Brief overview of Heidegger’s Letter on Humanism
Martin Heidegger’s Letter on Humanism, is a letter that was published in 1947. This letter expresses Heidegger’s thoughts on humanism In 1946, A friend of Heidegger, Jean Beaufret, asked Heidegger his thoughts on Karl Marx’s theory, one that said that human thinking can obtain objective truth, and use this truth for practical purposes in society. Also discussed between Beaufret and Heidegger, was Jean Paul Sartre’s essay, Existentialism is a Humanism, which puts forth the idea that humans must take subjectivity as a point of departure, not objectivity as Marx had theorized. For Sartre, existence precedes essence. Heidegger’s Letter on Humanism addresses Marxism, Sartre’s theory of humanism and existentialism. Heidegger also addresses his concern with humanism being a metaphysic.
In Being and Time written by Heidegger and published in 1927, Heidegger constructs a phenomenological ontology and inquires into the meaning of Being. In Being and Time, Heidegger explains simply some universal truths about Being. “Being”, Heidegger states, “is the most universal concept”, it is already understood before everything that is conceived of in the world. [ii] Heidegger believes that the question of Being is taken for granted throughout philosophy. Since Plato’s tripartite ontology, until the modern era, philosophy has concerned itself with beings and relations. The interrogation of Being has remained elusive. Heidegger states that Being is indefinable. To define Being, would assume it as an entity, for which a logical definition could be placed upon it. The concept of definition cannot be applied to Being.
Throughout the Letter on Humanism, Heidegger refers back to these terms and concepts in Being and Time. He uses the word Dasein (translates to “being there”) and defines Dasein as mans essential occurrence “there”(da) in the clearing of Being. Dasein is sustained by man through ek-sistence, (a Heideggerian term) which means the preservation of the ecstatic (standing out) of mans essence.
In the Letter on Humanism begins Heidegger analyzes our view of action. Actions are that which cause effects. The effects are valued according to their utility. Heidegger claims that the essence of action is accomplishment. Accomplishing is to unfold something into the fullness of its essence. What is, is Being. “Thinking accomplishes the relation of Being to the essence of man” writes Heidegger. However, he notes that thinking does not cause Beings relation to man, and thinking does not make Being related to man. Thinking is a manifestation of Being into language. Heidegger uses the phrase “language is the house of Being” (which he explains later on in the letter in further detail). Man dwells in this house. Man, who thinks words and creates with words, is the guardian of this home. Guardianship accomplishes the manifestation of Being by manifesting Being to language and maintaining it in language through speech. [iii]
Heidegger writes ,“All working or effecting lies in Being and is directed towards Being. Thinking in contrast lets itself be claimed by Being so that it can say the truth of Being.” Thinking accomplishes this letting. Therefore, letting is the essence of thinking. Thinking is not just an action which has causes and effects, “thinking acts insofar as it thinks” Thinking lets itself be claimed by being, Thinking is the engagement by Being and for Being, which is reducible to ‘Thinking is the engagement of Being’. [iv]
Heidegger asks in what does humanity of man consist? He answers the humanity of man lies in his essence. To explain how the essence of man is determined, Heidegger analyzes the history of humanism and some contemporary answers as given by Marx and Sartre.
According to Marx, the nature of man can be found in society. “Social man, is for him (Marx) “natural” man ”.[v] The Christians see man in relation to God, as God’s children. Heidegger explains that humanism in general is thought of a as a concern for mans freedom, his humanity and finding worth in that process to freedom. Thus, humanism will differ depending on the conception of “freedom” and “nature”. The humanisms of Christianity, Marxism, Sartres’ Existentialism, the Romans and Greeks, may all differ in purpose and principle, yet all agree on one point: “humanitas of homo humanus” (i.e. humanity/education/training and good conduct of human man), all rests on a preconceived notion of an established metaphysic. Heidegger goes onto claim that “every humanism is either grounded in a metaphysic or is itself made to be the ground of one”
Heidegger’s problem with the relation of humanism to metaphysics is that metaphysics, in general, makes statements regarding beings, without ever asking what Heidegger thinks is the most important inquiry: the truth of Being. And so, he says, that every humanism remains metaphysical and in order to understand humanism, one must understand metaphysics and ask “what is metaphysics?”. [vi]
‘The ‘substance’ of man is existence”, is a passage taken from Being and Time, and is repeated often. In this letter, Heidegger references it, yet changed the wording to ‘the ek-sistence of man is his substance. Substance is not used in in its traditional fashion. Heidegger explains that the what is meant by the ek-sistence of man is man’s substance, is “nothing else but that the way that man in his proper essence becomes present to being is ecstatic inherence in the truth of Being.”[vii]
Jiddu Krishnamurti
Jiddu Krishnamurti was born in 1895 in India. His interests were in the phenomenology of the self, and a change in the world through the individual. He regarded dogmas and habits as some causes for internal conflict within oneself and their relation to society. He was mostly regarded as a spiritual teacher, giving talks, and did not spend much time writing or trying to be a philosopher. In fact, he did not advocate philosophizing or lecturing, as he found it inhibitory to seeing truth. Richard Martin, in his book titled, On Krishnamurti, writes: “In addition to being a spiritual teacher he has a well-spring of philosophically significant insights, particularly on the phenomenology of the self”.[viii] For Krishnamurti, through meditation, i.e. observing the now, was the way to self knowledge and truth of humans relation to others and the world.
Heidegger and Krishnamurti On Truth
Krishnamurti said that the truth is attainable, but the human mind will not be able to find it by listening to others or accepting some dogma. Truth is acquired by inquiring into things themselves, in order to free themselves from the chains of the external world (Martin 16). This is very similar to Heidegger’s thinking. There is no methodology to attain truth. Truth is found in authenticity, as Heidegger calls it. To be authentic, Heidegger claims that one must inquire into the truth of Being. An inauthentic life, rather, is to be concerned and caught up in the world’s appearances, without inquiring into truth.
Heidegger rejects all words ending in –ism. He sees them as mere labels, taking away, or detracting from the art of it an idea’s essence. Heidegger expresses this notion by explaining how the act of thinking is most of the time thought as doing “philosophy”. By calling thinking “philosophy”, the essence of thinking is lost as well as the essence of pure thought. Thinking becomes an –ism and misdirects one’s ability to grasp the essence of thinking. Original thought and creativity, comes to an end once it becomes an –ism, according to Heidegger.
Krishnamurti, would agree with Heidegger on this point. Krishnamurti rejects all –isms, dogmas, or anything that claims to be a school of thought. He states, “Truth is a pathless land; each of us represents all humanity and one needs to be a light to oneself, free of all authority”.[ix]
Authority for Krishnamurti, is anything that calls itself a doctrine, labels itself, identifies, tries to teach something. This statement, written in The First and Last Freedom, expresses his idea on truth. “You cannot find truth through anybody else. How can you? Truth is not something static; it has no fixed abode; it is not an end, a goal. On the contrary, it is living, dynamic, alert, alive. How can it be an end? If truth is a fixed point it is no longer truth; it is then a mere opinion. Truth is the unknown, and a mind that is seeking truth will never find it, for mind is made up of the known, it is the result of the past, the outcome of time – which you can observe for yourself. Mind is the instrument of the known, hence it cannot find the unknown; it can only move from the known to the known.”[x]
It is Heidegger’s contention that not since the Pre-Socratics, has the history of philosophy been able to get anywhere near truth of Being. Heidegger states that “metaphysics closes itself to the simple essential fact that man essentially occurs only in his essence, where he is claimed by Being” [xi] Krishnamurti discusses the history of thinking and summarizes it by stating that we only move from the known to the known. Heidegger also finds, in the history of philosophy, the same predicament. There is always a focus on beings relation to beings. Negation, does not necessitate freedom from the other. According to Heidegger negation is just another way of doing metaphysics.
Krishnamurti and Heidegger On Freedom and Thought
In Heidegger’s writing On the Essence of Truth, he describes in a section, what he finds the essence of freedom to be. He writes: “How is the essence of freedom to be thought? That which is opened up, that to which a presentative statement as correct corresponds, are beings opened up in an open comportment. Freedom for what is opened up in an open region lets beings be the beings they are. Freedom now reveals itself as letting beings be.”[xii] Freedom which is also part of the essence of truth, is a letting, and Being. Similarly, we can find an explanation of the relation of freedom and truth in Krishnamurti’s dialects. To Krishnamurti, intelligence is freedom.
Thought, according to Krishnamurti, has no place in truth. You cannot think truth. There is no label, no grasping of a word to represent a reality. To Krishnamurti, thinking is what humans do as an outcome, a result of a result. He claims the whole thinking process is conscious process. Thinking is not free because it compares. It reconciles effects, and is not action. Thinking is related to memory as all thought is of the past.
Krishnamurti’s ideas on thought, seems to be different from Heidegger at first glance. It must be noted that both Krishnamurti and Heidegger describe thinking at first, as how it is traditionally viewed, as a techne. Heidegger describes thought in Letter on Humanism, as mostly of the past, in memory, and what is thought about must exist before being thought. Heidegger does not see this sort of thinking grasping of the essence of thought. To think, truly think, we must first learn to think. To learn to think is to learn what is to be thought of. For Heidegger, thinking is a letting. A letting of what wants to be thought come to us, and our thought to be inclined towards it.[xiii] This letting of thought from Being and we are inclined to think towards Being.
