Japan und Heidegger: Gedenkschrift der Stadt Mebkirch zum 100.

Geburtstag Martin Heideggers by Harmut Buchner Review by: Gregor Paul Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 45, No. 4 (Winter, 1990), pp. 492-494 Published by: Sophia University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2385389 . Accessed: 24/11/2013 14:00
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sophia University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Monumenta Nipponica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:00:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

492

Monumenta Nipponica, 45:4

zum 100. Geburtstag derStadtMeJikirch Japanund Heidegger:Gedenkschrift Martin Heideggers.Edited by Harmut Buchner. Jan Thorbecke,Sigmaringen, 1989. 282 pages. DM 45.00. ofZenand proponents Japanese in 1923, Heidegger EVERsince TanabeHajimevisited close and havemaintained in hisphilosophy, theKyotoSchoolhavebeeninterested On the otherhand, followers. withHeidegger and his German relations personal byZen and theKyotoSchool.Thismutual felt attracted and hisdisciples Heidegger in the belief common suchas their affinities from philosophical resulted sympathy and the shared the notionof nothingness, especially of ontology, importance technology. modern toward aversion metaphysical about information historical andinteresting comprehensive bookoffers Thepresent on the article in Japan.OhashiRyosuke's was received philosophy howHeidegger's

first encountersof Tanabe, Miki Kiyoshi, Kuki Shuizo,and Watsuji Tetsuro with of Heidegger, and Yuasa Yasuo's piece on Miki's and Watsuji's reception Heidegger, did not The articles show thattheseJapanesephilosophers are extremely informative. to them. just accept Heidegger'sideas, but reactedcritically Uniof Freiburg speechas president on Heidegger'sfirst For instance,commenting of reason!' 'Restorethepowerof logosand the right in 1933, Miki remarked, versity (p. 28). A similarpassage is quoted by Yuasa on p. 67. He points out, 'In Miki's view . . , Heidegger did not take rationality seriously enough and put too much emHeidegger's whathe considered pathos' (p. 69). Watsuji criticized phasis on irrational of thesocial statusof man and therolethatspace playsin theshapingof man's neglect life. become especiallyclear whenwe read both of his articles.In Tanabe's reservations everon Heidegarticle turn',thefirst his 1924essayon Heidegger's'phenomenological that Tanabe was alreadyemphasizing ontologyand phenomenology, ger's existential speechas presidiscussionof Heidegger'sfirst humansare social beings.In his critical Tanabe maintainedthat Heidegger'sway of thinking dent of FreiburgUniversity, and that rationality, underrated thatHeidegger 'necessarily deniesacademicfreedom', than a philosophy such as Heidegger'sthatregardsSchicksal,fate,as morepowerful reason, was dangerous. Thus Tanabe, Miki, and, to a certainextent,even Watsuji rationalpointsof view. All creditto Ohashi and criticized Heideggerfrommarkedly Tanabe's and to HarmutBuchnerforincluding bringing thisto light, Yuasa forclearly articleon Heidegger'sspeech. probablystillnew to manyGermanreadersis that Anotherpiece of information it was Kuki who in 1926 firstintroducedHeidegger's philosophyto Sartre. Also of Yuasa welcome, at least for German studentsof Heidegger,is the translation to Academic Studies, 1929, Introduction Seinosuke's reporton Heidegger'slectures, on theJapanese of whichno Germantextexists.The same appliesto Buchner'sreport editionof Heidegger'sworks. In addition to newlywritten articlesabout the receptionof Heideggerin Japan, that documentthisreception, former essays by some famous Japanesephilosophers duringtheirdisfromand to Heidegger,and notes made by Japanesevisitors letters wrotefor thatHeidegger cussionswithhim,Buchnerhas also includedintroductions and useful of his works, photographs,and a comprehensive Japanese translations of Heidegger compiled by Kozuma Tadashi, of Japanesetranslations bibliography,

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:00:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS

