Página inicial > Medievo - Renascença > Caputo (MEHT:39-40) – "a rosa é sem por quê..."

Caputo (MEHT:39-40) – "a rosa é sem por quê..."

quinta-feira 22 de setembro de 2022


In Gelassenheit, the active life of “responding” to Being which Versényi attributes to the “middle” Heidegger   (1930 to the early ’50 s) is destroyed. Gelassenheit the very word of course is Meister Eckhart  ’s refers to a state of total self-denial and self-repression. It is a condition of such passivity that the most noble attitude Dasein   can adopt toward the “region” Heidegger no longer calls it “Being” is to remain “open” and to “wait” upon it. The promise of a disclosure is a “shadowy hope,” Versényi observes, which cannot be clarified.

In Der Satz vom Grund  , the blurring of the lines which Heidegger had drawn between Being and Dasein is, according to Versényi, carried out even further. Being and man still need one another, as in the earlier works, but it is “difficult to say why”; indeed, in this work Heidegger discourages us from even asking why:

. . . the fate of Being and man has become so much of a Mystery that those who want to follow Heidegger on his path can no longer ask questions. They have to abandon philosophy as reflective, self-reflective thought altogether, and find consolation and reassurance in mystical poetry and faith. (Vers. [1], 158)

Versényi singles out for consideration from Der Satz vom Grund   Heidegger’s analysis   of the verse from the mystical poet Angelus Silesius  :

Without Why
The rose is without why; it blooms because it blooms;
It cares not for itself, asks not if it’s seen.
(CW. I, 289/66)

This saying of Silesius is opposed by Heidegger to Leibniz  ’s Principle of Sufficient Reason: nothing is without reason. The philosophical principle is subjectivistic, because it demands that a reason be rendered to the thinking subject, but in the saying of the mystic poet there is a recognition that man most truly is when he is, like the rose, “without why,” i.e., when he surrenders all questioning and lets the Ground Being be. (Versényi rightly traces the expression “without why” back to Meister Eckhart, who to a great extent is being set to verse by Angelus Silesius.) Versényi points out that according to Heidegger the “ground” revealed to a thinking which is without why is a groundless ground, an abyss   (Ab-grund). As such it is a mere ‘’play”:

It plays because it plays.
The “because” submerges in the game. The game is without “why.” It plays while (dieweil) it plays. It remains only play, the highest and the deepest. (SG [2], 188; cf. Vers., 154)

When Heidegger calls for abandonment to a groundless play, he has effectively destroyed the living dialogue between Being and Dasein, according to Versényi. While “Being and Dasein still belong together even in Heidegger’s last, most prophetic and mystical writings” (Vers., 155), the dynamic interchange between them is destroyed, and man is reduced to a helpless suppliant “waiting upon” the movements of an enigmatic “mystery.” The “impotence” of Dasein which Heidegger discussed in What is Metaphysics  ? (WM, 33/338) now returns in his latest writings to haunt the relationship between Being and man.

Ver online : John Caputo

[1Versényi, Laszlo. Heidegger, Being and Truth. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965.

[2GA10 Der Satz vom Grund. 3. Auflage. Pfullingen: Verlag Günther Neske, 1965.