Heidegger’s idea of thinking as a letting, a letting be, is similar to meditation and non judgment, that Krishnamurti discusses. Like Heidegger, Krishnamurti says there is no art of thinking and no technique of thinking. [xiv] “Most minds”, Krishnamurti states, “are seeking a culmination, a goal, an achievement and are molding themselves upon the idea of success, and such thought, such thinking is continually limiting itself, whereas if there is no idea of achievement, but only the continual movement of thought as understanding, as intelligence, then that movement of thought is creative”. Creative thinking has no result. Creative thinking is the “infinite movement of thought, emotion and action”. [xv] Creative thinking for Krishnamurti, is similar to Heidegger’s idea of pure thought.
One difference, besides usage of terms between Heidegger and Krishnamurti, is that Heidegger is consumed in the question of the meaning of Being. He implies that thought, the only thought which is capable of being thought, would be from Being just as we are inclined towards thinking it. Krishnamurti never tries to explain mans relation to Being, however he does state that thinking creatively is thinking that is action and “is the relationship between the individual and society”.[xvi]
Heidegger writes in the Letter on Humanism about the truth of Being in relation to its belongingness to Being. He claims that the truth of Being is concealed by the dominance that is the public realm. Heidegger believes that the devastation of language threatens the essence of humanity. The devastation is that language falls subject to the public realm and into metaphysics, which makes language subjective. The devastation of language denies us essence which is “the house of the truth of Being”. We view everything from cause and effect and try to attain truth through metaphysics and logic. Heidegger claims, in order to get to the nearness of Being, “man must first learn to exist in the nameless”. Man must let himself be claimed by Being before he speaks which means he has to acknowledge that there may not be much or anything to say. Man needs to be made ready for this claim.
Both Heidegger and Krishnamurti would agree that the public realm has an inhibitory affect on the individual and his ability to see truth. In order to be free in one’s life, that is, to see truth, Krishnamurti stresses self knowing, meditation, and awareness. Inquiry and understanding are crucial There is a freedom of thought that occurs once the significance of thought is deeply understood. Profound self knowledge is essential to Krishnamurti. He states “meditation and not repetition, awareness and not definition, reveal the ways of thought.[xvii]
In Heidegger’s view thinking comes to an end when “it slips out of its element. The element of thinking, is what enables thinking to be thinking. This element embraces thinking ,bringing it into its essence. Thinking is of Being. Thinking is propriated by Being and belongs to Being. Thinking, also, listens to Being. Heidegger writes: “Thinking is-this says: Being has fatefully embraced its essence” [xviii]What embrace means is, to embrace a “thing”, is to love it or favor it, and bestow essence as a gift. This is the essence of enabling. Enabling not only can achieve something, but it can let something essentially unfold, or expressed in a simpler way, “let it be”.[xix] This is precisely the notion Krishnamurti stresses. He does so when he talks about love and thought. Thought is the biggest hindrance to love. That is because one does not understand thought. Traditional thought, cannot let something be, or bestow something. It creates a hindrance between what is and what should be, by making distinctions and relations.[xx]
On Humanism and Concern
Heidegger explains that in order for the man in the future to think the truth of Being, he will think from ek-sistence. Ek-sistence in content, means standing out (ecstasis) in the truth of Being. Heidegger explains that saying “man ek-sists” is not an answer to a question if man exists or not, rather, “man ek-sists is a response to a question concerning mans “essence”. “Essence” should be conceived distinctly from esse essentiae or esse existentiae. “Essence” is defined by Heidegger as the ek-static character of Dasein.
For Heidegger, humanism, in its philosophy, does not grasp man’s essence. It does not realize the proper dignity of man. Heidegger argues that Being and Time is, in a way, against humanism, but not that it advocates for the inhumane, but that humanism “does not set the humanitas of man high enough”. Perhaps, humanism does not set the humanitas high enough, in that it does not set out to understand mans essence, and ek-sist in it. Rather, humanism as it is traditionally known, is grounded on a metaphysic. The metaphysical groundwork all humanism is founded upon, distracts from the essence of man, man’s situation in Being.