493

and Japaneseeditionsof his worksin German. Many of the articlesand textshave timeand withan admirableaccuracy. into Germanforthe first been translated of Heideggerand his school thatZen and theKyoto due to theinfluence It is largely and symifnotthesole, topicof Germanbooks, articles, School becamethedominant, to listenhave been repeatedly and thatGermanswilling posia on Japanesephilosophy, in Japan by thearticles notionsthatare now, once more,conveyed told the following und Heidegger.These notionshave shaped the Germanviewof Japanesephilosophy more than any otherfactor. and logicalnessand evendeniesthevalidity discardsrationality 1. Japanesethought non datur. In his articleon Nishida and Heidegger,pp. 39-61, Elmar of the tertium notion (p. 45). uses thismystifying Weinmayr again uncritically 2. In Japan, man and nature are regardedas 'one'. Yuasa Yasuo's claim that thisidea. TsujimuraKoichi nature' (p. 74), reflects 'Eastern art does not contradict fromtimeimmemorial, even maintainsthatthe Japanesehave been Naturmenschen natureand livedin accord withit (p. 160). In a letter thatis, theyhave alwaysrevered to Heideggerdated 1963, Kojima Takehiko wrote,'We Japanesefeelgeborgen[proby the embraceof nature' (p. 219; see also p. 173). tectedand comforted] onlywithNishida Kitaro,who originated 3. ['True' or 'real'] Japanesephilosophy has been repeatedlycalled der Erzvaterjapanischer Philosophie, or 'the founding quotinga statement of Japanesephilosophy'.Buchner(p. 13), and Weinmayr, father by NishitaniKeiji (p. 41), repeatthisclaim. 'Eastern', almost inconceivably 4. Japanese thoughtis somethingdistinctively different fromWesternor European thought.The presentbook abounds in phrases thatin culturaldistinctions fundamental East and West,thussuggesting thatcontrast . . . thatelevated speaks of 'a European way of thinking factdo not exist.Weinmayr (p. 45). He about . . . reality' law forall reflecting non daturto thehighest thetertium of Europeanlogicalness'(p. 57). He does nottakeintoacalso speaksof 'theviewpoint B.C. the Later Mohists developed a logic basically count that in the fourthcentury logical laws, theory.Among otherfundamental syllogistic equivalentto Aristotelian Indian logic is non datur.Furthermore, the tertium formulated the Mohistsexplicitly Nara period ever since the aspects.Finally, to European logic in all relevant equivalent In wrotea in 781, Zenju JapaneseBuddhistscholarshave been engaged logicalstudies. In all of logic. theory Dignaga's and explained introduced on a work that commentary as early as in Thus, syllogistics. Aristotelian by influenced was this theory probability logical notionsthatare equivalentto corresponding fundamental the eighthcentury, Aristotelian notions,were known,accepted,and studiedin Japan. I dwell on this point because it is of utmostimportance.If we use termssuch as thataccord withfunto structures 'logical' in theirnormalsense,thatis, as referring EurobetweenEastern, Western, damentallogical laws, then thereis no difference however, pean, or Indian logic. To employthemin a way thatexcludesthismeaning, is confusing.Hence, termssuch as 'logical' are unsuitableto describefundamental or continubetweencultures.There are no culturesthatdiscard,neglect, differences ously and consciouslyviolate logical rules, for such culturescould not survive.As such as Ito Jinsaiand Ito Togai of philosophyin Japan, philosophers to the history as any Westerner. arguedas logicallyand rationally In his discussionof Watsuji, Yuasa Yasuo speaks of an 'Eastern mind' and conto a is his reference unfortunate art' (p. 74). Particularly 'Easternand Western fronts

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:00:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

494

MonumentaNipponica, 45:4

Western dualismbetween mindand body,sincethisdualismis evenstronger in Indian philosophyand religion,for example, the Bhagaviwdgfta. Nishitani,too, repeatedly speaks of East and West, althoughhis usage of 'East' actuallyrefers onlyto certain Buddhistschools. In his reporton a conversation with Heideggerin 1953, Suzuki Daisetsu approvingly tells of Heidegger'sview that 'in the West, one separatesthe in the East' (p. 170). subject fromthe object . . . , whileone has no such interest In his article 'Martin HeideggersDenken und die japanische Philosophie' (pp. 159-66), a speech givenin 1969, Tsujimura uses the term'Japanese philosophy'in a mystifying way. He contrasts it withthe expression'philosophyin Japan', which he rejectsas unimportant and uninteresting. He emphatically speaks of 'a definition of the essentialnatureof Japanesephilosophy,and the need for, and predicament of, an essentially Japanesephilosophy'(p. 160). Accordingto Tsujimura,'Japanese philosophyoriginatesfromthe fundamental source of the [Japanesepeople's] own spiritual tradition',particularly the alleged Japaneseconceptionof nature. Accordingto scholarssuch as Suzuki, Tsujimura,and Tezuka Tomio, the interest thatBuddhistschools and theKyoto School take in ontology, in such noparticularly tionsas beingand truth ('truth'takenas an ontologicalrather thanan epistemological notion), and the way in whichtheseschools explain beingand truth, is a distinctive and originalfeature of Japaneseand Easternthought. I have alwaysfoundthisviewmostunconvincing. of First,priorto theintroduction Buddhismin China and Japan, questionsof truth did not play an important role in there.Second, theemphatic in truth tradithought interest is sharedby manyWestern tions. Third, it is thisveryinterest in truth of such and ontology,and the similarity ontological notions as ku (sunyata), mu (nothingness),and zettai mu (absolute nothingness) on the one hand, and Nichts (nothingness) on the otherthatled to the conviction thatthereare fundamental commonalities betweenthe Kyoto School and Heidegger. In sum, Buchner,Weinmayr, Yuasa, Nishitani,Tsujimura, Suzuki, Tezuka, and in Kojima repeatin theirarticlessome of thosedreadfulprejudicesabout philosophy Japan thathave shaped the Germanpictureof Japanesephilosophyformanyyears. In doing so, theyshow littleawarenessof whatphilosophy should or, at least, could of ideas. Without be, namely,a criticalexploration,discussion, and presentation and employing the fundamental acknowledging rulesof logic, nobodycould survive. Philosophers such as OgyuiSorai, Ito Jinsai, and Nishi Amane explicitly argued of man and nature(tenjin g6itsu). Scholarssuch as Kuikai, againsttheso-calledunity Hayashi Razan, and Ito Jinsaiwerephilosophers, and, by every standard, originators of Japanesephilosophy. between Thereare probablyno significant cultural differences 'East' and 'West'. When all thisis neglected, thenone need not wonderthat,except for a fewjapanologists, the four prejudiceswill continueto remainstrongin Germany. in Heidegger, For anyoneinterested of HeidegtheKyotoSchool, and thereception comgerin Japanmainly from theviewpoint of thehistory of thought, thisbook offers prehensive, important, and readable information. But what is said about Japanese philosophyand culturalin generalshould be read verycritically. and Osaka CityUniversity KarlsruheUniversity
GREGOR PAUL

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 24 Nov 2013 14:00:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions