Here is my thoughtless/thoughtful reply to the deeper question I hear here on OMF, YMMV based on your hold on time and history.
Heidegger rejected humanism and metaphysics, while we do have relations to beings, we also have a relation to Being.
His was a search for the Transground of being beneath ordinary human consciousness.
Despite Dan’s accusations that I’m just here to laugh at him, I have been on an earnest quest to touch primordial consciousness.
I have raised deep issues with him he scoffs off unable to go deeper with me.
I did not want to spoil the fun, so I just used his negative energy against him over and over.
It didn’t have to be negative, but this is what Dan has to project.
Who knows why, mommy and daddy issues I suspect.
Forgetting his sham anger and flipping the script on him...
What is the ground of being?
Can’t hide behind that ole time religion and history.
Beyond time and space...
Heidegger saw science as just another religion, most here might agree.
Ironically religion is about connecting to a dreamed of source.
Why even consider the nature of being?
Humanism only cares how beings relate.
Science says reality is only what is measurable.
He was in search or a more inclusive ontology of being.
I have not abandoned Being as the nihilists have.
Not at all.
I have delved into Being and Non-Being.
“In fact humanism, Heidegger insists, is a measure of man's homelessness (Heimatlosigkeit), for in his forgetfulness of Being, he forgets his original home. This is precisely the brunt of Heidegger's criticism of Sartre, for despite Sartre's reversal -- his emphasis on existence over essence -- Sartre is still a metaphysician, “juggling the terms existence and essence, either in Sartre's sense of existence being prior, or in Plato's sense of essence being prior, is metaphysical thinking, according to Heidegger, and he will have none of it.
...
As Heidegger puts it, "the reversal of a metaphysical principle remains a metaphysical principle." Moreover, Sartre is more nihilistic than the metaphysicians before him, according to Heidegger, because in his concern with beings, he has abandoned Being entirely.”
I can hold my own and then some with Dan and friends.
As you can see, he is confused in several of his dismissive characterizations of my non-position.
He simply is a dualist and this is how they fight with nondualists.
They attack people personally and call them names.
They have no choice but their thinking, which is easily frustrated and befooled.
Well, Dan is pretty smart, maybe smarter than you and me combined, so watch out.
I am not smarter than you.
I am fairly ordinary.
“Zen is certainly in agreement with Heidegger that metaphysics must be transcended; in fact, in congruence with Heidegger's "forgottenness of Being" (Seinsvergessenheit), Suzuki writes: "The power of dichotomizing has made us forgetful of the source in which it preserves its creative potentialities.
...
Also like Heidegger, Zen confirms transconceptual thinking as an accompaniment to transmetaphysical thinking. A radical transformation of consciousness is essential if one is to transcend the realm of beings and "break through" the dichotomous matrix of ordinary thinking with its inherent subject-object duality. According to Suzuki, "to turn away from all this [the world of relativity], what may psychologically be called a 'revulsion' or 'revolution' must take place in our inmost consciousness." That this transformation of consciousness is a transcendence of metaphysics is explicit in Suzuki's statement, "knowable knowledge is relative, while unknown knowledge is absolute and transcendental and is not communicable through the medium of ideas." The major difference between Heidegger and Zen, however, is that Zen's transformation of consciousness (as we shall see) is much more radical than Heidegger's -- especially with regard to subject-object duality -- and therefore its transcendence of metaphysics also more radical.”
Yes, an apparently radical change seems to occur grappling with these non concepts. Only few seem to see it still.
Awareness then could be thought of, but could not capture the experience of, standing in the light of Being within your self.
Being itself is never separate from beings.
“Whereas Heidegger postulates an integral relation between Dasein/human existence, and man, between Dasein and Being, Zen would say that, though phenomenally a difference can be perceived, ultimately no difference exists. According to Shinichi Hisamatsu, "Buddha as the Mind of which I am speaking, however, is not such a subject which is 'other,' but is a subject in which something 'other,' is completely Oneself."
Whereas Heidegger proposes an integralness between man and Dasein, between Dasein and Being, and between man and Being, Zen would say that man is Mind, Mind is Being, and man is Being.
As Suzuki puts it, "When you ask what Zen is, I say that Zen is you and you are Zen." And this is why Hisamatsu refers to Zen as "Mind," "Self," or the "True Man."
...
Though Dasein, might be thought of as a mode of consciousness, Dasein cannot be simply equated with consciousness. It is more akin to Being (the "there" of Being) than consciousness, and therefore is more ontological than conceptual. As William Richardson explains, Dasein "is a self to be sure, but not a conscious subject. It is a pre-subjective, onto-conscious self.
...
It is important to note that, though Zen affirms that man is Being, Zen does not affirm (as it is usually thought) that man is One with Being. The important distinction between Heidegger and Zen is not that Heidegger postulates an integralness between man and Being while Zen postulates a Oneness of man and Being, but that Zen transcends duality and nonduality altogether. Oneness itself is a dualistic concept, that is, in relation to Twoness. That Zen is not a Oneness is a major point of Suzuki's: I am not certain whether Zen can be identified with mysticism. Mysticism as it is understood in the West starts generally with an antithesis and ends with its unification or identification. If there is an antithesis, Zen accepts it as it is, and makes no attempt to unify it. Instead of starting with dualism or pluralism, Zen wants us to have a Zen-experience, and with this experience it purveys a world of suchness.
Zen starts neither with the duality of ontic and ontological nor with the oneness of ontic and ontological, but with a (paradoxical) distinguishment and non-distinguishment at the same time. As Suzuki puts it, ‘Not two! Not even One.’
If Being -- just Being -- was the apex of Heidegger's quest, Heidegger's relation to Zen would be tenuous, not worthy of comparison. What makes Heidegger's relation to Zen fruitful -- and most deserving of comparison -- is his concern with Nonbeing, for it is precisely through Nonbeing that Dasein can come to terms with Being: "The Being of beings, however, is comprehensible only -- and in this lies the deepest finitude of transcendence -- when Dasein, by its very nature, plunges into Non-being."
Nonbeing, in Heidegger, is the gateway to Being.
You can never be free as long as being for you is tied to temporo-historical foundations.
Zen transcends all notion of being and nonbeing.
Zen would say that Heidegger's difficulty (and his restlessness) is that he is still thinking (metaphysically).
In a dialogue between Bodhidharma and the Second Ch'an Patriarch, Bodhidharma supposedly said.
"Bring me your mind so that I can quiet it" -- to which the Second Patriarch replied,
"I cannot find my mind."
To this, Bodhidharma responded, "I have now quieted your mind."
I only recount my path and mechanism to my acceptance, which is only my own.
It was nothing less than a complete immediate awareness beyond all concepts of being and non-being.
Today at 12:33 am by Mr. Janus
» Why are we here?
Yesterday at 3:23 pm by RealPan
» Livin Your Best Life
Yesterday at 3:18 pm by dan
» WRATH OF THE GODS/TITANS
Tue Mar 26, 2024 12:04 am by Mr. Janus
» Scientists plan DNA hunt for Loch Ness monster next month
Sat Mar 23, 2024 1:32 am by Mr. Janus
» Uanon's Majikal Misery Tour "it's all smiles on the magic school bus"
Thu Mar 21, 2024 2:10 am by Mr. Janus
» OMF STATE OF THE UNION
Sat Mar 16, 2024 12:01 am by Mr. Janus
» Earth Intelligence
Mon Mar 04, 2024 1:04 am by Mr. Janus
» The scariest character in all fiction
Sat Feb 03, 2024 12:54 am by Mr. Janus