Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 16:32:12 +0100
From: Rene de Bakker <rene.de.bakker-AT-uba.uva.nl>
Subject: Re: Gewesenheit (1)


>> Rene Schreef:
>>
>> >I think, that what Heidegger is at, is a radical turning of position:
>> >in a Hoelderlin poem, or in a text of Leibniz, is the opening, which
>> >is enough for itself. They don't need us. At most, we need them.
>> >A very strange use of the word 'is', that must be admitted, but
>> >the only one, that can free the historical from the available.
>> >
>> >Nietzsche 2, German p. 9, heading "ER and WtP":
>> >
>> >"Die Gewesenheit ist die Befreiung des scheinbar nur Vergangenen
>> >in sein Wesen [...]   Das WESENDE Vergangene, die je entworfene
>> >Seiendheit als verhuellte Wahrheit des Seins, ueberherrscht alles,
>> >was als gegenwaertig und, kraft seiner Wirksamkeit, als das Wirkliche
>> >gilt."
>>
>> Alta Vista Schreef's this as:
>>
>> " the beingness is the release apparently only of the passing into its
>> nature [... ] the WESENDE passing, the beingness per sketched as veiled
>> truth of the Seins, over-prevails everything that is considered to strength
>> of its effectiveness as present and, as the real. "
>>
>> uh, - - - huh?  uh, Michael, was sagt dieses wirklich?
>>
>> kenneth
>>
>
>Kenneth,
>It says something like:
>"Has-been-ness is the liberation of what is apparently merely the past
into its
>essence. [...] The ESSENCING past, each cast beingness as the veiled truth of
>being, rules over everything which is regarded as present/contemporary
and, by
>virtue of its effectiveness/realness, is regarded as real."
>
>Michael


Thanks. 
A year ago or so, there was a discussion on ontological difference and
transcendental
method in BT, and how they might freeze the hermeneutical circle. Malcolm
Riddoch then
asked, how *time* could possibly be a hindrance to it. I didn't see an
answer then. 
Now after the discussion of GA26 with Gulio, I see somewhat clearer. In
"What is metaphysics"
and GA29/30, through Angst and boredom (Langeweile - long while), time
seems more
acqainted with concealment, "looming in the hidden depths of Dasein",
although the waking
of it still must have a momentary/opening character. 

I already mentioned Heidegger's comment in the Contributions (1936-38),
that in 1929/30
he left time and time schematism, and, like in the last part of "The
essence of ground",
turned to ground and freedom.  The free is something important of the late
Heidegger, as in 
die freie Weite / the free wideness, for instance in Gelassenheit. But,
instead of pursuing
freedom, the truth of Being, die Wahrheit des Seins, came in between. (The
essence of
truth, originally 1931/32)

In a later comment - my guess is in "An introduction to metaphysics" (1935)
- he speaks
of his doings up to then as the "ever more hopeless efforts, to evade the
truth of Being".
 
In a critical GA-comment to this same Introduction to metaphysics Heidegger
says:
The road that is chosen in the beginning of the lecture, is wrong: there is
no way 
from Seinsverstaendnis (understanding of Being) to Being itself. And one
better
skips over the first 15 pages. One has to begin with the beginning, and
that is Being,
and only then its understanding.

H1: Dasein is the Lichtung
H2: Lichtung grants Dasein. Or: The relation (Bezug) of man and Being,
belongs to 
       Being itself.      (This sentence is inexhaustible. Also compare it
with the one, that,
       perniciously, Being is always represented as something apart from man)
        



rene










-----------------------------------
drs. René de Bakker
Universiteitsbibliotheek Amsterdam
Afdeling Catalogisering 
tel. 020-5252309              


     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---