Krishnamurti sets out to help facilitate an understanding of the individual self to truth. He states his purpose in Total Freedom: What I want to Do as, not giving a system of philosophy to follow blindly, rather he is “trying to awaken the desire for true and intelligent fulfillment, which alone can bring about happy order and peace in the world”.[xxi] From this inquiry into truth and in the light of truth, a person, also becomes free. According to what Heidegger defines as traditional humanism[xxii], Krishnamurti’s philosophy at first glance, is a humanism. However, unlike traditional humanism, explained on the grounds of metaphysics, Krishnamurti bypasses any method, or ground of being, and focuses on the individual experience and self exploration of truth.
Heidegger redefines humanism in his own terms, In Letter on Humanism. He writes “For this is humanism: meditation and caring, that man be human and not inhumane, “inhuman”, that is, outside his essence[xxiii]. Heidegger does not provide an ethic behind his statements, rather, he repeats throughout his writing, that an ethic shouldn’t be taken from it. His goal is to simply discuss the meaning of Being and the explanation of Dasein’s relation to it. Attaining the dimension of the truth of Being, in order for man to ponder it, is done so for the benefit of Dasein. It is not done for the sake of man, for his action in life or some sort of salvation.
Conclusion
Understanding of the self and the situation at hand is of upmost importance to both Krishnamurti and Heidegger. Heidegger urges man to transcend metaphysics and learn pure thought in order to stand in the light of truth of Being. Krishnamurti urges us to inquire, to be aware and understand , rid of labels in order to allow ourselves to creatively think, and be. Krishnamurti’s aim is given by him, very directly. He wants to awaken a desire for truth in the individual for the betterment of the world in which we are one. His talks, center on truth, problems of living, understanding and freedom through awareness. One of the most important lessons I find in Krishnamurti and Heidegger alike, is that of being aware of how we traditionally think. Only by doing so, may we free ourselves from, history and habit. By embracing the now, we open ourselves to possibility and truth.
Although Heidegger does not focus on ethic, and sets out to do philosophy, the way his ideas attempt to open our minds to new ways of thinking is valuable, nonetheless. Krishnamurti shows ways of thinking outside of traditional philosophy, and how this awareness can be applied to an ethic. Perhaps an accomplishing of humanism, as a concern for man’s sake and also for the standing in the light of the truth of Being, can both be possible.
Bibliography
Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. (J. Macquarrie, & E. Robinson, Trans.) New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Krishnamurti, J. (1967). Commentaries on Living (1st ed.). (D. Rajagopal, Ed.) Wheaton, Il: The Theosophical Publishing House.
J. Krishnamurti First and Last Freedom, Chapter 21 Power and realization
Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Martin, R. (2003). On Krishnamurti. Wadsworth.
References:
[i] Being is a Heideggarian term, and is explained as that which is. Krishnamurti never uses ”Being” ,but uses the term “being” to mean the same thing as Heidegger, i.e. not an entity
[ii] Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. (J. Macquarrie, & E. Robinson, Trans.) New York, NY: Harper & Row, p.22
[iii] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins, p. 217
[iv] Ibid. p.218
[v] Ibid. p. 224
[vi] Ibid. p.226
[vii] Ibid. p. 233
[viii] Martin, R. (2003). On Krishnamurti. Wadsworth.
[ix]Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins. P. 255
[x] First and Last Freedom, The J. Krishnamurti The First and Last Freedom Chapter 21 Power and realization
[xi] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins, Letter on Humanism, p. 228
[xii] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins, On the Essence of Truth p. 125
[xiii] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins,What calls for thinking 369-370
[xiv] Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins To be a human being p.45
[xv] Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins To be a human being p. 44
[xvi] Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins p.45
[xvii] 17
[xviii] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins, p. 220
[xix] Ibid. 220
[xx] Krishnamurti, J. (1967). Commentaries on Living (1st ed.). (D. Rajagopal, Ed.) Wheaton, Il: The Theosophical Publishing House 16-17 commentaries on living
[xxi] Krishnamurti, J. K. (1996). Total Freedom (1st ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins p.11
[xxii] Heidegger explains that humanism in general is thought of a as a concern for mans freedom, his humanity and finding worth in that process to freedom.
[xxiii] Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings from Being and Time to The Task of Thinking. (D. F. Krell, Ed.) New York: HarperCollins, Letter on humanism
hey there.
I googled “Heidegger Krishnamurti” thinking that no one would have found the correlation that I have. There are some papers that I found in google scholar, but this little blog post details a level that I haven’t found elsewhere.
Have you published it somewhere? I think it is worth working up and publishing. It is difficult to talk about Krishnamurti in ‘academic’ language.
From reading other parts of your blog, I can assure you that you are in exactly the same place as I am. And as many, if not most (or all), other people are … I believe. Some of us are more conscious of it than others.