Skip to main content

Selfless Care? Heidegger and anattā

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethics without Self, Dharma without Atman

Abstract

This chapter asks whether and in what sense(s) the un-self-centred way of being that Heidegger develops in his later writings under the description Gelassenheit parallels the Buddhist doctrine of anattā.  The term Gelassenheit is adopted from Meister Eckhart, for whom it meant a relinquishing of the appropriating desire that constitutes the ordinary self. It does not per se involve a denial of the reality of the individual self in every respect. Yet Heidegger’s thought, both early and late, has been compared with Buddhist positions both because of its critique of the Cartesian notion of the self as an underlying substance, and because Gelassenheit as a way of being seems similar to Buddhist ideals of liberation that rest on seeing through the fiction of the self. At the same time, though, one should notice that Heidegger came to affirm the idea of Gelassenheit through a critical confrontation with Nietzsche, who denies the ultimate reality of the self as a single entity but nonetheless affirms the value of assertive will to power, an ideal that is the opposite of Buddhist selflessness. An exploration of these themes through a comparative focus on Heidegger and anattā helps to identify various senses in which the self could be said to “be” or exist. It also raises questions about the relation between metaphysical views on this subject and existential, ethical or soteriological ideals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Reinhold May suggests that Heidegger’s understanding of the “clearing” was indebted to Leon Wieger’s interpretation of the Chinese character wu (May 1996, 31–34). I am less certain but in any case my objective in this essay is to draw conceptual comparisons rather than establish points of historical influence. Heidegger was certainly influenced by East Asian sources, however, and May provides a helpful survey of his contact with Chinese and Japanese thinkers and texts. See also Parkes 1987 , 1993.

  2. 2.

    “BT” refers to Being and Time (Heidegger 1962); page numbers refer to the German text, cross-referenced in the margins of Macquarrie and Robinson’s translation.

  3. 3.

    Anthony Traylor argues, on the other hand, that Heidegger acknowledges in Being and Time that Dasein is also, in a way, present-at-hand, and that in general “far from being relegated to the ontological periphery , Vorhandenheit as pure presence-at-hand stands at the epicenter of Heidegger’s problematic” (Traylor 2014, 464). However, while I agree with Traylor that a basic sense of in fact being there, common to Dasein and the things it encounters, is presupposed in Heidegger’s account but not adequately thematized, in my view this sense has to be differentiated from the concept of Vorhandenheit as intrinsically involving substantiality. It may be that this basic sense of “being” that is common to Dasein and things simply cannot be explicated, from which it would follow that the ultimate project of Being and Time, “to work out the meaning of being and to do so concretely” cannot in principle be completed.

  4. 4.

    Heidegger is explicit on this point: “In our existential interpretation, the entity which has been presented to us as our theme has Dasein’s kind of being, and cannot be pieced together into something present-at-hand out of pieces which are present-at-hand.” (BT302)

  5. 5.

    This emphasis differentiates Heidegger’s account from that of Husserl , and also makes the point here a different one from that on which current debates about the self’s existence usually focus. See, for instance, Zahavi 2005 and Fasching 2009.

  6. 6.

    See Peter Harvey’s interpretation of the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta in Harvey 2009, 268–269.

  7. 7.

    In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), John Locke discussed the question of the self’s continuity and identity in terms of personhood, describing “person” as “a forensic term, appropriating actions and their merit,” and therefore applying “only to intelligent agents , capable of a law, and happiness , and misery” (Book II, Ch. 27, “Of identity and diversity,” Locke 2010–2015, 120). This dimension of the question about the “real” existence of the self remains important in current debates; see, for example, Korsgaard’s critique of Derek Parfit in Korsgaard 1989.

  8. 8.

    Examples are Parfit 1984, 281, and Harris 2014 (though the latter case is ambiguous, since Sam Harris had also been engaged in Buddhist meditative practices for many years).

  9. 9.

    Nietzsche challenges the idea that there is any such “subject” from a number of directions, arguing in one place that “‘the doer’ is merely a fiction added to the deed” (Genealogy of Morals, First Essay, 13; Nietzsche 1989, 45).

  10. 10.

    The following description of nirvana by Miri Albahari suggests there are: “There is a radical shift in motivational structure: no longer do such persons seek gratification from any state of affairs. Losing family or suffering illness fails to dent their equanimity. The arahant operates from a different basis: no more identifying with the ‘I’ of such situations than most of us would identify with burning leaves on a fire. Yet they still act fluently in the world – with great joy and spontaneity and compassion ” (Albahari, 79). Heidegger was himself admittedly not much like an arahant, but then Gelassenheit describes a possible way of being rather than an achievement of this particular man.

  11. 11.

    For an extended analysis and defense of the coherence of this idea, see Framarin 2009 .

References

  • Albahari, Miri. 2011. Nirvana and Ownerless Consciousness. In Self, No Self? Perspectives from Analytical, Phenomenological and Indian Traditions, ed. Mark Siderits, Evan Thompson, and Dan Zahavi. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fasching, Wolfgang. 2009. The mineness of experience. Continental Philosophy Review 42: 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Framarin, Christopher. 2009. Desire and Motivation in Indian Philosophy. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S. 2014. Waking up: A Guide to Spirituality without Religion. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, Peter. 2009. Theravada philosophy of mind and the person: Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, Maha-nidana Sutta, and Milindapanha. In Buddhist philosophy: Essential readings, ed. William Edelglass and Jay Garfield, 265–274. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Being and Time. Trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1966. Discourse on Thinking. Trans. John M. Anderson and E. Hans Freund. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993. Basic Writings, ed. David Farrell Krell. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Überlegungen II–VI (Schwarze Hefte 1931–1938), ed. Peter Trawny. Gesamtausgabe 94. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holder, John J. 2006. Early Buddhist Discourses. Indianapolis. Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisiel, Theodore J. 1993. The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, Christine. 1989. Personal Identity and the Unity of Agency: A Kantian Response to Parfit. Philosophy and Public Affairs 18 (2): 103–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, John. 2010–2015. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Book II: Ideas, ed. Jonathon Bennett. http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/locke1690book2.pdf.

  • Matilal, B.K. 2004. Logical and Ethical issues: An Essay on Indian Philosophy of Religion. New Delhi: Chronicle Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, Reinhard. 1996. Heidegger's Hidden Sources: East-Asian influences on his work. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nāgārjuna. 1995. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Trans. and Commentary Jay L. Garfield. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1974. The Gay Science. Trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1989. On the Genealogy of Morals and Ecce homo. Trans. Walter Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990. Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ. Trans. R.J. Hollingdale. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Beyond Good and Evil. Trans. R.J. Hollingdale. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkes, Graham, ed. 1987. Heidegger and Asian thought. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993. Heidegger and Japanese Thought – How Much Did He Know, and When Did He Know It? In Heidegger: Critical assessments, ed. Christoper McCann, 377–406. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Questions of King Milinda: An Abridgement of the Milindapanha. 1993. Ed. N.K.G. Mendis. Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traylor, Anthony. 2014. Vorhandenheit and Heidegger’s Predicament over Being-in-Itself. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 88 (3): 439–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Buren, John. 1994. The Young Heidegger: Rumor of the Hidden King. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, Dan. 2005. Subjectivity and Selfhood: Investigating the First-Person Perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, Michael E. 2006. Heidegger, Buddhism, and Deep Ecology. In The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger, ed. Charles B. Guignon, 293–325. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonia Sikka .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sikka, S. (2018). Selfless Care? Heidegger and anattā . In: Davis, G. (eds) Ethics without Self, Dharma without Atman. Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures, vol 24. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67407-0_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics