>That Heidegger can help us with is to understand the way of thinking that has become predominant in the West, and by extension all over the world. He called it Metaphysics. The word is not his, but he recaptured the original meaning of the term and gave it an encompassing meaning as a tool to define the way of thinking of the West. That way of thinking can also be called Philosophy. Heidegger gave also a new meaning to this word taking from the original meaning and intention of its Fathers, the Ancient Greeks. He placed the beginning of Philosophy with the works of Plato and then Aristotle. And he said that this way of thinking, philosophy, carried an inherent error from its beginning. He called that error: “the forgetfulness of Being.”. As a first approximation to his thinking we will say that Heidegger maintained that Philosophy cannot think Truth; or -which is the same-, that what philosophy calls truth is not Truth.
>Heidegger left something unresolved. He finished Philosophy. But he could only vaguely point out the way forward. He resolved this problem with what he calls “poetry”, not just any poetry, but the poetry of the one who is no longer himself. The one that lets “the things show themselves” to him. The one who is no longer the observer, but the observed. But he could not go any further. I would not say that what he pointed out was nothing, it was very important. But nobody yet has picked up this unfinished affair. Because the resolution of the End of Philosophy is only one: Islam.
All monotheism according to Heidegger is part of that metaphysics and forgetfulness of being. It is man identifying with a creator God rather than as a Dasein. So Mudlslimes are full of shit like always.
Nicholas Wilson
Sorry, Islam is onto-theological because of its Aristotelian heritage.
Archaic Judaism, Pauline Christianity or forms of paganism are the Heideggerian alternatives.
Gabriel Thompson
Oh the pedoposter is back.
>Daily reminder muhammad was a pale ginger jew. >Daily reminder muhammad fucked a 6 yr old >Daily reminder muslims worship a black cube in the dessert. >Daily reminder muslims believe mekka will be conquered by the Christians (based) >Daily reminder that God made men to have foreskins
>nobody reads the OP >everybodys shitposting Yea Forums really is /pol/ for the delusioned
Adam White
Crackpot ramblings.
Dominic Peterson
He's not wrong that western thought has an issue with the forgetfulness of Being, or that Islam mainly in its Sufi teachings presents an alternative. His is wrong though on the point that Islam is the only answer, there are many alternatives ranging from Neoplatonism, Tantra, Vedanta, Daoism, certain kinds of Buddhism, etc all of which contain these sorts of teachings about abiding in Being through uniting the transcendental and immanent; very much in line with what Heidegger suggested but never fully mapped out. Does all these teachings have initiatic orders which take on disciples and show them the way like Sufism does? No not all of them but some do, and given the state of the Islam today and the spread of Salafi ideology someone perhaps has better reasons for going to a eastern religion/meditation center instead, or better reasons for simply becoming a auto-didact and extensively studying Neoplatonism or Vedanta and so on. The very teachings that the author presents as the answer to Heidegger are denounced by other (well-funded) Muslims as Bid‘ah, how can you expect Islam to be the solution when it's internally divided on that very question? Islam is mostly onto-theological in its exoteric schools of legalism and in a few figureheads that took after the Greeks like Averroes or Avicenna; but within Sufism or within the esoteric teachings transmitted within some Sufi groups is a form of non-dualism which goes over and beyond onto-theology; having teachings that pertain to one's immediate Being and how to reach higher states of it. Heidegger was notably influenced by eastern thought and incorporated various concepts of theirs into his work without attribution, c.f. Reinhard May's work showing the texts he literally took passages from. >"The investigation concludes that Heidegger’s work was significantly influenced by East Asian sources. It can be shown, moreover, that in particular instances Heidegger even appropriated wholesale and almost verbatim major ideas from the German translations of Daoist and Zen Buddhist classics. This clandestine textual appropriation of non-Western spirituality, the extent of which has gone undiscovered for so long, seems quite unparalleled, with far-reaching implications for our future interpretation of Heidegger’s work."[100] So, the author of the article is not incorrect in that there is a common element between Heidegger and Islam, by which he really means Sufism if you read the article you'll see; and in truth this common element is also shared with Daoism, Neoplatonism, Hindu thought etc. but the author is just trying to shill Islam or they aren't aware of that so they don't say so
If i were the muslims i would stay away from western philosophy. Islam is like a woman with no pants trapped between a wall, and deconstruction is like a giant dicked rapist who just walked by the wall
Jacob Evans
>As we shall see, Evola also admires Islam for its action and it is exactly this reality that distinguishes Tawhid from monotheism. “Tawhid is not monotheism, it is not a metaphysical principle. Allah is beyond what is attributed to Him, therefore beyond logos. Allah is not a mono-theos, nor poli-theos, or tri-theos, or a-theos. Allah is not theo-logical or onto-logical. Allah is neither a theory nor a principle. Allah is not contained by definition.”(16)
You're a loon if you think Muhammed was influenced at all by Aristotle, or that Islamic Aristotlean thought was ever considered important except for dealing with the fussy
Ironically Islam holds that Paul is who invented Christianity as a religion of Christ atoning and doing away with law, and that Christ actually purified "archaic Judaism" into its pre warped form (Islam).
Western paganism no longer exists anyway, neither does archaic Judaism.
I would say none of the other schools you mentioned provide a social context or community, certainly Heidegger did not simply dwell on the individual fate, but also on collective destiny. Things like de-distancing are individual on basic things, but as cultural phenomena which alarmed Heidegger, they are not.
