxious way of moving through life because it
Yet because small and large are also not discrete names, nondual
perception includes synchronous and immeasurable facets to the two-sided
interdependence of opposites. The liberated mind can see the tallness in the
small. Even a cicada acquires its form, beauty, power, and greatness from the
Dao. It can discern the smallness of all that the world considers grand. It can
intuit the hidden in the visible bones of the ox, recognize the virtue of the
lame person who ascribes no blame to the Dao, and find the exemplar in
the monstrous or odd. From the perspective of unknowing, one’s virtue,
in the ethical sense, emerges through fasting away the preferences of the
bloated heart that cannot transcend a dualistic, non-contextual, and non-
dynamic manner of evaluating things. The Zhuangzi certainly confounds
the usual ways of discriminating, since gourds can be tubs and a balm for
chapped hands can serve the fiefdom.57 “Only the man of far-reaching vision
. . . has no use of categories, but relegates them all to the constant.”58
Earlier I noted that integration into the generative matrix of life makes the
non-rational life possible. Action can stem from spirit. The Dao can lead
beyond set measures and release one for the adaptive intelligence that can
apprehend, in light of Heaven, the situated size of things. Yet such a life, if it
is to be sustained in a thoroughgoing manner, must be lived ever more fully
for intrinsic aims. There may be no discernible telos or extrinsic cosmic
purpose to the generative Dao because it gives us no foundation on which to
project the standards of ideal character formation, development of civilization,
or moral coda. Yet it does not follow that the generative Dao realizes
no intrinsic, non-purposive, natural, or autotelic ends, namely, to nourish,
liberate, and transform. The fasting of the mind, understood as a transcendental
reduction, performs a dance with the Dao. In this dance, the extensive reach
out into life pursuits must constantly shed extrinsic aims in order to discover
and be fortified anew by the intrinsic lessons that life bestows.
Finally, this path of de-cultivation must engender an integration of powers
that otherwise fall fallow under domination of the discriminating mind or
“self,” powers such as the intuitive, sensitive, feeling, vital, and spiritual
aspects of human being as well as those of nondual perception and thought.
The living movement of return to the essentially creative font of effortless
action could be said to marshal all our powers conjointly or in unique
combinations as the circumstance demands. Even though the Cook Ding
passage seems to give special significance to qi or vitality as the spontaneous
force of free action, overemphasis on qi would have two undesirable
outcomes. It would give undue credence to the prospect that the Zhuangzi
promotes mindless forms of spontaneity. Edward Slingerland clarifies that
effortless action is not unaware or blind but rather unself-conscious and
unscripted.59 Overemphasis on vitality would equally neglect the other
faculties involved in correlative nondual perception, trust in the Dao, and
the virtues of practical knowing that the non-rational life fosters.
To the degree that one can speak of individuation in the context of the
Zhuangzi, it must be as a process of self-forgetting that unifies one with the
generative matrix of the Dao and unleashes the fuller array of powers that
enable one to follow Heaven and respond to the unexpected. In the Zhuangzi,
integration cannot refer to a psychological view, as this would mimic the
kind of Confucian or Mohist patterns of development that he scorns. The
term “individuation” normally starts to collapse at the point that partaking
in the creative processes of life unfolds through forgetting the self’s power to
impose a plan and assert its separateness. Heidegger shows that genuine
individuation arises only through de-cultivation and the growth of virtues
that openness produces. Zhuangzi might add that we acquire and lose
“individuation” as we transform along with and adaptively respond to the
immeasurable and wild transformation of things.
5. Conclusion
Examining the Zhuangzi through the lens of the phenomenological reduction
shows a number of reasons to globalize philosophy and re-examine the
nature of philosophy as an academic discipline. The Zhuangzi encourages
the Western academic to break with a narrow conception of rationality, and
even to take disciplined reasoning less seriously. If, as the Zhuangzi intends
to show, the pretentions that underlie rational life impede or limit the growth
of humanity, then it proves conceivable that an ideal path of learning might
progress not only from moral cultivation to taking reflective distance on
cultivation but also from reflective life to a liberation from attachments to
the reflective life. Engaging the Daoist tradition debunks the idea that there
is one sole path to the attainment of an enlightened orientation. Even though
the cultivation of a rational life may benefit most individuals in a given
society, it may not be recommended that every individual take a direct path
into reflective life, since not all people are intellectually inclined. If the aim
of philosophy is not finally enjoyment of critical debate but rather self-
transformation, then it can proceed in various ways. A transformational
approach can dissolve attachment to any native bent, and thus open a person
to an integration of powers that would introduce balance into her overall
orientation to life. The intellectual cannot be exempted from the task to
safeguard finitude. The Zhuangzi detects the need to combat the stubborn
barriers to self-examination that, ironically, the pursuit of the reflective life
can erect.
The Zhuangzi and the Daoist tradition invite a rejuvenated sense that
the ultimate value of philosophy lies in its power to orient us to live a better
life and to effectuate transformative attitudes and outlooks. Anchoring
philosophy in a liberated relation to one’s primary bent, rather than prizing
one bent over another, engenders an appreciation of other modes of thinking,
manifold ways of arriving at insight, and creative methods of edification. In
addition to decentering analytical reasoning as the sole path to enlightenment,
this lineage leads one to consider the importance of utilizing a host of
Notes
1 Kwok-Ying Lau develops a rich phenomenological expression of this
orientative character of Chinese philosophy in his Phenomenology and
Intercultural Understanding: Toward a New Cultural Flesh (Dordrecht:
Springer, 2016).
2 For an overview, see: Julia Jansen and Wenjing Cai, “Husserlian
Phenomenology: Current Chinese Perspectives,” Comparative and Continental
Philosophy, 10.1 (2018): 2–6; and D.P. Chattopadhyaya, Lester Embree, and
Jitendranath Mohanty (eds.), Phenomenology and Indian Philosophy (Albany:
State University of New York Press, 2019).
3 Kim-Chong Chong, Zhuangzi’s Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the
Human (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2016), 2.
4 Sellmann points out that bianhua 變化 refers not only to transformations “of
form and shape (bian 變) . . . but also entails a complete renewal of the
experience of life’s meaning (hua 化).” See James D. Sellmann, “Transformational
Humor in the Zhuangzi,” in Wandering at Ease in the Zhuangzi, ed. Roger Ames
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998), 170.
5 Edmund Husserl, Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a
Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book, (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1982), 27–8.
6 Ibid., 88–9.
7 Edmund Husserl, Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology
(London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1931), 49, cf. 131. For a general
description of the evolution of the reduction in Husserl, see Dermot Moran
and Timothy Mooney (eds.), The Phenomenology Reader (New York:
Routledge, 2002), 12–16.
8 Ramakant Sinari, “The Method of Phenomenological Reduction and Yoga,”
Philosophy East and West, 15.3–4 (1965): 219.
9 François Raffoul, “Factical Life and the Need for Philosophy,” in Rethinking
Facticity, eds. François Raffoul and Eric S. Nelson (Albany: State University of
New York Press, 2008), 75.
10 Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag, 1985), 84. For
the English translation, see Martin Heidegger, Being and Time (New York:
Harper and Row, 1962). I follow the standard method of citing marginal page
numbers so that the references correlate to the German passages.
11 Ibid., 148. In all life activities, human beings operate interpretively; that is, by
projecting a horizon of possibility (a world of cleaning) within which things
appear meaningfully “as” something (a dust cloth) and “in order to” (for the
References
Allinson, Robert. (1989), Chuang-Tzu for Spiritual Transformation: An Analysis of
the Inner Chapters, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Ames, Roger, ed. (1998), Wandering at Ease in the Zhuangzi, Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Chai, David. (2008), Early Zhuangzi Commentaries: On the Sounds and Meanings
of the Inner Chapters, Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
Chattopadhyaya, D.P., Lester Embree, and Jitendranath Mohanty, eds. (1992),
Phenomenology and Indian Philosophy, Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Chong, Kim-Chong. (2016), Zhuangzi’s Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the
Human, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Graham, A.C. (1989), Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient
China. La Salle: Open Court.
Heidegger, Martin. (1962), Being and Time. John Macquarrie and Edward
Robinson (trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (1985), Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag.
Holland, Nancy J. and Patricia Huntington, eds. (2001), Feminist Interpretations of
Martin Heidegger, University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Huntington, Patricia. (2018), “A Huayan Critique of Heidegger: The Quest for
a Non-Obstructed Mitdasein,” Journal of the Pacific Association for the
Continental Tradition, 1: 5–23.
Husserl, Edmund. (1931), Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology,
W.R. Boyce Gibson (trans.), London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Husserl, Edmund. (1982), Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a
Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book, F. Kersten (trans.), The Hague:
Nijhoff.
Ivanhoe, P.J. and Bryan van Norden, eds. (2001), Readings in Classical Chinese
Philosophy, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Jansen, Julia and Wenjing Cai. (2018), “Husserlian Phenomenology: Current
Chinese Perspectives,” Comparative and Continental Philosophy, 10.1: 2–6.
Laozi. Daodejing. Available online at: https://ctext.org/dao-de-jing
Lau, Kwok-Ying. (2016), Phenomenology and Intercultural Understanding:
Toward a New Cultural Flesh, in Contributions to Phenomenology (vol. 87),
Dordrecht: Springer.
Leighton, Taigen Dan. (2000), Cultivating the Empty Field: The Silent Illumination
of Master Hongzhi, Boston: Tuttle Publishing.
Leland, Dorothy. (2001), “Conflictual Culture and Authenticity: Deepening
Heidegger’s Account of the Social,” in Nancy J. Holland and Patricia
Huntington (eds.), Feminist Interpretations of Martin Heidegger, 107–27,
University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Lugones, Maria. (1987), “Playfulness, ‘World’—Traveling and Loving Perception,”
Hypatia, 2.4: 3–19.
McCarthy, Erin. (2010), Ethics Embodied: Rethinking Selfhood through
Continental, Japanese, and Feminist Philosophies, Lanham: Lexington Books.
Moran, Dermot and Timothy Mooney, eds. (2002). The Phenomenology Reader,
New York: Routledge.
Nelson, Eric S. (2008), “Heidegger and the Ethics of Facticity,” in François Raffoul
and Eric S. Nelson (eds.), Rethinking Facticity, 129–47, Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Ortega, Mariana. (2016), In-Between: Latina Feminist Phenomenology,
Multiplicity, and the Self, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Raffoul, François. (2008), “Factical Life and the Need for Philosophy,” in François
Raffoul and Eric S. Nelson (eds.), Rethinking Facticity, 69–85, Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Seeburger, Francis. (1975), “Heidegger and the Phenomenological Reduction,”
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 36.2: 212–21.
Sellmann, James D. (1998), “Transformational Humor in the Zhuangzi,” in Roger
Ames (ed.), Wandering at Ease in the Zhuangzi, 163–74, Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Sinari, Ramakant. (1965), “The Method of Phenomenological Reduction and
Yoga,” Philosophy East and West, 15.3–4: 217–28.
Slingerland, Edward. (2003), Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor
and Spiritual Ideal in Early China, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vogel, Lawrence. (1994), The Fragile “We”: Ethical Implications of Heidegger’s
“Being and Time,” Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Watsuji, Tetsurō. (1996), Watsuji Tetsurō’s Rinrigaku: Ethics in Japan, Yamamoto
Seisaku and Robert E. Carter (trans.), Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Wong, David. (2005), “Zhuangzi and the Obsession with Being Right,” History of
Philosophy Quarterly, 22.2: 91–107.
Zhuangzi. (1996), Chuang-Tzu: Basic Writings, Burton Watson (trans.), New York:
Columbia University Press.
Zhuangzi. (2009), Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings with Selections from
Traditional Commentaries, Brook Ziporyn (trans.), Indianapolis: Hackett
Publishing.
Sarah A. Mattice
1. Introduction
Reading is a skill and a practice that many take for granted. Words and
letters are all around us; the visual world is saturated with things to read.
For many fully literate adults, reading is such a fundamental skill that we do
not remember clearly not being able to read.1 Once we have learned to read,
something foundational about our existence in and engagement with the
world has been fundamentally altered, forever. Cognitive scientists and
psychologists describe this as an “irreversible” process, because once it has
really taken hold, or become automatic, we read without even trying—even
sometimes when we are trying not to, as in the case of the Stroop Effect2—
and we try to read even in cases where we know what we are seeing is not
“readable”—as in Xu Bing’s 徐冰 (1955–) art installation piece “Book of
the Sky.”3
In this chapter, I follow in the methodological footsteps of twentieth-
century literary giant Qian Zhongshu 錢鍾書 (1910–98), who often wrote
of the importance of datong 打通, creating connections and breaking
down or through barriers between previously un-associated material by
identifying unusual correspondences or affinities.4 In this chapter, my aim
is to contribute to the ongoing conversation on the ethics of reading, by
putting alongside one another material from such diverse sources as
cognitive science, European phenomenology, contemporary humanities, jazz
music, and classical Chinese philosophy, to name a few. Although reading is
When Daniel Willingham, author of The Reading Mind, says that “what
happens when we read” is a bad question, he does not mean that we should
not be investigating what happens when we read, as he notes that scientists
have been trying to do just that, from a variety of perspectives, for more
than a century. One reason he says that it is a bad scientific question is that
reading is too complex—it is made up of so many different sub-processes,
like vision, memory, grammar, language comprehension, vocabulary,
emotion, and so on—and so we should ask questions of the individual sub-
processes, and really understand those before moving on to the larger
activity. Another reason it is a bad question, according to Willingham, is that
understanding what happens when we read requires us to know what
happens, and we might not always be the best judge of that.
The history of psychology shows that it’s easy to be fooled when you try
to describe a task . . . Here’s a simple example. When we read it feels as if
we move our eyes smoothly—we sweep from the start of a line to the end,
and then snap back to the far left of the page for the next line. That
impression is easily disconfirmed by watching the eyes of another person
as she reads. Her eyes don’t move smoothly, but instead jump from
one spot to the next, usually a distance of seven to nine letters. That’s so
easily observed it’s probably been known for centuries. But even that
observation—jumping movements, not smoothly tracking—is an
incomplete description. In fact, your eyes are not always pointing at the
same letter when you read. About half the time each eye looks at a
different letter. They may even be slightly crossed.6
or how often they actually visualize passages from the text that they are
reading.7
And, of course, as we are now fully immersed in the digital age, we are
learning more and more about how very different reading is not just on a
screen, but online, with hypertext and links and multitasking that does make
reading online an overlapping but somewhat different skillset than reading
offline. We also know that when we read on screens, we tend to read in a Z
or F pattern,8 not every line, and that we pay significantly more attention to
the left side of the screen than the right: about 80 percent of our eye attention
goes to the left half of the screen.9 The fact that researchers have spent
significant time and energy tracking down this information is not just good
for web designers who want to redesign their pages so that people really see
all their good information, but it is also useful for people who study reading
habits of students. Imagine a page of text in print and a page of text as a
PDF; now imagine you’ve put a patch over the lower right corner of the text
on the PDF. This is basically what the F pattern of reading does on a screen—
our eyes read the top lines, and the left sides of things, but we don’t spend
as much time or attention with the lower right-hand corner of a page. Now
imagine this is how you read (without being aware of it) a twenty-page
document. It is no wonder that basic reading comprehension, recall, and
other reading tests are noticeably better with print than digital reading, and
the F pattern is not even the only issue. A number of researchers have also
studied the tactile experience of holding a book or paper in hand, being able
to flip back pages in a book, or hold a page and move between pages, or put
a finger at one spot in a text—all of these physical aspects of reading with
print materials do seem to make a difference.10
Cognitive neuroscientist Dr. Maryanne Wolf, Director of the Center for
Dyslexia, Diverse Learners, and Social Justice in the Graduate School of
Education and Information Studies at UCLA, explains that her research
depicts how the present reading brain enables the development of some
of our most important intellectual and affective processes: internalized
knowledge, analogical reasoning, and inference; perspective-taking and
empathy; critical analysis and the generation of insight. Research
surfacing in many parts of the world now cautions that each of these
essential “deep reading” processes may be under threat as we move into
digital-based modes of reading.11
Wolf is careful to note that she is not blaming technology per se, but
rather that we need to pay attention to the environment in which our brains
are developing and the practices we consistently privilege. She explains,
Patricia Greenfield writes, the result is that less attention and time will
be allocated to slower, time-demanding deep reading processes, like
inference, critical analysis and empathy, all of which are indispensable to
learning at any age.
The Pew Research Center reported . . . that nearly a quarter of American
adults had not read a single book in the past year [2013]. As in, they
hadn’t cracked a paperback, fired up a Kindle, or even hit play on an
audiobook while in the car. The number of non-book-readers has nearly
tripled since 1978.12
someone else’s thoughts can only take a form in our consciousness if, in
the process, our unformulated faculty for deciphering those thoughts is
brought into play—a faculty which, in the act of deciphering, also
formulates itself . . . The need to decipher gives us the chance to formulate
our own deciphering capacity . . . [reading literature] entails the possibility
that we may formulate ourselves and so discover what had previously
seemed to elude our consciousness. These are the ways in which reading
literature gives us the chance to formulate the unformulated.20
also decipher and formulate for herself words, thoughts, language, ideas,
narratives, stories, and so on that are not her own.
Although Iser does not directly reference Hans-Georg Gadamer’s
philosophical hermeneutics, it is clearly visible in the architecture of his
phenomenological account of reading. While there is a great deal that could
be said concerning Gadamer’s hermeneutics and the phenomenology of
reading, here we can focus on his metaphor of conversation for the activity
of understanding, where the paradigm case of understanding is understanding
a text. For Gadamer, understanding is
When you first open a book, you enter a liminal space. You are neither in
this world, the world wherein you hold a book (say, this book), nor in
that world (the metaphysical space the words point toward). To some
extent this polydimensionality describes the feeling of reading in general—
one is in “many places at once.”26
Mendelsund brings us back into our bodies, in holding the book, and
yet also reminds us of the ways in which reading can draw our attention
away from the physicality of the activity into the world of the book, and
the ways in which we can be in different places in different ways at the
same time, without necessarily having merged or lost something. He
writes:
Again, the language here is reminiscent of Poulet and Iser, but with slight
differences. Mendelsund’s description resists the easy collapse of the
phenomenal world into the “interior” world—in describing these worlds as
overlapping, and the book as a passage, he is allowing each to maintain its
own sensibility while acknowledging the reality of the feeling that the
distinction between them has broken down.
Mendelsund’s text meanders in, around, and through questions connected
to what we see, hear, smell, taste, touch, and feel when we read. In particular,
he makes a strong case for a connection between the visual and the auditory:
“I would suggest that we hear more than we see while we are reading.”28 In
the context of the passage in which he writes this, Mendelsund has asked his
readers to consider what happens when we read the opening lines of Moby-
Dick: “Call me Ishmael.” He is drawing our attention to our having been
addressed, and asking us to think about what that means. While it is possible
that he is making a claim about inner speech vs. visualization, I think that
like Gadamer, he is trying to get us to attend to the connection between
being readers and being listeners, not to literal sound but to listening as a
metaphor for reading.
When Mendelsund suggests that we “hear” more than we see, part of
what he is relying on is both experience and research into the way our senses
attempt to reproduce literary description—in knowing what Anna Karenina
looks like from how she is described in the novel, you are familiar with her
and yet, if asked to sketch her, may not really be able to provide much detail.
Or, if a scent is described, although we usually say we can bring that scent
to mind, we are often making a metaphoric or analogous move from
something in our own experience, which may or may not match the intended
scent. Mendelsund suggests that part of how we can make sense of these
synaesthetic moves is that although we use our eyes to read (generally), the
connections are made through a kind of neural-auditory mode. Seeing the
words does not necessarily entail reading—the understanding that comes
with reading requires, for him, a kind of listening to the language as it is
presented.
really an art of memory . . . the way sound works, you play a note, and
then that note is gone, and you’ve played the next note, and the concept
of memory, the consequence of a melody is based on you remembering
what the note that happened before was, it’s all memory. You never hear
a whole piece at once, you can’t.30
Walker sets the stage for her argument by looking at the trend that
understands reading primarily under a technological or scientific model
of information acquisition, which draws on “mining” or “extraction”
metaphors: as you read, mine the text for the key information, extract the
parts that will be on the test, etc.35 On this sort of model, according to
researcher Peggy Kamuf, the activity of reading is simply a “technique for
capturing information.”36
Walker uses the current trend toward reducing reading to a technology of
information capture to motivate the project of considering connections
between reading and complexity. She draws on work by Hans Ulrich
Gumbrecht: “Gumbrecht makes a positive link between reading and
complexity, arguing that a certain slow and careful reading . . . makes it
possible for us to confront—I would say ‘encounter’—high levels of
complexity, thus resisting the temptation to reduce and simplify the issues at
hand.”37 Reading, then, becomes one of the key practices that exposes
students (and all of us) to complex issues that are not easily or obviously
resolvable into simple or straightforward solutions. She writes, “reading is
thus re-figured in his work as a kind of bitter-sweet exposure or openness
to complexity, one that inevitably takes its time.”38 Given a certain ethical
perspective, this is a very desirable habit to inculcate—both the sense of
ethical complexity and the sense of the value of not rushing ethical decisions.
Walker is not alone in suggesting that haste is not a virtue. From
philosophers like Paul Cillers to contemporary psychologists like Iain
McGilchrist, a number of thinkers have argued that the ability to pay a
certain quality of attention to what one is doing is crucial to success, and
rushing compromises that ability. Walker also notes that this quality of
I began by evoking the Torture Memos because in that case the disastrous
results of not reading—of merely pretending to read while in fact inserting
one’s own prejudices and preferred outcomes between the reader and the
text—are so clear and so horrible . . . Though the consequences of other
sloppy, misguided, pernicious interpretations may not be so spectacularly
awful, they can skew everything that follows in their wake.41
thinkers, who have argued similarly for the idea of “the capacity of literature
to exercise and reinforce our recognition that there are other points of view
in the world, and to make this recognition a powerful mental habit.”48
Narrative, in particular, is particularly powerful for eliciting empathy,
especially in circumstances where other forms of argumentation have not
been successful.49 She notes that the way literature/poetry develops empathy
and how it develops deliberative thought are actually very similar:
the claims made about dispute greatly resemble what we can say about
empathy. What they have in common is not just the recognition that there
are multiple points of view, two sides to every coin, but also the chance to
practice, and thereby to deepen and strengthen that recognition . . . both
dispute and empathetic narrative require one to think counterfactually, to
think the notion that one does not oneself hold to be the case.50
beauty interrupts and gives us sudden relief from our own minds. Iris
Murdoch says we undergo “an unselfing” in the presence of a beautiful
thing; “self-preoccupation” and worries on one’s own behalf abruptly fall
away. Simone Weil refers to this phenomenon as a “radical decentering.”
I call it an “opiated adjacency,” an awkward term but one that reminds
us that there are many things in life that make us feel acute pleasure
(opiated), and many things in life that make us feel sidelined, but there
is almost nothing—except beauty—that does the two simultaneously.
Feeling acute pleasure at finding oneself on the margins is a first step in
working toward fairness.51
the presence of beauty, in being swept along in something that is not yours,
in stretching your cognitive capacities beyond where they were yesterday,
in being drawn into that liminal space where you, too, are intimate with
greatness for a moment and yet it is not about you. As a moment of
motivation for ethical practice, beauty is particularly powerful.
Zhuangzi may still be considered the first in the history of Chinese art to
have discovered and given attention to the aesthetic principles of artistic
While this story is often taken as a critique of texts, language, and reading,
I think the critical element here is not so much about the fact that the Duke
is reading, and not “doing,” but that the Duke at once says that the sage
is dead, and that his words are worth reading. From the Wheelwright’s
perspective, what is found in the book is mere “dregs of old” if the Duke
thinks that he can mechanically read and reproduce the sage’s advice for
living well (his ethics) without himself creatively adopting and making live
the sage’s words. Reading without concern for self-and-world transformation,
and without an acknowledgment of both the aesthetic (non-algorithmic) and
what we might call the hermeneutic application, is the object of the critique.
In other words, fixed words are mere dregs, while transforming words are
more than mere text. Wheelwright Pian is making a phenomenological point
here about the necessary embodiment of skill, and the fact that learning and
skill require aesthetic personalization. If the sage is really dead, then what is
left to feel in the hand and respond to from the heart? On the other hand, if
the book is a real connection, through language, through a meaning-making
activity, to the life of another, then treating that other as “live” is precisely
what makes possible a transmission, not of a message, but of the potential of
a way of life that must be lived to be understood.
Cook Ding was butchering an ox for Lord Wenhui. His hand touched,
shoulder leaned in, foot stamped on the ground, putting pressure with his
knee, with a hiss! With a thud! The chopper as it sliced never missed the
rhythm, now in time with the Mulberry Forest dance, now with an
orchestra playing the Qingshou. “Ah, excellent!” said Lord Wenhui.
“Your skill has reached such heights!” Cook Ding set down the chopper
and replied, “What I care about is dao, this goes beyond skill. When I first
began to butcher oxen, wherever I looked I saw nothing but oxen. After
three years, I no longer saw an entire ox. Now, I use the numinous to
encounter it, and do not use the eye to see it. The senses know where to
stop, the numinous continues on. I rely on natural patterns, cleave along
the main seams, let myself be guided by the main cavities, go by what is
inherently so. I skillfully pass through without hitting any tendons or
ligaments, not to mention solid bone. A good cook changes his chopper
once a year, because he hacks. A common cook changes it once a month,
because he smashes. Now I have had this chopper for nineteen years, and
have butchered several thousand oxen, but the edge is as new as if it just
came from the grindstone. At that joint there is space between, and the
blade’s edge has no thickness; if you take what has no thickness and put
it into the space between, then, there is more than enough room in there
for the edge to roam about. This is why after nineteen years the edge of
my chopper is as new as if it were fresh from the grindstone.”57
each unfamiliar word to the ease and familiarity of a reader who hardly
even recognizes that she is engaged in doing anything when she reads. The
ease, the joyful dance of the embodied practice of Cook Ding’s care for dao,
how things are and how they should be, which is skillful and yet not mere
skill, lends an aesthetic richness to the language of reading. If we were to
read as Cook Ding butchers, how would we read? We would read with a
direct care for the embodied nature of the activity, with a dance-like rhythm
and grace; we would recognize that reading is part of a larger project of
caring for dao and nourishing life; we would be guided by the particulars of
the situation without imposing ourselves upon it; and we would pay careful
attention to the empty spaces and places. We can see these empty spaces in
Mendelsund’s account of when as readers we are asked “not to see,” or to
“imagine the unimaginable” or to “understand a character by what they are
not.”58 The relationship between the silence that births a tone and the void
that words emerge from reminds us that often it is the play or interplay
between what is present and what is absent that creates meaning.
