Harrison HaggBuddhism

andBeing and Time by Martin Heidegger

April 6, 2011

Purpose

• To examine the differences and similarities between Buddhism (especially the “original” teachings found in Rahula) and Being and Time by Martin Heidegger

• To gain a greater understanding of ontology as presented by the two thinkers

• To elucidate one’s relationship to the world according to each view

Brief Biography of Martin Heidegger

• Born in Baden, Germany in September 1889

• Worked at Marburg University then Freiburg University

• Main influences- Edmund Husserl, Aristotle, St. Augustine, and Soren Kierkegaard

• His major work is Being and Time and it is often considered one of the greatest philosophical texts in the 20th century (if not all time)

• Influenced thinkers like Jean Paul Satre, Emmanuel Levinas, Jacques Derrida, Bernard Stiegler, Michel Foucault and many more

• Major influence on the movements of Phenomenology and Existentialism

• Died in May of 1976 in Baden

Major Controversy

• Martin Heidegger was a Nazi.• He actively participated in rallies and acquiesced to Nazi

requests to remove Jewish-German teachers and students from Freiburg University.

• Heidegger remained a Nazi until the end of the war.• He neither renounced nor apologized for his Nazism

during his life.

Ontology: What is it?• Ontology is. Ontology IS the study of being, being as such, being

qua being, existence, or reality.• Ontology is considered a major branch of Metaphysics.• Aristotle broke up being primarily into two distinctions: Existence

(that it is) and Essence (how or what it is- “pulp”)• “’Being’ is the most ‘universal’ concept… An understanding of being

is always already contained in everything we apprehend in beings.” (Heidegger, 2)

• “The concept of ‘being’ is indefinable.” (Heidegger, 2)• “Being is a self-evident concept.” (Heidegger, 3)• Heidegger’s language concerning ontology is complicated and

confusing but there are basically two main categories.• 1. The ontological- roughly, that which is; existence; being. Words

to look for—ontology, existence, primordial, existential, equiprimordial, presupposed, phenomenological, and fundamental.

• 2. The ontic- roughly, manifestations of being made possible by the ontological (e.g. language made possible by discourse or depressed made possible by mood). Words to look for—ontic, essential, existentiel, categories, categories, and factuals.

Brief account of Heidegger’s Ontology

• Heidegger seeks to retrieve the question of being and ontology. “It is said that ‘being’ is the most universal and emptiest concept. As such it resists every attempt at definition.” (Heidegger, 2)

• One must ask the right question in order to produce the right answer. Heidegger believes that the best place to start is to enquire about the nature of ourselves, or what he calls Da-sein (being-the-there or being-there).

• “The being that has the character of Da-sein has a relation to the question of being itself.” (Heidegger, 8)

• Thus, to enquire about being is to enquire about the nature and ontology of Da-sein. Da-sein is a privileged kind of being precisely because Da-sein is concerned about its being in a way that a rock, tree, or animal is not.

• What constitutes Da-sein may be split up between the ontological and the ontic.

• The ontological is what is necessary, presupposed, and gives rise to the possibilities of enquiry.

Cont.• Da-sein is what is already always presupposed and whenever

human beings are in the world. We are in the world ontologically and ontically.

• The “whatness” of Da-sein may be answered in terms of the ontological structures always already present in Da-sein.

• 1. Da-sein is always already ‘in’ the world.– Not a spatial relation, rather “to live… to dwell… I am used to, familiar

with. I take care of something” (54).– This is called “being-in-the-world.”

• 2. Being-in-the-world makes itself know through “handiness” and “at-hand”; this is the “care” structure– Handiness—hammer example– At-hand—when handiness breaks and it becomes Obtrusive

• 3. Da-sein is always already in relation to others, Mitda-sein or “being-with”; this is the “concern” structure– Always already with others as being-in-the-world– Not only “in” spatial relationship (ontic) but “in” as to dwell with

(ontological”• 4. Da-sein is always already in a “mood” and “attuned”

– Mood comes from being-in-the-world– Special mood of “Angst” or “Anxiety” towards death

Buddhist conception of “being”• Pivotal to the Buddhist understanding of being, the self, ego, or I is the idea

of nothingness, especially Anatta.• “…[T]he idea of an abiding, immortal substance in man, or outside, whether

it is called Atman, ‘I’, Soul, Self, or Ego, is considered only a false belief, a mental projection. This is the Buddhist doctrine of Anatta, No-Soul or No-Self.” (Rahula, 55) also, “no-selfness”

• “The correct position with regard to the question of Anatta is…to try and see things objectively as they are without… ‘I’ or ‘being’… [as] a combination of physical and mental aggregates.” (66)

• “The Buddha’s teaching on Anatta… should not be considered as negative or annihilistic. Like Nirvana, it is truth, reality.” (66)

• The apparent “self” and the “world” are made up of the Five Aggregates. They are part of conventional truth.

– 1. Form/Matter- external physical world and material body– 2. Sensation/Feeling- sensing an object– 3. Perception- the registering of an object (e.g. sounds)– 4. Mental formations- states of the mind (e.g. ideas)– 5. Consciousness- cognizance or awareness

• “In brief the five Aggregates of Attachment are dukkha.” (25)• Therefore, all of being is impermanent, subject to change, phenomena, and

dukkha. Ultimate reality, real being is nothingness; it is Nirvana. • Buddhism stresses a respectful and caring relationship with the world.

ComparisonBeing and Time

• Similarities– Starts with a notion of “emptiness”

as definitional of being– Emphasizes being-in-the-world as

always already there– Phenomenological account– Good relationship to nature

• Differences– Everything that is is being– Presupposed ontological qualities

that make experience possible– Da-sein is, it has real qualities– Concept of self, Da-sein (being-

there)– Being-in-the-world is reality– Mitda-sein (being-with) is an

ontological quality– Care structure as our relationship

to the world of objectively present things

Buddhism• Similarities

– Starts with the notion of “nothingness”

– Emphasizes a proper orientation to the world by caring for others

– Phenomenological account– Good relationship to nature

• Differences– Nothing is– Experience, made possible by the

five Aggregates, is not ultimately real

– Anatta has no qualities (neither positive nor annihilistic)

– Anatta—no selfness– World only has conventional

reality, not ultimate reality– Relationship does not exist as

ultimate reality, only as conventional reality

Concluding Thoughts

• Many other similarities and differences exist between Heidegger and Buddhism

• Comparison between “Angst” and “Dukkha”? “Throwness”? “Falling-prey”?

• Views on Time? Death?• Zen Buddhism and Heidegger?• Role of “mood” and emotion as ontological

structures?• Metaphysical claim?• Ontic categories of experience and the five

Aggregates?• Many others…