I like things that support my body:
chairs, floors, beds. I like it when my body is resting. Being still is nice. I
like being still. If I want something I can think about it and imagine various
ways to get it. If what I want to do is nothing but stay still and rest, I'm
lucky, I'm already there, I've already reached my goal and can consider my
condition a huge success. If I want to go to Paris I can imagine Paris, and
that has its conveniences, not the least of which is not having to get on a jet
and watch three or four movies, and then shuffle awkwardly down a narrow aisle
to get off the plane after the plane lands to go stand in a line and wait for a
customs official to wave me through into France, into Paris, but it will not be
the same as being in Paris. There are limits to the imagination.
I’ve done a nice job, I
think, imagining my trip to Paris, but it wasn’t the same thing as being in
Paris, not at all. I didn’t feel my feet on the sidewalks of Paris or feel the
air of Paris on my skin or hear the sound of Parisians talking or taste a
waffle stuffed with crème brulée at the Bouillon Racine. I can imagine these
things but I can’t actually experience these things, not physically.
Nevertheless, the ability to imagine these things, to think about them, is a
way to unfold them in my mind, to bring them into being, albeit a phantasmal
form of being, a perambulation of brain waves based on my memories of Paris.
Better yet, forget Paris.
Imagine a mood of pure receptivity, a zone between yes and no, a region which
is both an expanse and an abiding, an openness to the mystery of existence, not
a place or a city or a landscape but a “regioning,” a coming forth.
I like that word,
existence. It’s a word with a lot of resonance, a lot of reach. It comes from
Latin ‘existere,’ which means “to step out, to stand forth, emerge.” That’s it.
That’s all it really means. But over the years it’s accumulated a lot more
layers, stratum, lamina, fold.
All words are
palimpsests, but existence grumbles in the corner like an old man wearing a hat
with tassels. I think of Rembrandt’s philosopher sitting by a window
photosynthesizing the golden light of 16th century Holland.
Existence, for Heidegger,
is the ground of presence. It is a mode of being in the world. It is being true
to life rather than self, which is really just an epiphenomenon of life, a
goofy byproduct that clamors for attention, silly thing that it is. Existence
is the brute fact of being. It’s a walk on a country path, the odor of earth
after a downpour. The opening out of a solitude released from the noises and
distractions of everyday life. Unadorned consciousness. Naked awareness. Existence
is lived in orientation towards death. It is lived out of a sense of urgency.
It is a preparedness for death. It is an acknowledgement of the finitude that
informs our understanding of time. It is a deeply sensitive and welcoming
disposition.
Heidegger called it Gelassenheit. Gelassenheit is a German word that means ‘serenity,’ but Heidegger
had something much bigger in mind. Heidegger used the term in an essay titled “Towards an Explication of Gelassenheit: From a
Conversation on a Country Path about Thinking.” He used the term to refer to a
state of openness, meditative thinking. He believed that it plays an important
role in contemporary life. You really don’t see people appearing to do it much
anymore. Mostly what I see when I’m outside on the city streets are people
staring into handheld devices, pocket computers, as if in a trance, barely
paying any attention at all to their surroundings. I don’t own a pocket
computer so I when I’m outside running or walking I do meditative thinking.
What else can you do in your head? I can’t actually be in my head, even though
it does feel like that, like I’m a captain of a ship in a wheelhouse.
I don’t even know for
sure that I’m in my mind when it feels like I’m in my head. There are nerves
throughout the body, including the intestines, so thinking involves the whole
body. According to Erica and Justin Sonnenburg, the nervous system of our
gastrointestinal tract is often referred to as our body’s second brain. “There
are hundreds of millions of neurons connecting the brain to the enteric nervous
system,” they say,
… the part of the nervous system that is
tasked with controlling the gastrointestinal system. This vast web of
connections monitors the entire digestive tract from the esophagus to the anus.
The enteric nervous system is so extensive that it can operate as an independent
entity without input from our central nervous system, although they are in
regular communication. While our “second” brain cannot compose a symphony or
paint a masterpiece the way the brain in our skull can, it does perform an
important role in managing the workings of our inner tube. The network of
neurons in the gut is as plentiful and complex as the network of neurons in our
spinal cord, which may seem overly complex just to keep track of digestion. Why
is our gut the only organ in our body that needs its own “brain”? Is it just to
manage the process of digestion? Or could it be that one job of our second
brain is to listen in on the trillions of microbes residing in the gut?
But that would be Eingewide (guts, viscera, entrails,
bowels, innards, etc.) not Gelassenheit.
This isn’t to say Gelassenheit
doesn’t go on in the gut, I think it does, but it’s preferable, for the sake of
simplicity, to stay focused on Gelassenheit.
You could say Ich fühle es in meinen Eingeweiden,
which means “I feel it in my guts,” and would be fun to say if I spoke German,
but I don’t, so I’m going to leave it alone, and let it digest on its own.
What Heidegger means
by Gelassenheit is complicated.
Heidegger borrowed the word from Meister Eckhart, a 13th century
German theologian who was particularly enthusiastic about detachment: “When I
preach,” he proclaimed, “I usually speak of detachment and say that a man
should be empty of self and all things; and secondly, that he should be
reconstructed in the simple good that God is; and thirdly, that he should
consider the great aristocracy which God has set up in the soul, such that by
means of it man may wonderfully attain to God; and fourthly, of the purity of
the divine nature.”
Gelassenheit means releasement. More specifically, Gelassenheit zu den Dingen: releasement
toward things. It’s a litle counterintuitive. When we think of release we think
of release from something, something restraining
us, jail, for instance, or (as in the case of Engelbert Humperdinck) a romance gone sour: “Please
release me, let me go, for I don’t love you anymore.” Release toward something
is a very interesting kind of release. That’s the opposite kind of release. It
suggests a desire for contact, but something held us back. Something prevented
us from moving toward the thing, event, object, phenomenon that aroused our
interest. A guard, maybe, that kept us from going backstage to meet the
Freytag-Loringhovens, a rock group I just made up.
Releasement might best
be described as an attitude, a state of mind, a disposition of receptivity and
openness, a field of maximal awareness, thinking which is open to its content.
Heidegger contrasts meditative thinking, the kind of thinking that leads us
into a field of intense awareness, with the calculative thinking associated
with science and technology. He strongly endorses obtaining a mental state that
is non-dualistic, that negotiates the field of technology without being mired
in it, trapped. Releasement makes the free air of the heavens available, the
open realm of the spirit. It is therefore in conflict with calculative
thinking, but there is a between-state, a region between the calculative and
meditative where it is possible to maintain an attitude of openness.
“Meditative thinking,” he avers, “demands of us not to cling one-sidedly to a
single idea, nor to run down a one-track course of ideas. Meditative thinking
demands of us that we engage ourselves with what at first sight does not go
together at all.”
Incongruity is
stimulating and tonic. It nourishes our sense of the uncanny. For this reason,
Heidegger also values anxiety. Anxiety is the sign that the world of
familiarity has slipped away and what we find in its place is the uncanny.
Mystery, enigma, inscrutability.
Without releasement,
without meditative thinking, without this capacity for incongruity and
transcendence, we become infatuated with calculative thinking, we get mired in
the quantitative, we lose the qualitative, and nature “becomes a gigantic
gasoline station, an energy source for modern technology and industry.”
(Heidegger, page 50, Discourse on
Thinking).
The transition from
willing into releasement is where things get tricky. If you can’t will
releasement into your being, what do you do? How do you get there? Heidegger
describes it as both a region and horizon. But there’s no map in Heidegger’s
glove compartment.
“The nature of
releasement is hidden,” he says.
Hidden in what? Open,
and the hidden appears. This is what Heidegger calls “Divine-Presencing-in-the-World.”
Achtsamkeit (attentiveness) is
crucial. Attentiveness teaches the eyes the philosopher’s gaze. The uncanny
lurks among the known. The unknown of the known aches to unfold the map of
itself. What falls away is where I have to go.