Not really, ever read Derrida on immigration? His thought is what helps justify the flood of Islamic immigration. Moreover Islam's conception of heresy as bid'ah makes it pretty much immune to tampering, trying to deconstruct it too much in practice will just get your ass kicked while you cry you are actually winning because appeal to asswupping is a fallacy
Carter Powell
>the poetry of the one who is no longer himself. The one that lets “the things show themselves” to him. The one who is no longer the observer, but the observed. yeah this sounds like zen buddhism to me dawg
Samuel Baker
>Daily reminder muhammad fucked a 6 yr old >Daily reminder muslims worship a black cube in the dessert. sounds based
Jonathan Morris
Someone send this website an email with this video attache and say "mainlander sent me bish" since he came up with the concept of god being dead and wasnt a muslim cuck like Nietzsche
>“Tawhid is not monotheism, it is not a metaphysical principle. Allah is beyond what is attributed to Him, therefore beyond logos. Allah is not a mono-theos, nor poli-theos, or tri-theos, or a-theos. Allah is not theo-logical or onto-logical. Allah is neither a theory nor a principle. Allah is not contained by definition.” Christianity isn't monotheistic in that sense either then: >"But even this gives no true idea of His essence, to say that He is unbegotten, and without beginning, changeless and imperishable, and possessed of such other qualities as we are wont to ascribe to God and His environments. For these do not indicate what He is, but what He is not(4). But when we would explain what the essence of anything is, we must not speak only negatively. In the case of God, however, it is impossible to explain what He is in His essence, and it befits us the rather to hold discourse about His absolute separation from all things(5). For He does not belong to the class of existing things: not that He has no existence(6), but that He is above all existing things, nay even above existence itself. For if all forms of knowledge have to do with what exists, assuredly that which is above knowledge must certainly be also above essence(7): and, conversely, that which is above essence(7) will also be above knowledge."
John Nguyen
>But even this gives no true idea of His essence, to say that He is unbegotten Indeed no because this would present an ontological distinction between the Father and the Son, as the latter IS begotten.
Gabriel Mitchell
sounds like negative esthetic theology to me. Also Manicheism kinda did that before Mainlander, without going full edge
and you're a fool if you think Islam has developed solely on Muhammad's teachings. This applies to any major religion with how it assimilated outer elements of 'pagan' philosophies; it's natural process, cultural osmosis. Even in rejecting other religions, one keeps strains of 'heresy' within as antibodies.
and those talking about Islam as a singular movement when it has an even richer history than Christianity philosophically and mystically speaking is braindead and proves them a zealot and unable of dialogue.
German Romantics also professed such ideas; i'd think Heidegger mainly took cues from them.
Mystical ontology is far from being the domain of Islam solely, as says.
I'd rather say Islam today is becoming the most mystically-dead religion, trapped by literalism and tribe politics. Sufism and other denominations are more violently repressed than ever; and as the OP link shows, any attempt of philosophy in Islam turns to proselytization and power struggle.
Kevin Ward
>and you're a fool if you think Islam has developed solely on Muhammad's teachings. This is, from a secular perspective, pretty much the case, Islam has only two sources of doctrine, the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
>This applies to any major religion with how it assimilated outer elements of 'pagan' philosophies; it's natural process, cultural osmosis.
Yes, Islam actually says this, and claims Islam has been corrupted many times as a result. However Muhammed is held to be the "seal of the prophets", the final restoration of Islam which will no longer be destroyed by bid'ah.
>and those talking about Islam as a singular movement when it has an even richer history than Christianity philosophically and mystically speaking is braindead and proves them a zealot and unable of dialogue.
Islam has a lot of movements within in, although even differing sects mostly agree on doctrine and practice.
Islam is not a "dialectical" religion (which Evola admired)
>Comparing Christian and Islamic mysticism, Evola notes that what lacks among Christian ascetics is going further than the vows of silence, “the practice of the most interiorised degree of this discipline, that does not only consist of putting an end to the spoken word, but also to thought (Ibn ‘Arabi’s notion of ‘not speaking with oneself’).”(57) He compares the practice of Sufi dhikr (remembrance of Allah) with the Hindu mantra and the repetition of sacred names practiced in the Hesychasm of some of the Orthodox Christian and Eastern Catholic churches.(58)
Noah Smith
because of anatta l assume? and Dasein being ātman
Ian Hill
No, it is Sorge (care)
Levi Brooks
I’m not an academic so forgive me if I sound very unprofessional or am straight-out wrong, but it seems to me that Heidegger’s stressing that
>there is no way to talk about the question of Being without considering the being for whom Being is a question (I.e. considering Dasein)
Or, to put it more simply, that there is no subject without an object and vice versa, no way to talk about the world without also including the subject who perceives this world — this seems like it can overlap with Buddhism. After all, isn’t it a famous koan, “If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one to hear it, does it still make a sound?” Both Heidegger and Buddhism have a shared point of making us turn around to realize the observer whom we usually forget is there, and pointing out that the observed is dependent on the observer. And, if I’m not stretching, both can lead to a similar conclusion that the observer is simultaneously everywhere one looks and nowhere in particular, both transcendent and immanent at the same time and also neither/nor.
Angel Gray
>And, if I’m not stretching, both can lead to a similar conclusion that the observer is simultaneously everywhere one looks and nowhere in particular, both transcendent and immanent at the same time and also neither/nor. Except that's basically Advaita Vedanta and not Buddhism
Grayson Thompson
You may think it’s sloppy but I ultimately see them as very similar. Different ways of speaking of a non-dual state. Zen, for instance, speaks of the omnipresent Buddha-nature.
