22.05.2014 Views

Say who everyone is as you go along - Faculty of Philosophy ...

Say who everyone is as you go along - Faculty of Philosophy ...

Say who everyone is as you go along - Faculty of Philosophy ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

16<br />

Nietzsche also thinks our concept <strong>of</strong> death thoroughly informs our attitude to<br />

life and makes a difference to <strong>who</strong> we are:<br />

'The <strong>who</strong>le way in which a man thinks <strong>of</strong> death in the prime <strong>of</strong> h<strong>is</strong> life and strength <strong>is</strong><br />

very expressive and significant for what we call h<strong>is</strong> character' (HATH 46)<br />

Were I to be correctly identified with my body or my soul then there would be<br />

genuine grounds for my fear <strong>of</strong> my own destruction. God could perhaps destroy my<br />

soul, and my body will in any c<strong>as</strong>e be d<strong>is</strong>solved in natural, biological death. If I am<br />

my soul, and my soul <strong>is</strong> destroyed, then I am destroyed. If I am my body, and my<br />

body <strong>is</strong> destroyed, then I am destroyed.<br />

In Zen the self <strong>is</strong> 'reduced' to what we would normally think <strong>of</strong> <strong>as</strong> the psychophysical<br />

stream <strong>of</strong> events constituting a person's life (or, in Nietzsche and Buddh<strong>is</strong>m,<br />

lives). There are different kinds <strong>of</strong> reduction. If the self <strong>is</strong> reduced to a set <strong>of</strong> events<br />

then it <strong>is</strong> nothing 'over and above' them, that <strong>is</strong>, the self <strong>is</strong> identical with those events<br />

and so nothing more than or nothing other than those events. That the self <strong>is</strong><br />

reducible to a set <strong>of</strong> psycho-physical events might mean that 'self' and 'set <strong>of</strong> psychophysical<br />

events' have the same reference even though they differ in sense. In what<br />

sense <strong>is</strong> the self 'reduced' to a set <strong>of</strong> psycho-physical life processes in Zen? Roshi<br />

Y<strong>as</strong>utani gives th<strong>is</strong> example <strong>of</strong> the absence <strong>of</strong> the fear <strong>of</strong> death:<br />

'Even though heaven and earth were turned upside down, <strong>you</strong> would have no fear.<br />

And if an atomic or hydrogen bomb were exploded, <strong>you</strong> would not quake in terror'<br />

(WD 8)<br />

and provides th<strong>is</strong> explanation <strong>of</strong> the possibility <strong>of</strong> overcoming that fear:<br />

'So long <strong>as</strong> <strong>you</strong> became one with the bomb what would there be to fear?<br />

"Impossible!" <strong>you</strong> say. But whether <strong>you</strong> wanted to or not <strong>you</strong> would perforce become<br />

one with it, would <strong>you</strong> not?' (WD 8)<br />

What <strong>is</strong> it to become 'one with the bomb'? By 'the bomb' <strong>is</strong> meant the explosion <strong>of</strong><br />

the bomb. It at le<strong>as</strong>t follows from th<strong>is</strong> identification that it <strong>is</strong> false that there are two<br />

things: myself and the explosion <strong>of</strong> the bomb. Rather, the explosion <strong>of</strong> the bomb <strong>is</strong><br />

part <strong>of</strong> the same psycho-physical life process in which the sensation <strong>of</strong> self also<br />

intermittently appears. At the moment <strong>of</strong> the explosion <strong>of</strong> the bomb there <strong>is</strong> only theexperience-<strong>of</strong>-the-exploding-<strong>of</strong>-the-bomb.<br />

(Following the German and French<br />

ex<strong>is</strong>tential<strong>is</strong>ts) I hyphenate th<strong>is</strong> expression to signify that the items it refers to are not<br />

separable in reality (only in thought, or conceptually, or in language). The event <strong>is</strong><br />

one, prec<strong>is</strong>ely not the tripartite structure I, experience and explosion. In particular;<br />

there <strong>is</strong> no sensation <strong>of</strong> 'self' or 'me' <strong>as</strong> the victim <strong>of</strong> that explosion. Th<strong>is</strong> concept <strong>of</strong><br />

death in an atomic explosion <strong>is</strong> very different from the idea <strong>of</strong> a human being caught<br />

in its bl<strong>as</strong>t. Clearly Y<strong>as</strong>utani does not deny that, on one level, that <strong>is</strong> exactly what

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!