The empty spaces and places, for the butcher the joints of the animal, the
openings between muscle, bone, ligament, and fiber, for the reader are
perhaps what is unsaid, unwritten, and yet what underlies and holds together
the story, the description, or the argument; they are also the meaning that
is yet-to-be-determined, the space for significance to emerge from the
particulars of the given text, rather than through the imposition of a fat
chopper that would get very dull indeed shoving its prejudgments through
the text. The experienced reader’s chopper, guided by what is absent as much
as what is present, does not hack or smash but moves through the text with
the agile precision of a very slim blade. The novice’s chopper, on the other
hand, may need frequent sharpening.
In building on this last point, we would especially take care to go slowly
when the going was difficult, as Cook Ding relates:
The character here used for “Potter’s Wheel” also means “equality.” The
two meanings converge in the consideration of the even distribution of
clay made possible by the constant spinning of the wheel: the potter’s
wheel’s very instability, its constant motion, is what makes things equal.
Note also that Chinese cosmology considers Heaven, the sky, to be
“rotating”: the stars and constellations turn in the sky, and the seasons—
the sky’s varying conditions—are brought in a cyclical sequence. The
turning of the seasons is what makes things exist and grow. The turning
of the Potter’s Wheel sky brings life, as the potter’s wheel creates pots.61
where the present is shaped by the past, and is in the process of shaping
what is to come.
One way to read this image is to bring to mind the importance of dynamic
instability—the wheel’s constant motion is what makes possible both
balance on it and creative activity from it. As readers this suggests that we
be conscious of our locations, and the difficulty of maintaining one’s balance
when occupying a position on the outside of the wheel. The empty space in
the center allows us to playfully occupy multiple interpretive spaces without
becoming fixed to any one in particular. To take this in a more concrete
direction, as Brooks notes: “The ability to read critically the messages that
society, politics, and culture bombard us with is, more than ever, needed
training in a society in which the manipulation of minds and hearts is
increasingly what running the world is all about.”62 Occupying the center of
the wheel, on this metaphor, then, may allow us not just to take the best
advantage of the given circumstances, but to have the necessary interpretive
distance to be critical readers of all incoming messages, not taking a friend-
or-foe position on the outside of the wheel, or situating ourselves in an echo-
chamber where intent and meaning have been determined in advance.
Confucius: “If you merge all your intentions into a singularity, you will
come to hear with the heart-mind rather than the ears. Further, you will
come to hear with the qi rather than with the heart-mind. For the ears are
halted at what they hear. The heart-mind is halted at whatever verifies its
preconceptions. But the qi is an emptiness, a waiting for the presence of
beings. The dao alone is what gathers in this emptiness. And it is this
emptiness that is the fasting of the heart-mind.”
Yan Hui said, “Before I find what moves me into activity, it is myself
that is full and real. But as soon as I find what moves me, it turns out that
‘myself’ has never begun to exist. Is that what you mean by being empty?”
Confucius said, “Exactly. Let me tell you about it . . . Good fortune
comes to roost in stillness. To lack this stillness is called scurrying
around even when sitting down. Allow your ears and eyes to open inward
and thereby place yourself beyond your heart-mind’s understanding.
Even the ghosts and spirits will then seek refuge in you, human beings all
the more so!”63
In his guise here as a Daoist sage, and not a stodgy moralist, Confucius is
trying to help Yan Hui figure out how to help others. In order to do that, he
suggests, Yan Hui needs to figure out how to stop feeding his heart-mind,
the source and activity of his feeling-and-thinking. To do this, Confucius
says that he needs to move from hearing with his ears, to hearing with his
heart-mind, to hearing with his qi 氣 (vital energy), which will allow him to
cultivate an emptiness and a stillness that will draw others to him.
In parsing out what this means, Yan Hui says, “it turns out that ‘myself’
has never begun to exist. Is that what you mean by being empty?” Here, the
image of fasting the heart-mind, reading with your qi, in concentrated
stillness, beyond the preconceptions of your heart-mind, has an additional
layer—rather than throwing into doubt the clarity of the subject–object
relation, as reading did for Poulet and Iser, here for Yan Hui fasting the heart-
mind has perhaps thrown into doubt the existence of his “self” in a strong
sense. In an ethics of reading, or reading as part of an ethical life, reflection
on what the “self” is and means is crucial, and this is something that certainly
would benefit from perspectives from diverse philosophical traditions.
While Scarry takes a key component of the ethics of reading to be taking
on other perspectives, from fasting the heart-mind we see also the idea of
placing yourself beyond your limited, individualized understanding, and
getting beyond the idea of your “self.” This can even be seen in Scarry’s sense
of opiated adjacency, where instead of the feeling of pleasure at one’s being
sidelined, one might have a feeling of pleasure at being beyond your heart-
mind’s understanding, empty of yourself. In entering into a liminal space
“we” can be “transformed” in important ways that point to the flexible and
permeable nature of us as persons. So rather than Poulet’s need to “leave the
individual behind,” reading gives us the opportunity to realize the fiction of
the unchanging self. After all, for the Zhuangzi one of the most important
themes of the entire text is transformation—the constant transformation
of the cosmos, but also the potential we have to playfully transform ourselves
to meander along with the changes we find around us. An ethics of reading,
then, as an aesthetic practice and approach not only to texts, but to any
potential sites of meaning and connection to others, whether in images,
works of art, persons, or as a way to move about in the world, can be a way
to live a response to Butler’s question: What value are our values? If they are
not to be just the dregs of old, then you will have to see for yourself.
6. Conclusion
Paying attention to the phenomenology of reading has led many thinkers to
converge on the importance of reading as a slow, self-conscious practice, one
that benefits from repetition and tactile sensation and that gives us the rare
opportunity to practice being still. As Mendelsund reflects, “reading mirrors
the procedure by which we acquaint ourselves with the world. It is not that
our narratives necessarily tell us something true about the world (though
they might), but rather that the practice of reading feels like, and is like,
consciousness itself: imperfect; partial; hazy; co-creative.”64
Attending more carefully to this oft-neglected practice can offer us
insights into who and how we are. In the Introduction to this chapter I
referenced Xu Bing’s “Book of the Sky,” an installation piece that took four
years (1987–91) to complete. This work of art is perhaps one of the most
insightful pieces in recent years on many issues, but especially concerning
reading. The work is a mixed-media installation featuring books and scrolls
printed from hand-carved blocks created by the artist. Each block was
created to resemble, but not really be, a character in the Chinese language.
The artist then printed the books and scrolls in such a way as to balance
word frequency and type, giving the feeling of reading a real text (e.g., “a”
and “the” occur more often in sentences than “perchance” or “terrifying”).
Each character is meaningless, and yet it produces the illusion of being
almost meaningful, nearly readable, just beyond one’s reach (if one reads
Chinese). As an installation, the ceiling billows with text, the floor is covered
in waves of books, the walls flow from one scroll to the next. Moving
through it, you are at once immersed in text, and yet never more aware of
incommunicability, of the way in which the text resists your almost
existential drive to read it. Many Chinese viewers spent hours examining the
early exhibits, sure that there were at least some “real” characters mixed in
with the fakes.
While there are many things that can be said about this work, from its
connection to Xu’s time spent working for state propaganda art to Chinese
history and block printing, for our purposes there are a few things that
stand out. First, there is the phenomenological experience of reading, the
way in which the work initiates a connection and makes one try to read it,
even when it is obvious that it cannot be read. Your eyes still pore over it as
if it were text, as if the characters will soon shift into focus and be meaningful;
if you are a calligrapher your hand might even trace some characters to feel
the rhythm of the brushstrokes. The opacity of the text is striking—the
Chinese Classics were learned through recitation, and while there is a visible
rhythm to the organization of the “characters,” there is no sound, no
reference through the visual to what the text should sound like. Second, the
work highlights the context of reading, not only the location, language,
history, printing, and so on, but that the very act of reading is a purposeful
(if also automatic) act. We read to know, to seek and to find meaning with
and through others, and that is always in a larger context. Third, reading is
a political activity. As a work of art, Xu’s piece is able to suggest this in ways
that are perhaps not as clear in a more direct phenomenological analysis.
Reading is political in the sense of the privilege of being able to read, the
control of what is available to read, and in the Zhuangzian sense of reading
as a transformational practice. The piece also encourages reflection on the
nature of such a large collection of books—while in the Song and Ming
Dynasties that his work evokes, such large collections would likely have
been in private hands, in contemporary times we are lucky enough to have
free public libraries, and such institutions have been an important part of
not only individual but also cultural transformation. Xu Bing’s work
prompts us to reflect on the experience, meaning, and significance of reading
in our own lives, and as a work of art, it does so in a way that models an
ethics of reading, from a work of art to a lived practice and out into our
engagements with others.
Finally, the work is called the “Book of the Sky,” and while we often take
reading to be indicative of human-to-human connection, as Xu hints at with
his title we also read the sky, the natural world, and we should perhaps not
get so caught up in our own meaning-making activities that we cease to pay
attention to the transformations happening around us. I would like to leave
you with selections from a letter, written by botanist Robin Kimmerer, as
part of a book to young readers:
Notes
1 While the focus of this chapter is on literate adults, low literacy among adults
and children in the United States is a serious issue that has not received
significant philosophical attention. Due to space constraints and my own lack
of familiarity with the subject, I also do not delve into the interesting
philosophical issues surrounding braille or other concerns in phenomenology
of reading for the visually impaired.
2 First noted in English by John Ridley Stroop in 1935, the Stroop Effect in
psychology described a kind of interference in the reaction time of certain
kinds of tasks. One of the most famous demonstrations of this is how much
longer it takes to name (out loud) the color a color word is printed in, when
the color it is printed in and the color it spells out are two different colors (e.g.,
RED, written in black ink, when the task is to name aloud the color of the ink,
not the word) of reading aloud the color a word is written in, if the word
spelled is a different color than the ink of the word.
3 For images of the work, see: http://www.xubing.com/en/work/details/
206?year=1991&type=year#206
4 A good introduction in English to Qian’s work is Ronald Egan, trans. Limited
Views: Essays on Ideas and Letters (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1998).
5 Daniel Willingham, The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to
Understanding How the Mind Reads (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2017), 2.
6 Willingham, The Reading Mind, 3.
7 See Alan Moore and Eric Schwitzgebel, “The Experience of Reading,”
Consciousness and Cognition, 62 (2018): 57–68.
8 See Kara Pernice, “F-Shaped Pattern of Reading on the Web: Misunderstood
but Still Relevant (Even on Mobile),” Nielsen Normal Group. Available online
at: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/
9 See Therese Fessenden, “Horizontal Attention Leans Left,” Nielsen Normal
Group. Available online at: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/horizontal-
attention-leans-left/
10 See Anne Mangen et al., “Reading Linear Texts on Paper versus Computer
Screens: Effects on Reading Comprehension,” International Journal of
Educational Research, 58 (2013): 61–8. See also the more popularly aimed
works by: Naomi Baron, “Do Students Lose Depth in Digital Reading?,” The
Conversation. Available online at: https://theconversation.com/do-students-
lose-depth-in-digital-reading-61897; Rachel Grate, “Science Has Great News
for People Who Read Actual Books,” Mic. Available online at: https://mic.com/
articles/99408/science-has-great-news-for-people-who-read-actual-books#.
PMd5BMAUI; and Maria Torheim, “Do We Read Differently on Paper than on
a Screen?,” Phys.org. Available online at: https://phys.org/news/2017-09-
differently-paper-screen.html
11 Maryanne Wolf, “Skim Reading is the New Normal: The Effect on Society is
Profound,” The Guardian. Available online at: https://www.theguardian.com/
commentisfree/2018/aug/25/skim-reading-new-normal-maryanne-wolf?fbclid=
IwAR28ZJeg3ZcO9TSwYTUWMTiaeTLJ0rTt6iSJmVyA8fajtzTFziyKtj33gZ4
12 Jordan Weissmann, “The Decline of the American Book Lover: And Why the
Downturn might be Over,” The Atlantic. Available online at: https://www.
theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-decline-of-the-american-book-
lover/283222/
13 While traditional phenomenology was not particularly concerned with ethics
per se, later developments in existential phenomenology recognize the
inextricable connections between the social, political, and intentional spheres
of our experience, and so are deeply concerned with how phenomenological
inquiry relates to ethical living, and I take this more existential approach to
phenomenological inquiry in this chapter.
References
Baron, Naomi. (2016), “Do Students Lose Depth in Digital Reading?,” The
Conversation, 20 July. Available online at: https://theconversation.com/do-
students-lose-depth-in-digital-reading-61897
Brooks, Peter, ed. (2014), The Humanities and Public Life, New York: Fordham
University Press.
Butler, Judith. (2014), “Ordinary, Incredulous,” in The Humanities and Public Life,
Peter Brooks (ed.), 15–37, New York: Fordham University Press.
Fessenden, Therese. (2017), “Horizontal Attention Leans Left,” Nielsen Normal
Group, 22 October. Available online at: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/
horizontal-attention-leans-left/
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (2004), Truth and Method, Joel Weinsheimer and Donald
Marchall (trans.), New York: Continuum.
Grate, Rachel. (2014), “Science Has Great News for People Who Read Actual
Books,” Mic, 22 September. Available online at: https://mic.com/articles/99408/
science-has-great-news-for-people-who-read-actual-books#.PMd5BMAUI
Iser, Wolfgang. (1972), “The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach,”
New Literary History, 3 (2): 279–99.
Kidd, David and Emanuele Castano. (2013), “Reading Literary Fiction Improves
Theory of Mind,” Science, 242 (6156): 377–80. Available online at: http://
science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6156/377
Kimmerer, Robin. (2018), “Dear Young Reader,” in A Velocity of Being: Letters to
a Young Reader, Maria Popova and Claudia Bedrick (eds.), 78, New York:
Enchanted Lion Books.
Larmore, Charles. (2014), “The Ethics of Reading,” in The Humanities and Public
Life, Peter Brooks (ed.), 49–54, New York: Fordham University Press.
Li, Zehou. (2009), The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, Majia Bell Samei (trans.),
Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Mangen, Anne et al. (2013), “Reading Linear Texts on Paper versus Computer
Screens: Effects on Reading Comprehension,” International Journal of
Educational Research, 58: 61–8.
Mattice, Sarah. (2014), Metaphor and Metaphilosophy: Philosophy as Combat,
Play, and Aesthetic Experience, Lanham: Lexington Books.
Mendelsund, Peter. (2014), What We See When We Read: A Phenomenology with
Illustrations, New York: Vintage Books.
Katrin Froese
1. Introduction
In the contemporary world, we are drowning in a cacophony of textual
voices, thanks in large part to the precipitous rise of social media and an
overabundance of available data. But, this surplus of information and text
has also been accompanied by a profound sense of meaninglessness and
a burgeoning disenchantment, especially as it seems to proliferate without
grounding. Nonetheless, we become habituated to this noise and are
increasingly uncomfortable with silence and solitude, even though we are in
dire need of their counterbalancing effects. Without silence as a companion
to language, words themselves are eventually denuded of their meaning and
become little more than continuous babble which we are addicted to, despite
its unsettling impact. Our language has literally run away from us.
In an environment marked by the excess of speech, Laozi’s Daodejing 道
德經 and the work of Maurice Merleau-Ponty offer a welcome alternative.
The need to step back from our linguistic constructs is acknowledged. A
primordial silence is once again to become a part of language, and for this
to take place, a non-linguistic awareness must be deliberately fostered. In
the Daodejing stillness is cultivated, and silence also becomes part of the
process of naming through the act of continuously renaming and unsettling
all settled words. In Merleau-Ponty, silence is a retreat from speaking in
order to open up infinite perceptual pathways that lead us to unexpected
worlds. This is meaningful in his view because it opens the door to the lived
experience of connection, rather than relying on communicative tools alone.
However, words do not necessarily function in opposition to silence, there is
also a continuous “enfolding” of words into the perceptual experience. The
danger arises not from their intermingling, but when we succumb to the
2. Merleau-Ponty
The prevailing view of language assumes that it functions mainly as a
communicative tool, which conceptualizes, represents, and enframes
experience. This illusory mindset impels us to view silence as little more than
a void, signifying ignorance and non-knowledge. However, it is precisely the
non-knowing relationship to the world that silence offers, which Merleau-
Ponty insists is absolutely essential in order to live a meaningful existence.
Silence and speech are placed into polar opposition only when language has
detached itself from its corporal moorings to the point where its conceptual
abstractions have asserted their primacy. For Merleau-Ponty this amounts
to mistaking the secondary end-product of linguistic development for its
origins and it dovetails with the fantasy of the omniscient subject to achieve
totality, which also functions as a kind of limiting self-enclosure.
According to Merleau-Ponty such an approach glosses over an awareness
of language in the process of emergence, wherein it becomes part of our
corporal response to the world. Silence resides in the midst of language,
attuning us to a plenitude of existence that can never be grasped, nor fully
communicated. It represents the confusion out of which language emerges
as well as the openness and potential that impels us to speak in the first
place. As such, it also functions as an important counterweight to knowledge,
reminding us that knowledge itself is only one kind of response to our
existence that when taken too far, suppresses the very wonder that gave
birth to it in the first place. Silence can keep such wonder alive, reminding
us that we are interwoven into a world that “precedes knowledge . . . in
relation to which every scientific schematization is an abstract and derivative
sign-language.”1 In other words, we must stop continuously thinking
ourselves out of the world.
The role of silence in Merleau-Ponty is indelibly linked to the primacy of
perception, which remains the central theme of his entire corpus. When the
phenomenological clarion call to “return to the things themselves” is heeded,
we discover that there are no “things” except perhaps as a result of the
objectifying acts of consciousness. Instead of privileging consciousness,
Merleau-Ponty focuses on perception, which precedes consciousness.
Perception is no longer the abstract grasping or apprehension of “things,”
but a testament to our entanglement in the world. In addition, the
predominant role accorded to perception marks a resistance to a life
increasingly weighed down by words, which causes the words themselves to
this second-order experience offers and we “lose contact with the perceptual
experience.”24
In the Introduction to Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty
makes the claim that “to return to things themselves, is to return to that
world which precedes knowledge of which knowledge always speaks.”25 We
cannot move from certainty within the self, to certainty about the outside
world, since the world is there “before any analysis of mine.” Before
knowledge speaks, before we can even conceive of a consciousness, the
world speaks to us silently. Thus silence is also a return to pre-egoistic
reflection: “When I begin to reflect, I reflect upon an unreflective experience.”26
Merleau-Ponty vociferously denies the existence of an inner world separated
from the outer world: “Truth does not ‘inhabit’ only the ‘inner man’ or more
accurately there is no inner man, man is in the world, and only in the world
does he know himself.”27
In The Visible and the Invisible Merleau-Ponty suggests that we engage
in a hyper-reflection which is a kind of reflection that returns to pre-linguistic
awareness, perpetually relating it to our linguistic ways of being, which
would not “lose sight of the brute thing and the brute awareness and would
not finally efface them, and would not cut the organic bonds between the
perception and the thing perceived with a hypothesis of inexistence.”28 This
means that silence would be part of reflection as part of “our mute contact
with things, when they are not yet things said.”29 Rather than becoming
merely the vehicle for knowledge, thinking becomes a constant interrogation
of the world, through which we expose “what in silence it means to say.”30
No conceptual schema can bestow upon the world a singular unity. Instead
the world through perception is revealed as “strange and paradoxical.”31 We
are transformed through this perceptual act and cannot extricate ourselves
from the world “in order to achieve consciousness” of it.32
Perception is neither wholly passive nor wholly active and opens up a
new surrounding world (an Umwelt) and therefore is in itself fundamentally
expressive as well as responsive. Our relationship with this Umwelt is
paradoxical since we are assaulted by it, creating a fissure within ourselves
that constantly places our subjectivity under siege. But this inner rift or
opening incites within us an impossible thirst for plenitude that drives us to
perceive. Perception is also a kind of yearning for the fullness the world
offers, while at the same time underlining the impossible possibility of
coming together and tearing apart which Merleau-Ponty will later coin the
incompossible: “The world ceaselessly assails and beleaguers subjectivity, as
waves wash round a wreck on the shore. All knowledge takes place within
the horizons opened up by perception . . . we can never fill up in the picture
of the world, that gap which we ourselves are, since perception is the flaw
in this ‘great diamond.’ ”33 The image of the great diamond is taken from a
poem by Valéry: “Mes repentirs, mes doutes mes contraintes, sont les défauts
de ton grand diamant” (My doubts, compunctions, my constraints and
checks, these are the flaws of your great diamond).34 This metaphor
In the above passage, the word ji 寂 means both silent and lonely, since it
refers to a condition prior to the emergence of the myriad forms of life. The
ten thousand things (wanwu 萬物), of which we are but one, always long to
return to their primal origins. Hence, silence is emblematic of a state before
things were distinct from one another, which also can become the source of
our longing. According to the Daodejing, it is as fundamental to our being
as language, which is something we readily forget, especially in a culture
that is marked by a surplus of words and text. In other words, the Daodejing
suggests that even our desire to speak may represent the allure of silence
because the plenitude of silence can never be “filled” by speech. Every word
we utter falls short and so we frantically search for more fitting words. In
fact, the text notes that if “forced (qiang 強) to give it a name, I would call
it grand.” But as soon as the name grand (da 大) is bestowed on it, the
speaker adopts a plethora of other names that cast doubt on the initial
moniker: “Being grand, it is called passing. Passing, it is called distancing.
Distancing, it is called returning.”61 The interaction between naming and
un-naming or renaming is significant. Through silence we recognize that
no name suffices. Thus silence is part of the action of naming by unsettling
every name. This kind of “deconstruction” is a meaningful process signifying
a movement back to the source of all things, which is beyond any single
name but at the same time permeates all of them. The primordial oneness
gives birth to multiplicity and a fecund naming is part of this process of
constant generation and growth. In other words, it draws attention to
naming as process rather than focusing simply on “the named.”
There are many instances in the Daodejing where the importance of jing
靜 is underscored. Although this word means silence, it can also mean
stillness, calm, and equilibrium. Stillness is the root of movement, even
agitated movement: “The heavy is the root of the light, stillness is the lord
of agitation (jing wei zaojun 靜為躁君).”62 This passage can be interpreted
in multiple ways. One is that frenetic activity (zao 躁) is kept in check by
jing ensuring that one is always drawn back to the silent root. Cultivating
the stillness of the body is an important part of this process. Thomas Michael
asserts that the “pristine Dao” is related to its inner cultivation within the
physical body and that “both are grounded in a physicality that cannot be
brushed aside.”63A second possible interpretation of the passage is that the
desire for stillness precipitates the frantic attempt to return to the primordial.
Since every action falls short, we engage in unrelenting activity unaware that
our nervous movement is a longing for silence.
The Daodejing presupposes that harmony is also the most natural state
of being, but it is not a harmony that excludes opposition; rather, it emerges
out of a process in which opposites flow into each other. This means that
even the movement from one extreme to another signifies a natural pull
toward equilibrium, just as the door swings around a hinge from one side to
another while the hinge itself does not move. The moving opposites always
remain connected through the hinge and thus are one.
While the text on one level labels desire a negative force that hinders
the return to the Dao, maintaining that a desireless posture enables one to
observe the mysteries of things (gu heng wuyu, yiguan qi miao 故恆無欲,以
觀其秒), it also asserts that desire enables one to “observe boundaries” (heng
youyu ye, yiguan qi suojiao 恆有欲也,以觀其所徼).64 Boundaries draw
attention to the particular potential of things or their de 德. Thus we
must move continuously between desire and “desirelessness.” The desire
manifested in silence is a yearning for a radical openness that impels us to
transition through various states rather than settling in any one position.
Curie Virag points out that desire is what “incites, animates and furnishes the
content of knowing because it represents the workings of the Dao within
humans: it is the productive force by which all things come into the world
and move towards fulfillment.”65 In contrast, Hans-Georg Moeller argues
that desires are identified as the “main cause of war and social disorder in the
Daodejing.”66 He points out that a desireless stance is necessary among sages
as well as being deliberately cultivated in the general populace so as to avoid
conflict. However, I argue that the rejection of objectifying desire predicated
on acquisition does not constitute the rejection of all desire.
The above passage attests to the possibility of a desire for fluid and open
movement.
In the Daodejing, as in Merleau-Ponty, speaking is an act that transforms
the ten thousand things, sometimes in creative ways that “fold back” into
the Dao (to appropriate Merleau-Ponty’s language), but also in destructive
ways that usher in disequilibrium and mark abrupt departures from the
harmonious way of the Dao (of course, even this disharmony experienced
by human beings becomes part of the ultimate harmony of the Dao which
treats human beings as “straw dogs destined for sacrifice”). The Daodejing
begins by highlighting the paradoxical nature of language and cautioning us
to always speak carefully and tentatively. It throws into question the action
of naming while at the same time affirming its importance and vitality:
Way-making that can be put into words is not really way-making, and
naming that can assign fixed reference to things is not really naming. The
nameless is the beginning of Heaven and Earth, the named is the mother
of the ten thousand things.67
There are several ways of interpreting this passage. On the one hand,
words cannot possibly capture the eternal Dao (changdao 常道), and are but
a pale and also misguided imitation of it. Yet, it can also be read in a very
different, albeit unconventional way if chang is assumed to mean regular or
common rather than eternal: “The Dao that can dao is not the common
Dao, the name that can name is not the regular name.” In other words, the
Dao that is capable of Dao-ing is not regular because it is continuously
adaptive and flexible.68 The naming that can name is not a congealed word
but a fluid one. Naming is always also a renaming. There is a difference
between using language adaptively and using it rigidly. Nonetheless, the
name is always inadequate to the Dao, and so the only recourse one has is
to use words and subsequently undo them, thereby mimicking the ebb and
flow of the Dao in language and ensuring that words do not become too
entrenched, or sedimented. In order to approximate the stillness of the
source, one must be prepared to continually adjust. Thus movement can
become a kind of return to the openness of stillness. Sedimented language
which all too often bellows into silence, disrupting it rather than growing
out of it, obscures the harmonious movement of the Dao.
The Daodejing does not vilify speech. Naming itself is a way of
participating in the creative generation of the Dao, which is why the named
The five colors blind the eye, the hard riding of the hunt addles both heart
and mind, and property hard to come by subverts proper conduct. The
five flavors destroy the palate and the five notes impair the ear. It is for
this reason that in the proper governing by the sages: They exert their
efforts on behalf of the abdomen rather than the eye, thus eschewing one
they take the other.72
The unavailability of the Dao to the senses suggests that there is a kind
of awareness made possible by the cognizance of their failure to reach
what we long for. Thus perceptual failure is an important part of the
awareness of the Dao:
Looking and yet not seeing it, we thus call it elusive. Listening and yet not
hearing it, we thus call it inaudible. Groping and yet not getting it, we
thus call it intangible. Because in sight, sound and touch it is beyond
determination, we construe it as inseparably one.75
As soon as everyone in the world knows that the beautiful are beautiful,
there is already ugliness. As soon as everyone knows the able, there is
ineptness.77
Those of ancient times who engaged in way-making (Dao) did not use it to
edify the common people, but rather to keep them foolish. What makes it
difficult to bring proper order to the people is that they already know too
much. Thus to use knowledge in governing the state is to be a bane to that
state. To use a lack of knowledge in governing the state is to be its benefactor.80
This is not a plea to render people ignorant, although the wording of the
passage may suggest that this is indeed the case. In comparison to the masses
who are enamored with their own knowledge, the person who realizes the
unknowable nature of the Dao seems dumb and is also thrust to the social
periphery. The wisdom of stillness always makes one an outsider. The masses
think they see because they can scale the heights to survey the surroundings
(this is reminiscent of Merleau-Ponty’s critique of knowledge as survoler or
surveying from above):
Most people are happy, happy as though feasting at the tailao banquet
or climbing some sightseeing tower in the springtime. I alone am so
impassive, revealing nothing at all, like a babe that has yet to smile. So
listless, as though nowhere to go . . . The common lot see things so clearly,
while I alone seem to be in the dark. The common lot are so discriminating,
while I alone am so obtuse. So vague and hazy, like the rolling seas; so
indeterminate, as though virtually endless.81
The wisdom of the sage who cultivates an appreciation for the murkiness
of the Dao and retreats into silence appears stupid in relation to the babbling
crowd. It is natural for the sage to “speak only rarely” (xiyan ziran 希言自
然).82 When words are used to excess, they resemble the “violent winds”
which “do not last a whole morning.”83 Silence represents a refusal to see the
world through one’s communicative tools alone, but in doing so, one is
forced into the position of the outsider. In a world overrun with texts and
words, such a person is scorned and mocked for her/his rejection of
instrumentalism. A non-instrumental stance is open, adaptive, purposeless,
and useless in world that prioritizes success and achievement:
What is truest seems crooked; what is most skillful seems bungling. What
is most prosperous seems wanting; what is most eloquent seems halting.
Staying active beats the cold; keeping still beats the heat. Purity and
stillness can bring proper order to the world.84
4. Conclusion
The cultivation of the relationship between speech and silence according to
both the Daodejing and Merleau-Ponty is necessary to revive the poetic and
creative use of language. It signifies an overture or openness to the world
that imbues us with a sense of meaning. Mystery and obscurity generate a
kind of desire that assists the closure of knowledge. An overemphasis on
knowledge risks changing the world into something that can be ordered and
controlled, which is why it must be continuously undone. The child, who
greets the world with wonder, is not suffocated by the idea that life has no
purpose, because it is intuitively preoccupied with its exploration. Meaning
Notes
1 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception (London: Routledge
& Kegan Paul, 1979), ix.
2 Ibid., xvii.
3 Ibid., 5.
4 Reneau Barbaras maintains that Merleau-Ponty never abandons the dualist
vocabulary that marks the split between realism and intellectualism, and
maintains that the body becomes a site of mediation between the two
conflicting strains: “Realism and intellectualism are not so much overcome as
pushed to the side, with the result finally that the double negation tends to turn
itself into a double affirmation. Far from giving way to a radical reevaluation
of the concepts of objective philosophy, the description is actualized in
terminology that is simultaneously realist and intellectualist.” Reneau Barbaras,
The Being of the Phenomenon: Merleau-Ponty’s Ontology (Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1991), 6. However, I would argue that the word sens
is a word that bridges the gap between intellectualism and realism because it is
the physical connection to reality, which is also always incomplete and partial,
that precipitates the conscious quest for meaning.
5 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible (Evanston: Northwestern
University Press, 1969), 43.
6 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 4.
7 Lawrence Hass, Merleau-Ponty’s Philosophy (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 2008), 33.
8 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 4.
9 Ibid., 61.
10 Ibid., 215.
11 M.C. Dillon, Merleau-Ponty’s Ontology (Chicago: Northwestern University
Press, 1997), 56.
12 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Signs (Evanston: Northwestern University Press,
1964), 58–9.
13 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 214.
14 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Primacy of Perception: and Other Essays on
Phenomenological Psychology, The Philosophy of Art, History and Politics
(Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 290.
15 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 11.
16 Ibid., 67.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid., 71.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 Merleau-Ponty, Signs, 16.
54 Ibid., 136.
55 Ibid., 150.
56 Ibid., 126.
57 Ibid., 127.
58 Glen Mazis notes that Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy of perception undercuts all
sorts of dualisms including the dualisms of “ideality and materiality, necessity
and contingency and empiricism and idealism” and espouses a “felt solidarity”
with the world. He uses the term “imaginal” to describe the world between
silence and speech. Glen Mazis, Merleau-Ponty and the Face of the World:
Silence, Ethics, Imagination and Poetic Ontology (Albany: State University of
New York Press, 2016), xiii–xiv.
59 Mazis, Merleau-Ponty, 121.
60 Laozi, Daodejing: A Philosophical Translation, Roger Ames (trans.)
(New York: Ballantine Books, 2004), chapter 25.
61 Ibid.
62 Ibid., chapter 26.
63 Thomas Michael, The Pristine Dao: Metaphysics in Early Daoist Discourse
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005), 4–5.
64 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 1.
65 Curie Virag, The Emotions in Early Chinese Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2017), 76.
66 Hans-Georg Moeller, The Philosophy of the Daodejing (New York: Columbia
University Press, 2006), 87.
67 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 1.
68 Most commentaries interpret changdao to mean the eternal Dao. For example,
Wang Bi notes that: “The Way that can be spoken about is not the eternal Dao,
since the eternal cannot be spoken about and named.” See Rudolf Wagner, A
Chinese Reading of the Daodejing: Wang Bi’s Commentary on the Laozi with
Critical Text and Translation (Albany: State University of New York Press,
2003), 121.
69 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 1.
70 Lin Ma, “Levinas and the Daodejing on the Feminine: Intercultural
Reflections,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 39.S1 (2012): 165.
71 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 16.
72 Ibid., chapter 12.
73 Thomas Michael, In the Shadows of the Dao: Laozi, the Sage and the
Daodejing (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2015), 11.
74 Laozi, Daodejing, chapter 48.
75 Ibid., chapter 14.
76 Ibid.
77 Ibid., chapter 2.
78 Ibid., chapter 20.
References
Barbaras, Reneau. (1991), The Being of the Phenomenon: Merleau-Ponty’s
Ontology, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Carbone, Mauro. (2004), The Thinking of the Sensible: Merleau-Ponty’s
A-Philosophy, Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Chai, David. (2018), “Thinking through Words: The Existential Hermeneutics of
Zhuangzi and Heidegger,” in Paul Fairfield and Saulius Geniusas (eds.),
Relational Hermeneutics: Essays in Comparative Philosophy, 205–19, London:
Bloomsbury Academic.
Dillon, M.C. (1997), Merleau-Ponty’s Ontology, Chicago: Northwestern University
Press.
Froese, Katrin. (2018), Why Can’t Philosophers Laugh, New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Hass, Lawrence. (2008), Merleau-Ponty’s Philosophy, Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Laozi. (2004), Daodejing: A Philosophical Translation, Roger Ames (trans.), New
York: Ballantine Books.
Ma, Lin. (2012), “Levinas and the Daodejing on the Feminine: Intercultural
Reflections,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 39 (S1): 152–70.
Mazis, Glen. (2016), Merleau-Ponty and the Face of the World: Silence, Ethics,
Imagination and Poetic Ontology, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1945), Phénomenologie de la Perception, Paris:
Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1964), The Primacy of Perception: And Other Essays on
Phenomenological Psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History and Politics,
James Edie (trans.), Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1964), Le Visible et l’Invisible, Paris: Gallimard.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1964), Signs, Richard McCleary (trans.), Evanston:
Northwestern University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1969), The Visible and the Invisible, Claude Lefort
(trans.), Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1979), Phenomenology of Perception, Colin Smith
(trans.), London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Michael, Thomas. (2005), The Pristine Dao: Metaphysics in Early Daoist
Discourse, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Michael, Thomas. (2015), In the Shadows of the Dao: Laozi, the Sage and the
Daodejing, Albany: State University of New York Press.
A Most Urgent
Encounter:
Re-Rooting Our
Futural Selves
Martin Schönfeld
Phenomenology faces uncertain prospects, not only in the arts and the
humanities, but also in relation to the wider spectrum of research programs.
Is there a path from its great past to an even greater future? I believe there
is—but with the caveat that taking this path would come with two conditions.
First, it would require phenomenology to embrace a foundational outlook
based on positivism rather than relativism, on objectivity rather than
subjectivity, and on realism rather than anti-realism. Second, it would
require an orientation toward Eastern ways of thinking, specifically toward
Daoism and the ontological model of Laozi’s Daodejing 道德經. Embracing
a realist epistemology and integrating Daoism would allow phenomenology
to consolidate its heuristic position. Such a consolidation would let it gain a
seat at the interdisciplinary table for managing the crisis of collective
existence.
In this chapter, I argue for such a future-oriented consolidation. The
argument proceeds from explaining the two conditions toward examining
“the fourfold” (das Geviert) and “the sage” (der Weise), which are neglected
concepts in Martin Heidegger’s later thought. I describe the need for the
conditions and explain how the fourfold and the sage, in a Daoist reading,
may satisfy them.
In the first section, I point to an alternative in continental philosophy.
It consists of approaches marginalized in the English-speaking world, which,
weakening, with outflows of polar air to the lower latitudes now occurring
every winter. The increase of weather extremes, driven by the thermal energy
absorbed through elevated greenhouse gas concentrations in the climate
system, is pummeling continents and islands with storms, droughts, and
floods; with heatwaves in summer, and deep freezes in winter. As a result,
lands in temperate and tropical latitudes are becoming less productive.
On the civilizational side, the lands most vulnerable to the impacts of
climate change—in North Africa, South Asia, the Middle East, and Central
America—contain also some of the most densely populated regions on
Earth. Growing numbers of people are pushed on uncertain migrations,
with the majority being children. As rivers run dry, dust bowls grow, and
deserts spread, the carrying capacity of the affected regions shrinks. This
makes people lose their livelihoods and homes, and forces them to become
refugees, seeking shelter elsewhere. The stream of refugees is dividing the
host societies which are their destination. Thus in the Global South,
economies are being destabilized and nation-states are failing, while in the
Global North, doors are closing, walls are going up, and nation-states are
battening down the hatches. The growing disparity between haves and have-
nots polarizes collective existence, with cascading consequences. One
consequence is that the liberal order of the West is succumbing to autocratic
regimes. The havoc wreaked on the environment is now blowing back to
global civilization.
Prior to the mass extinction and climate change, civilization had impacted
nature on the surface, with land conversion and with air and water pollution.
Now, human impacts are affecting the ensemble of environmental services
and cycles, the totality of the Earth System. (An example of services is the
biological productivity of the planet; an example of cycles is the carbon
cycle that assimilates CO 2 emissions.) Civilization is dependent on the
integrity of the Earth System, and while this is a truism so trivial it hardly
merits discussion, it is worth considering that this collective existential
dependence is objective, universal, and absolute.
This is the crisis. The upheavals do not spare philosophy. The paradigm
shift in our lifeworld imposes a concordant shift on the academy. Postmodern
approaches to truth and reality are now obsolete. Relativistic, subjectivist,
and anti-realist ways of deconstructing information belong to an earlier
age. In the Anthropocene, such skepticist deconstructions are becoming
cognitive liabilities. Insisting on them, despite the crisis, also raises ethical
concerns.
The philosophical upheaval is illustrated by the precursors to the cognitive
approaches that are standard in postmodernity today. For example, with
regard to early phenomenology’s rejection of psychologism, Edmund
Husserl disavowed positivism and embraced a type of subjectivism instead.
Seen in the historical context of philosophy protecting its borders against
the sciences encroaching from all directions, Husserl’s subjectivism, at that
time, and in these circumstances, was arguably reasonable.
and giving are done freely and energetically; they are not one-time gestures
but a continuous, daily toil. They are activity understood as hard labor. This
activity of giving sense to life (dem Leben einen Sinn geben) requires wisdom
and courage, as well as wit and stamina. The sense-giving serves survival,
well-being, and flourishing. As such, this creation of meaning is subservient
to an existential universal.
The integration of dogmatism with therapy reveals a pattern. Logotherapy
appeals to wisdom in harmony with science for helping people put their
lives back together. Normative humanism appeals to wisdom in harmony
with science for realizing a sane society, as Fromm puts it. Liberation
theology appeals to wisdom and faith, while accepting the findings of science
as positive data, for curing civilization from the disease of social inequality,
for mending the rift between the haves and the have-nots. Deep Ecology,
finally, appeals to wisdom, inspired by science, for mending the rift between
humans and nature caused by economic expansion and population growth.
The goal of logotherapy is spiritual health; the goal of normative humanism
is a sane society; the goal of liberation theology is a compassionate if not
communist social compact, and the goal of Deep Ecology is a sustainable
interface of civilization with the Earth System. In each case, the framework
of reality is science; the philosophical means is wisdom, and the therapeutic
goal is existential flourishing.
The final aspect of dogmatic-therapeutic philosophies is their progressive
character. Progressiveness is implicit in the therapeutic dimension, because
therapy involves a teleological trajectory, which starts at a given existential
or societal situation and ends in the realization of an optimal potential of
that existence or society. The trajectory from actuality to potentiality is
progressive. This progression is both a movement going forward, from an
earlier to a later point, and a movement upward, from a lower level or a
worse situation, to a higher level, a better situation.
While the vector of progress in logotherapy is closely aligned with the
meaning of progress in medicine, its vector in the other branches it is more
aligned with is the meaning of progress in politics, which, by definition, is a
leftist concept. Liberation theology, normative humanism, and Deep Ecology
are all committed to the thesis of an upwards development in history. While
Buber’s Jewish thought may seem to have little to do with this vector, once
more his biography is illustrative: Buber was not only a Talmud scholar but
also a card-carrying socialist, and therefore a progressive par excellence. In
the context of justice and rights, this upward development is the evolution
from the slaveholder feudalisms of antiquity to the liberal democracies of
modernity. In the context of welfare and security, this upwards development
is the evolution from market-liberal societies with high levels of inequality
to social democratic or socialist societies with low levels of inequality. In
the context of sustainability and humaneness, it is the evolution from
growth-based capitalistic economies to steady-state ecological economies.
As mentioned, the idea of such progressive-evolutionary trajectories grew
out of Wolff’s reading of the Confucian classics during the early German
Enlightenment. Later it was expanded to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of
Historical Materialism. Its contemporary scientific analog is given by various
quantitative metrics, such as the Human Development Index (HDI) used by
the United Nations Development Program, which measures the height of
societal development of nation-states with gauges such as infant mortality,
life expectancy, gender equality, years of schooling, and average standard of
living differentiated by wealth distribution to adjust for levels of inequality.
Another such metric is the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) to measure
the level of social evolution by qualifying the capitalistic yardstick of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) with criteria such as unpaid labor, community
service, environmental integrity, and carbon footprint. HDI and GPI are
indices of upward trajectories of existence that are quantifiable rankings of
life quality.
The therapeutic and progressive aspects of the dogmatic alternative make
the postmodern legacy of phenomenology appear as a conservative and
libertarian indulgence. The postmodern branch of continental philosophy,
which has been so much better received in the Anglophone Far West than
the dogmatic alternatives just described, comprises the liberal approaches
whose shared pedigree is phenomenology, in the guise of Heidegger, and
which is represented by his students, such as Hans-Georg Gadamer, and his
readers, such as Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty.
Unlike the parallel series of science and philosophy instantiated by
analytic thought and by the dogmatic strand of continental thought,
postmodernity struck out in its own direction, with theories that have little
to do with science and that are often at cross-purposes with its results. In the
liberal democracies, this departure from science makes postmodernity
converge with political conservativism. This convergence is not coincidental,
because postmodernity shares with political conservativism an emphasis
on liberty. Whereas dogmatic philosophers operate within self-imposed
constraints of reasoning, postmodern philosophers do not. Dogmatic
philosophers constrain their reflection by affirming an interdisciplinary
basis of knowledge that is external to them, and by embracing a therapeutic
goal that serves as a condition of the value of information. While dogmatic
philosophers pursue insight-driven endeavors, postmodern philosophers
pursue purely heuristic goals with problem-driven endeavors. Dogmatic
philosophers strive for a synthesis of information, by connecting the dots in
a rational matrix of knowledge and wisdom. Postmodern philosophers, by
contrast, strive for an analysis of information, by separating the dots, in
a process of deconstruction, which leaves one with an uncertain web of
perspectives and narratives.
The postmodern legacy of phenomenology stands in diametrical
opposition to the dogmatic philosophies laid out above. In Kantian terms,
one could say that postmodernity exemplifies skeptical philosophy.
Postmodernity is skeptical in assuming a fundamentally negative stance
split. Or rather, it would have been, had the postwar trajectory of civilization
continued indefinitely. In a cultural framework of ever more liberties, ever
larger prosperity, and ever greater diversity, one can celebrate postmodernity’s
libertarian aspirations. As long as the framework keeps expanding, there is
no need to tie philosophical inquiry to anything but freedom. Equality will
eventually take care of itself; justice is a natural consequence of free markets;
and solidarity is not needed in times of plenty. Science is nothing but the
competition; it needs to be bested before it bests the arts. The problems of
the postmodern heirs of phenomenology identified in the first section would
never have come into being if this libertarian dream of the “end of history”
culminating in free markets and free people had come to fruition. But since
the hope for never-ending human and economic growth was dashed
by planetary boundaries such as that of the carbon cycle, the continued
libertarian aspirations of postmodernity have turned out to be liabilities.
The answers produced by science have registered the steady deterioration
of the human–nature relationship as the decades went by. A first wave of
findings, in the 1960s, showed that some species were endangered, some
wilderness areas were at risk of destruction, and some regions experienced
degradation. All of this seemed to be problems for experts, which could be
addressed with better technologies and policies. A second wave, in the
1970s, challenged the hope that this is an expert problem without larger
significance for the public. This wave concerned findings of the overshoot of
human demand on planetary bioproductivity and environmental services.
A third wave of findings, in the 1980s, drove home the message that the
overshoot is gaining in existential significance because it caused climate
change through the human-induced overshoot of the assimilative capacity
of the global carbon cycle.
There was not really a fourth wave of findings after the turn of the
new millennium. Instead, the three waves, of regional issues, of a general
overshoot, and of global consequences, are now surging ever higher. In the
new millennium, the first wave, of biodiversity loss, escalated into the sixth
great mass extinction in Earth history. The hemorrhaging of biological
diversity has fused with the decimation of common biota to result in an
unfolding defaunation of such magnitude that field workers describe it as
“biological annihilation.”6
The second wave, ecological overshoot, has escalated into a conflict
between civilization and the biosphere of such intensity that it has made the
prevailing growth-based model of market economies unsustainable. The
overshoot began in the 1970s when annual human demand on natural
supply crossed the maximum annual productivity of the biosphere and the
maximum annual capacity of environmental services. Since then, this
overshoot has widened. At present, global civilization operates as if it had
nearly two planet Earths at its disposal.
By crossing the sustainable yield threshold of service capacity, humankind
has altered the quality of its interaction with the Earth System. Before the
is visible in the human footprint on the terrestrial surface. By the most recent
estimate, based on data up to 2018, and released in 2019, “just 5 percent of
Earth’s landscape remains untouched.”11 By the most comprehensive
previous estimate, in 2016, and based on data up to 2015, 19 percent
remained untouched.12 Pristine wilderness is now disappearing at lightning
speed, as its reduction from 19 percent to 5 percent in less than five years
illustrates.
The loss of wilderness, in the past, was associated with the extinction of
rare species. After the turn to the new millennium, a sign that something else
was going on, in addition, was the uncanny worldwide decline of honey
bees; the so-called colony collapse disorder of bee populations.13 When
biologists turned from measuring biodiversity loss to measuring ecological
health, and from counting species to counting populations (e.g., by weighing
flying insect biomass caught in malaise traps), a trend came into view that is
now called “defaunation” and, informally, “the Great Thinning.”14 In the
second decade of the twenty-first century, the Great Thinning spread to
common flying insects, with a loss of biomass of 75–82 percent from 1989
to 2015 in some developed countries.15 As we are approaching the third
decade of the century, the Great Thinning affects nearly all wildlife,
vertebrates and invertebrates alike. A 2018 index tracking population sizes
of vertebrate species (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fishes)
shows a 60 percent decline in the northern hemisphere since 1970, with a 90
percent decline in the tropics.16
This staggering decline, whose full extent became visible only in 2018,
is a problem for civilization through the feedback of biota and climate.
Nonhuman life and the climate system are interdependent. Types of life
shape types of climate, obviously, but more specifically, biodiversity (the
variety of species) and biota (the size of populations) shore up climate
stability. The converse is also true: the loss of biodiversity and biota weakens
climate stability.17 But it does not stop there, because the positive feedback
of declining life and climate change goes both ways; it is bidirectional. The
loss of biodiversity and biota drives climate change by making the climate
system more sensitive to external forcings such as human carbon emissions.
And, climate change drives the loss of biodiversity and biota by sterilizing
organisms and impairing reproduction. Climate change causes heat waves,
whose longer duration, stronger intensity, and greater frequency have begun
to impair plant and insect fertility.18 Since plants and insects are close to the
bottom of the trophic pyramid, this is bound to trigger losses higher up the
food chain, and this cascading loss of life loops back into an unstable climate
ever more sensitive to human impacts.
While the loss of wilderness, the vanishing of insects, and the vertiginous
drop in vertebrate populations all made news in 2018, climate change has
steadily continued. In a special report released in October, Global Warming
of 1.5°C (SR15), the IPCC summarized that for the decade from 2006 to
2015 the average global temperature was 0.87°C higher than temperatures
FIGURE 1 Stability Landscape showing the pathway of the Earth System out of
the Holocene and, thus, out of the glacial-interglacial limit cycle to its present
position in the hotter Anthropocene.
These will become the destinations for everyone south of them, who will
struggle to survive and will migrate as an adaptive response. Russia may
cede Siberia to China when the deglaciation of the Himalayas turns the
Yellow River and Yangtze into seasonal rivers. Canada will be occupied and
annexed by the United States when the Southwest is a desert and the
Midwest a dust bowl. Siberia will become a Special Administrative Zone of
China, just like Hong Kong, and Canada will become a U.S. territory, just
like Puerto Rico. On Hothouse Earth, everyone loses.
This is the crisis. We have ten years to turn things around. Old bourgeois
indulgences of anti-realism, relativism, and skepticism, as cultivated by
postmodern heirs of phenomenology, are becoming intolerable in the
Anthropocene. Faced with the crisis, these indulgences are hooligan attitudes
of criminal negligence. They will not do anymore. An alternative is needed,
and it must be future-oriented, wise, and aggressive. In short, it must be
dogmatic.
softness over hardness, gentleness over violence, and peace over war. The
sage is not driven by profit or power, but by a reverence for life instead.
Throughout the Daodejing, Laozi makes clear that the sage is the guardian
of life. Today, this Daoist tradition is manifest in the canonization of Laozi
as the Guardian Spirit of Ecology by the Chinese Taoist Association.26
The task of the wise is to guard life, rather than to toss it to the elements;
to let life be, not to stifle it; to cultivate it, not to crush it. Of course, not all
Daoist philosophers are as life-affirming and dogmatic about this as Laozi.
Zhuangzi and Liezi, who are more popular among postmodern interpreters,
exhibit relativistic if not nihilistic values. Some passages in the Zhuangzi
suggest there is no difference between life and death, and that enlightenment
is carelessness. The Liezi, furthermore, suggests that selfishness may be wiser
than compassion. While such subversive playfulness was entertaining during
the libertarian dreams of unlimited capitalistic growth in the Holocene, it is
not good counsel as the Earth is rolling toward the ridge of planetary
boundaries beyond which the hothouse sinkhole lurks.
For Laozi, the shengren is a gardener in the garden of the Dao. Her job is
to care for what grows, to nurture the weak, and to protect the small. The
Daodejing explains how to do this best: by the practice of “non-action” or
wuwei 無為. For the likes of another great Daoist sage, Liezi, wuwei is
laissez-faire, but for Laozi, wuwei harnesses the flow of being, like a sailor
capturing wind in the sails, or a martial artist turning an attacker’s fury into
the force that neutralizes the assault. Whatever examples one chooses for
wuwei, Laozi is clear that the style of non-action is one of pliancy (rou 柔),
and that its form is gentleness. As perhaps the famous dictum from chapter
36 of the Daodejing goes: “the soft overcomes the hard, and the weak the
strong” (rouruo sheng gangqiang 柔弱勝剛強), or as chapter 30 elaborates:
Whenever you advise rulers in the way of Dao, counsel them not to use
force to conquer the universe, for this would only cause resistance. Thorn
bushes spring up wherever the army has passed, lean years follow in the
wake of a great war. Just do what needs to be done, never take advantage
of power. Achieve results but never glory in them. Achieve results but
never boast. Achieve results but never be proud. Achieve results because
this is the natural way. Achieve results but not through violence. Force is
followed by loss of strength; this is not the way of the Dao. That which
goes against the Dao comes to an early end.27
This recap of key points of the Daodejing makes it clear where the sage
stands vis-à-vis the Stability Landscape of the Earth System in the early
Anthropocene. As I have argued in section 2 above, the Earth System is at a
fork in the road. One road consists of capitalism, with the practices of
extraction, exploitation, and domination, in the spirit of competition and
advantage, for the purpose of profit and enrichment. This road has been the
Earth System trajectory since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution,
and it has pushed nature from its cold–warm cycle up on a warmer ridge,
from which it is now rolling toward a hot abyss. The violence our species
has been visiting upon nature, by perpetrating climate change and
biodiversity decline, goes against the Dao. Capitalistic civilization, with Far
Western skeptics and anti-realists in the vanguard, wages war on nature and
nonhuman life. This is now pointing us to an early end.
Philosophers faced with the fork in the road must make a choice. Either
they continue to embrace the cultural ways that are pushing the planet to
the brink, or they embrace an alternative. If they choose the former option,
they can try to justify their choice by the epistemic modes of sophistry and
reality denial described in the first section. If they choose the latter option,
then they will not question reality but embrace it instead; they will cultivate
empathy for life on Earth, and they will act and think according to the Dao.
The former and Far Western option makes philosophers into stooges
of the libertarian forces that are pushing civilization toward collapse.
The latter and Far Eastern option makes philosophers choose solidarity
over individuality, compassion over competition, and sustainability over the
market. The latter option, furthermore, turns philosophers into future-
oriented thinkers grounded in scientific reality. Such philosophers emulate
the shengren. In doing so—and only in doing so—they guide our world
toward a Stabilized Earth destiny.
Analogous to Laozi’s shengren, Heidegger conceives of der Weise. The
meaning of the Chinese and German words is the same; both sheng ren and
der Weise mean “sage” or “wise person.” Heidegger introduces der Weise in
Country Path Conversations (Feldweggespräche, 1944/5). The text is partly
a riff on an obscure Greek-Egyptian concept, áñkhibasié (άγχιβαίη), which
fuses the Egyptian áñkhi, meaning “near,” with the Greek basié, meaning
“come,” into a word that means something like “coming near,” “getting
closer,” or “progressing.” This fused concept is not Heidegger’s invention; it
is the shortest fragment, a single word, by Heraclitus.28
The structure of Conversations is a dialogue, or rather, a trialogue, of a
scholar (der Gelehrte), a scientist (der Wissenschaftler), and a sage (der
Weise). English translators have shied away from translating der Weise as
“the sage”—even though the German weise is evidently a homophone
cognate to the English “wise.” There are reasons for this caution. Heidegger
had second thoughts. There is a passage in Conversations where he seems to
deny that what he means by der Weise is what we mean by “sage,” and Bret
W. Davis, in his translation, accordingly suggests “the guide” instead.29 In a
published excerpt of Conversations (1959), Heidegger replaces der Weise
with der Lehrer, which John M. Anderson and E. Hans Freund rightly
translate as “teacher.”30 There may well be no ideal translation, considering
Heidegger’s misgivings. Yet, “sage” is what the German thinker writes. A
sage is certainly also a teacher, and it surely fits the role of the sage, as
indicated at the beginning of this essay, to serve as a guide in the fourfold.
The future-oriented alternatives in section 1, furthermore, underscore this
between self and other, and to see the world from the vantage point of
alterity. Empathy, so cultivated, is the cognitive condition of compassion
and benevolence. In this sense, the sage not only “sees” things; the sage
“gets” things, too.
Empathy is how the sage can be life-affirming. Theoretically, there is a big
picture such as the evolutionary arc of Daodejing chapter 42, and the sage
abides by it. Practically, the sage abides by the picture since his maturity lends
him an empathy so keen that he sees himself in any living being. In literature,
on the level of magic, this is how Gandalf can talk to moths and eagles. In
philosophy, on the level of epistemology and ethics, this is how the integration
of the perspective of the other leads to the appreciation of the other’s
existential interests, and how it leads from such appreciation to the moral
choice of according respect to such interests in well-being and existence,
regardless of whether “the other” is an individual life, such as a plant or an
animal, or a network, such as an ecosystem. The other merely wants to live.
Empathizing with this want, the sage affirms it and chooses to guard it.
Heidegger, in Country Path Conversations, coins a term to point to the
sensitivity of der Weise to the web of being, which is the environmental
alterity in which the sage dwells. He calls this cognitive stance die Gegnet, a
blend of Gegend, “region” or “environment”; gegen, “against” or “counter”;
and begegnen, “to encounter.” This stance of wisdom involves several facets.
One facet is that der Weise is someone who picks up on the numinous hints
(Winke) given to collective existence, and on the basis of this reception,
is then capable of pointing to where such hints come from. When the sage
points toward the source, he is also able to decipher their meaning and
guide (or be wise) in the way that follows best the ideal vector of the
numinous hints.31
Another facet of this consummate cognitive interface with the
environment, the Gegnet, is an openness that consists, variously, of waiting
(Warten), gratitude (Danken), attentiveness (Achtsamkeit), and letting-go
(Gelassenheit), in the sense of Meister Eckhart. This is how the magic (der
Zauber) of wisdom can emerge in the Gegnet.32
This brings us to the end of reading the Daoist concept of the sage as
Heidegger uses it. Our interpretive attempt seeks to suggest to philosophers
a future-oriented employment in the collective project of saving civilization
from the crisis against the forces that are pushing us ever closer to the edge.
In times of crisis, it would be irresponsible for the philosopher to be a
skeptic, and it would be pointless to be a better scholar than the scholars,
and to be a better scientist than the scientists. The philosopher, schooled
in phenomenology, but embracing the dogmatic alternative in the spirit of
stewardship, who encounters East Asian wisdom, should be a more mature
thinker than the inchoate exemplars of the past century. Such maturity
requires the empathy of a consummate environmental interface, whose
subjective side Heidegger calls die Gegnet, and whose objective side,
elsewhere, he calls das Geviert or the fourfold.33
In conclusion, I hope that two remarks may lead the reader further. They are
intended to show that neither the interface (Gegnet) nor the fourfold (Geviert)
is obscure. Both terms, I think, have a secular, interdisciplinary meaning.
Heidegger parses Gegnet as “the lingering openness, which gathers
everything up and thereby opens itself, such that the openness is sustained
and suspended, and in such suspension summoned to let emerge everything
in the way it is.”34 He parses Geviert as the intersection of the skies (Himmel),
Earth (Erde), the gods (Götter), and the mortals (Sterbliche). I suggest
linking these terms as an epistemic stance vis-à-vis an ontological situation,
the stance I hope to have clarified above. Clarifying the situation serves as
the appropriate conclusion of this essay.
The ontological situation is that of our Earth System at the verge of the
third decade of the twenty-first century, having been pushed out of its
halfpipe on a lethal incline by evil forces. This situation, trivially, involves
the skies, in terms of rising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases,
and thus, it involves the skies in terms of climate change.
It involves, existentially, the Earth, in terms of the double whammy of
climate change and biological annihilation, whose positive feedback loops
are now jointly affecting cryosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere alike (ice,
seas, and land), to our collective existential detriment.
It involves the mortals, who are just us, and everyone among alterity
with whom we can empathetically identify—all living beings, from moths to
eagles, from mosquitoes to song birds; in short, all forms of life, from the
morbidly obese to the starving, from the superrich to the migrant poor, and
from the human to the nonhumans. For mortal all of us are.
Last but not least, it involves the gods, whose identity would remain
puzzling if Heidegger were read in disconnect from his hidden Asian
sources. In Far Eastern thought, the gods and the numinous hints they rain
on hapless mortals, only to be picked up by keen sages, are summed up as
tianming 天命 or “Mandate of Heaven.” Yet, both scholarly renditions are
philosophically misleading, which only underscores Heidegger’s point.
Western scholars would look at the gods as cultural artifacts and objects
of worship in human religions. Eastern scholars would look at tianming as
the political authority invested in Confucian rulers. But for a future-oriented
outlook, seen from a synthetic-rational perspective that seeks to integrate
interdisciplinary findings, the gods (Heidegger’s Götter) are the future
vectors at the present fork for mortals on Earth under the sky. One vector,
that of the evil gods, consists of unfettered capitalistic, libertarian practices,
aided and abetted by postmodern sophistry and skepticism. The vector of
evil gods leads down the sinkhole of collective demise.
Another vector, that of good gods, consists of sustainable practices of
stewardship, exemplified politically by the People’s Republic of China, the
Nordic Countries, and the European Union (sans Britain, which exits itself
to the Far West). This vector, the only arrow that is genuinely future-oriented,
is pointed to the wide-open plain of collective stabilization.
Thus, from a secular point of view, the concept of the gods is intrinsically
dubious. This leaves philosophers of the future with a choice and a question.
The choice is between good and evil, light and dark, demise and survival.
The question, addressed to aspiring sages among the phenomenologists of
the future, is simply this: which of the two kinds of gods do you pray to?
Notes
1 See Eric Fromm, To Have or To Be? (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), and
The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil (New York: Harper and Row,
1964).
2 Arne Naess, “The Place of Joy in a World of Fact,” in The Selected Works of
Arne Naess, ed. A. Drengson (Berlin: Springer, 2005), 2371–82.
3 Reinhard May, Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His
Work, trans. Graham Parkes (New York: Routledge, 1996).
4 Ellen Chan, “How Daoist is Heidegger?,” International Philosophical
Quarterly, 45.1 (2005): 5–19.
5 See Lin Ma, “Deciphering Heidegger’s Connection with the Daodejing,” Asian
Philosophy, 16 (2006): 149–71; and “On the Paradigm Shift of Comparative
Studies of Heidegger and Chinese Philosophy,” Confluence, 4 (2016): 81–98.
6 Gerardo Ceballos et al., “Biological Annihilation via the Ongoing Sixth Mass
Extinction Signaled by Vertebrate Population Losses and Declines,”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114 (2017): E6089–E6096;
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704949114
7 Will Steffen et al., “The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great
Acceleration,” The Anthropocene Review, 2.1 (2015a): 81–98, esp. 91.
8 Will Steffen et al., “Trajectory of the Anthropocene,” 93.
9 World Economic Forum, The Global Risks Report 2019, “Executive
Summary,” 6.
10 Ibid.
11 Christina Kennedy et al., “Managing the Middle: A Shift in Conservation
Priorities Based on the Global Human Modification Gradient,” Global Change
Biology 2019: 1–16 (early pre-publication view), doi.org/10.111/gcb.14549.
For a map, cf. Ibid., 5, sec. “Results,” figure 1. For a summary, cf. Andrew
Freeman, “Just 5 percent of Earth’s Landscape is Untouched,” Axios (2019),
10 January.
12 O. Venter et al., “Sixteen Years of Change in the Global Terrestrial Human
Footprint and Implications for Biodiversity Conservation,” Nature
Communications 7 (2016): 12558, doi.org/10.1039/ncomms12558; J.E.
Watson et al., “Catastrophic Declines in Wilderness Areas Undermine Global
Environment Targets,” Current Biology, 26 (2016): 2929–34; cf. Kennedy,
loc. cit., “4. Discussion,” 9.
13 Dennis van Engelsdorp et al., “An Estimate of Managed Colony Losses in the
Winter of 2006–2007: A Report Commissioned by the Apiary Inspectors of
21 Ibid.
22 Will Steffen et al., “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene,”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 115 (2018): 8252–9,
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115.
23 For the mitigation window, cf. IPCC SR15 (2018), loc. cit.: “In model
pathways with no or limited overshoot of 1.5°C, global net anthropogenic
CO 2 emissions decline by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 . . .
reaching net zero around 2050.” Cf. Ibid., Summary for Policymakers
(approved and accepted 6 October 2018; subject to copy edit); section C
“Emission Pathways and System Transitions consistent with 1.5°C Global
Warming”; paragraph C1, 15.
24 Will Steffen et al., “Trajectories of the Earth System.”
25 See Ibid, 8254.
26 The Chinese Taoist Association (CTA) 中國道教協會 is the formal
denomination of Daoism in the People’s Republic of China. It is overseen by
the State Administration of Religious Affairs. With the embrace of
sustainability as an explicitly religious goal, it serves as a political platform for
environmentalism in China. Laozi’s canonization by the CTA in 2006 to the
Guardian Deity of Life (shengtai baohu shen 生態保護神) follows the CTA’s
Qinling Declaration 秦岭宣言, which states, “Harmony between Heaven,
Earth, and Humanity is the crucial guarantee for the sustainability of human
activities on earth. It is the highest aim of Daoists. With the environmental
crisis getting worse day by day, we have a duty to rethink the role of Daoism in
China.” Cf. Alliance of Religion and Conservation; arcworld.org/downloads
27 Laozi, Daodejing, trans. Gia-Fu Feng, Jane English, and Toinette Lippe (New
York: Vintage, 2011), 32. The original Chinese reads: 以道佐人主者,不以兵強
天下。其事好還。師之所處,荊棘生焉。大軍之後,必有凶年。善有果而已,
不敢以取強。果而勿矜,果而勿伐,果而勿驕。果而不得已,果而勿強。物壯
則老,是謂不道,不道早已.
28 Martin Heidegger, “Ein Gespraech selbstdritt auf einem Feldweg,” in Feldweg-
Gespräche (1944/45), (Frankfurt: Klostermann, 2007), 1.
29 Martin Heidegger, Country Path Conversations Bret W. Davis (trans.)
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010).
30 Martin Heidegger, “Conversation on a Country Path about Thinking,”
in Discourse on Thinking, trans. John M. Anderson and E. Hans Freund
(New York: Harper and Row, 1966), 58–90.
31 Heidegger, “Ein Gespraech selbstdritt auf einem Feldweg,” 84–5: “. . .
dies schliesst allerdings nicht aus, das seiner ein Weiser ist, mit welchem
Wort ich jetzt nicht den Wissenden meine, sondern einen solchen, der dahin
zu weisen vermag, von woher den Menschen die Winke kommen; einen
solcen, der zugleich die Weise, die Art, weisen kann, wie den Winken zu
folgen sei.”
32 See Ibid., 99, 100, 108–12, and 113–14 respectively for these terms.
33 See, for example, “Bauen Wohnen Denken” (1951) and “Das Ding” (1950),
both in Martin Heidegger, Vortraege und Aufsaetze (Stuttgart: Neske, 1997),
139–56 and 157–80; these correspond to Heidegger’s Gesamtausgabe vol. 7.
34 Heidegger, “Ein Gespraech selbstdritt auf einem Feldweg,” 114: “Die Gegnet ist
die verweilende Weite, die, alles versammelnd, sich oeffnet, so dass in ihr das
Offene gehalten und angehalten ist, Jegliches aufgehen zu lassen in seinem
Beruhen.”
References
Allen, Myles et al. (2018), “Technical Summary” in IPCC, Global Warming of
1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming Above
Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways,
in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate
Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty, Geneva:
World Meteorological Organization.
Ceballos, Gerardo et al. (2017), “Biological Annihilation via the Ongoing Sixth
Mass Extinction Signaled by Vertebrate Population Losses and Declines,”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114: E6089–E6096; doi.
org/10.1073/pnas.1704949114
Chan, Ellen. (2005), “How Daoist is Heidegger?,” International Philosophical
Quarterly, 45.1: 5–19.
Dirzo, Rodolfo et al. (2014), “Defaunation in the Anthropocene,” Science,
345.6195: 401–6, doi.org/10.1126/science.1251817
Freeman, Andrew. (2019), “Just 5 percent of Earth’s Landscape is Untouched,”
Axios, 10 January.
Fromm, Eric. (1964), The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil. New York:
Harper and Row.
Fromm, Eric. (1976), To Have or To Be?, New York: Harper and Row.
Grooten, M. and R. Almond, eds. (2018), Institute of Zoology (London), and
World Wildlife Fund, Living Planet Report 2018: Aiming Higher, Gland: World
Wildlife Fund.
Hatfield, Jerry L. and John H. Prueger. (2015), “Temperature Extremes: Effect
on Plant Growth and Development,” Weather and Climate Extremes, 10:
4–10.
Heidegger, Martin. (1966), Discourse on Thinking, John M. Anderson and E. Hans
Freund (trans.), New York: Harper and Row.
Heidegger, Martin. (2007), Feldweg-Gespräche, in Gesamtausgabe (vol. 77),
Frankfurt: Klostermann.
Heidegger, Martin. (2010), Country Path Conversations, Bret W. Davis (trans.),
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Jarvis, Brooke. (2018), “The Insect Apocalypse is Here: What does it Mean for the
Rest of Life on Earth?,” The New York Times, 27 November.
Kennedy, Christina et al. (2019), “Managing the Middle: A Shift in Conservation
Priorities Based on the Global Human Modification Gradient,” Global Change
Biology, 1–16.
Laozi. (2011), Daodejing, Gia-Fu Feng, Jane English, and Toinette Lippe (trans.),
New York: Vintage.
Ma, Lin. (2006), “Deciphering Heidegger’s Connection with the Daodejing,” Asian
Philosophy, 16: 149–71.
Ma, Lin. (2016), “On the Paradigm Shift of Comparative Studies of Heidegger and
Chinese Philosophy,” Confluence, 4: 81–98.
McCarthy, Michael. (2016), The Moth Snowstorm: Nature and Joy, New York:
New York Review Books.
May, Reinhard. (1996), Heidegger’s Hidden Sources: East-Asian Influences on His
Work, Graham Parkes (trans.), New York: Routledge.
Mesihovic, Anida et al. (2016), “Heat Stress Regimes for the Investigation of Pollen
Thermo-Tolerance in Crop Plants,” Plant Reproduction, 29: 93–105
Naess, Arne. (2005), “The Place of Joy in a World of Fact,” in A. Drengson (ed.),
The Selected Works of Arne Naess, 2371–82, Dordrecht: Springer.
Sales, Kris et al. (2018), “Experimental Heatwaves Compromise Sperm Function
and Cause Transgenerational Damage in a Model Insect,” Nature
Communications, 9: 4771 doi.org/ 10.1038/s41467-018-072723-z
Steffen, Will et al. (2015a), “The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great
Acceleration,” The Anthropocene Review 2.1: 81–98.
Steffen, Will et al. (2015b), “Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development
on a Changing Planet,” Science, 347.6223: 1259855, doi.org/10.1126/
science.1259855
Steffen, Will et al. (2018), “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene,”
in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115: 8252–9, doi.
org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115
Van Engelsdorp, Dennis et al. (2007), “An Estimate of Managed Colony Losses in
the Winter of 2006–2007: A Report Commissioned by the Apiary Inspectors of
America,” American Bee Journal, 14: 599–603.
Van Engelsdorp, Dennis et al. (2008), “A Survey of Honey Bee Colony Losses in the
U.S., Fall 2007 to Spring 2008,” Public Library of Science One, 3: e4071, doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004071
Venter, O. et al. (2016), “Sixteen Years of Change in the Global Terrestrial Human
Footprint and Implications for Biodiversity Conservation,” Nature
Communications, 7: 12558, doi.org/10.1039/ncomms12558
Vogel, Gretchen. (2017), “Where have all the Insects Gone? Surveys in German
Nature Reserves Point to a Dramatic Decline in Insect Biomass. Key Members
of the Ecosystem may be Slipping Away,” Science, 356: 576–9, doi.org/10/1126/
science.aal1160
Watson, J.E. et al. (2016), “Catastrophic Declines in Wilderness Areas Undermine
Global Environment Targets,” Current Biology, 26: 2929–34.
World Economic Forum. (2019) The Global Risks Report 2019: 14th Edition.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO). (2018), State of the Global Climate
in 2018: WMO Provisional Statement, Geneva: World Meteorological
Organization. et al.
defaunation 276, 288, 290 Hegel, G.W.F. 10–16, 18–26, 121, 127,
Derrida, Jacques 258, 285 137–8, 140–1, 268 n.46, 279
descriptive psychology 38–9 Heidegger, Martin 110, 132 n.44, 135,
139–40, 145, 152 n.1, 161–75,
Earth System 276–8, 284, 288–9, 177–82, 184–5, 197–204, 209, 212,
291–3, 297, 303 253, 255, 275–6, 278–80, 285–6,
Écart 95, 255–6 298, 300–3
Eckhart, Meister 167, 170, 189 n.66, Herman, Jonathan 123, 125,
279, 302 132 n.28
emptiness 45, 47, 73, 128, 167–8, 170, Hölderlin, Friedrich 162–5, 178–9, 181
183, 208, 237–8, 249 Hothouse Earth 291, 293–5
Engels, Friedrich 279, 283 Hsiao, Paul Shih-Yi 152 n.1, 166, 279
Enlightenment 91–2, 102 n.22, 212, Huizi/Hui Shi 55–6, 92, 176, 177
297 Husserl, Edmund 1, 10, 35, 88–92,
Epochè 69, 89–92, 100, 198–9, 206, 99, 101 n.12, 106, 135, 139–40,
208 197–200, 204, 208, 277–9
fasting of the heart/mind (xinzhai I and Thou (Ich und Du) 105, 108–9,
心齋) 67, 77–8, 91, 202, 204, 205, 115, 121, 124–7, 129, 131 n.1
207–9, 211, 216 n.43, 237–8 idem-identity 94–5
forgetting (wang 忘)/forgetting the self incompossible 252–3
(zuowang 坐忘) 3, 15, 91, 180, 207, individuation (vereinzelung) 202
209–12, 215 n.26 inexistence 31–4, 252
fourfold (das Geviert) 275, 278, 298, ipse-identity 94–5
302–3 Iser, Wolfgang 223–7, 231, 236, 238
freedom 9–11, 18, 72, 74, 113, 137–8,
141, 146, 155 n.29, 172, 179, Jing Hao 荊浩 17–18, 22
181–2, 185, 208, 288
Fromm, Erich 280–2, 284 Kant, Immanuel 38–9, 142, 153 n.5,
fundamental attunement 279, 282–3, 285
(grundstimmung) 162, 177, 181
Laozi 老子 2, 62, 65, 106–8, 113–15,
Gadamer, Hans-Georg 165, 224–7, 121–4, 126, 129, 131 n.15,
285 136, 139, 142–5, 147–52, 171,
Gegnet 167, 302, 303 191 n.105, 201, 247, 258, 275,
gentleman (junzi 君子) 295 278–80, 295, 297–8, 300
gestalt theories 88, 96 Levinas, Emmanuel 105–6, 109, 228,
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von 20, 136 230, 255
great awakening 40 Liezi 列子 278, 297
logotherapy 279–81, 283, 284
Hakuin 128
Harmony 3, 10, 16, 19, 21, 24, 65–6, Marion, Jean-Luc 12, 25
78, 259–60, 265, 281–4 Marx, Karl 138, 279–81, 283, 285
Hassidic 112, 122–3 Mendelsund, Peter 225–7, 235, 238,
heaven (tian 天, Himmel) 3, 16, 40, 242 n.28
43–5, 48–50, 52–3, 56, 66, 68, Merleau-Ponty, Maurice 88–9, 95–6,
71–6, 79–80, 110, 165, 171–3, 184, 98–9, 174, 199, 247–58, 260–2,
204, 207–8, 211–12, 236, 258, 260, 264–6, 267 n.4, 268 n.46,
264, 303, 306 n.26 269 n.58
mystery 12, 21–2, 32, 36, 42–3, 46, 48, self-awareness 10, 37, 142
53, 55–6, 110, 121, 139, 147, 149, self-cultivation 91, 93–5,
172, 180, 201, 209, 261, 265 102 n.22, 201
mystical immersion (versenkung) self-examination 90, 212–13
127–8 self-transformation 52, 90–2, 95,
100, 148
Naess, Arne 280–2 sensory perception 33
naturalness/spontaneous (ziran shining (scheinen) 11, 17–25
自然) 2–3, 10–11, 14–15, 17–18, Shitao 石涛 16
50, 52, 66, 68, 74, 105, 108, 109, silence 47, 124, 133 n.51, 145,
111, 113–14, 125, 130, 149, 162, 163–4, 166, 173–5, 180, 183,
165, 167–71, 180–4, 198, 204, 209, 235, 247–53, 255, 257–61,
211, 258, 265, 295, 297 263, 265–6, 269 n.58
nondual correlative perception/ skepticism 88, 111, 201, 282, 286–7,
thinking 198, 201, 207, 210–11 295, 303
non-willing (nicht-wollen) 167, 171 solitariness, solitude (einsamkeit) 198,
nothing/nothingness (wu 無; das 202–3
Nichts) 44–8, 90, 142, 164, Spinoza, Baruch 148, 279
167–8, 185, 189 n.49, 189 n.50, Spirit Resonance (shenyun 神韻)
200–1, 266 10–11, 14–18
Stability Landscape 291–3, 297
Okakura Kakuzo 161 straw dogs (chu gou 芻狗) 260, 296
Su Shi 蘇軾 18
Paris Accord 291–2 sympathetic resonance (ganying
Potter’s Wheel 72–3, 76, 184, 236 感應) 79
Poulet, Georges 222–3, 225–7, 238
pre-objective order 88–9, 93, Taborn, Craig 227
96–7, 100 the necessity of the unnecessary
(die notwendigkeit des unnötigen)
Qian Zhongshu 錢鍾書 219 162, 175–6, 178, 181, 185
Tolkien 299–300
releasement (gelassenheit) 132 n.44,
162, 164, 167–72, 174, 177, 302 Ultimate Reality 3, 10, 32, 39, 41–3,
representational thinking 95 46–7, 50, 55
Umwelt 252, 255
sage (shengren 聖人) 3, 50, 52, 71–3,
75–6, 78–9, 90, 97, 111, 112, 129, Valery, Paul 252
131 n.15, 139, 143, 148, 151, virtue 53, 68, 111, 149, 173, 182–3,
170–3, 181, 184–5, 233–4, 236, 197, 201–2, 205, 209–12, 228, 235
238, 260, 262, 265, 275, 278, void 13, 44–6, 67, 95–6, 173, 185,
295–304 235, 248, 266, 296
Sallis, John 17, 25, 193 n.139 von Strauss, Victor 62, 107, 110, 148
Sartre, Jean-Paul 199, 255, 257
Saussure, Ferdinand de 257–8 Wang Wei 王維 13, 21–2
savage spirit 98–100 way, path (Weg) 107, 162, 164, 166–9
Scarry, Elaine 230–1, 238 Weiser 173, 300–1
scholastic philosophers 32–3 Wheelwright Pian 92, 97–9, 233–4
secret essence 47 will (wille) 162, 171, 177
sedimentation 69, 253, 261 will to power 63–6, 71–3, 78–9, 111
without desire (wu yu 無欲) 78, 171–2 Zen 128, 152 n.1, 163–4, 174, 180,
Wolff, Christian 282–3, 285 203
wuwei 無為 (inactivity, non-action) Zhang Yanyuan 張彥遠 14–16, 23
3, 45, 47, 50, 111–12, 115, 125, Zhuangzi 莊子 2, 11, 14–15, 18–19,
129–30, 132 n.44, 143, 145–9, 162, 22–4, 31–2, 40–2, 48–56, 58 n.29,
164, 167–9, 171, 177, 204, 253, 61–5, 67–72, 74–80, 87–90, 92–5,
262, 297, 299 98–100, 100 n.7, 105–6, 108–11,
115, 121–3, 126–8, 131 n.15,
Xie He 謝赫 13, 15 150, 161–2, 169, 175–7, 179–85,
Xu Bing 徐冰 219, 239–40 186 n.4, 191 n.105, 192 n.137,
197–8, 200, 203–14, 215 n.26,
Yijing 易經 43, 70 216 n.42, 232–4, 236–9, 254, 256,
Yin-Yang 陰陽 45, 47–8 278, 280, 297