Nothingness and emptiness in Japanese philosophy
Although the purpose of
this paper is not a detailed philosophical discussion in Freudian thoughts on
transience and mortality, it is worth mentioning briefly some contexts of
Japanese school of philosophy in “Kyoto school” so long as their discussions
are quite relevant to these topics. Philosophers such as Kitaro Nishida, Hajime
Tanabe, and Kenji Nishitani, some of whose works are available in English
translation, are said to have established the philosophy of nothingness and
emptiness in their attempt to overcome nihilism in the Western Culture (Heisig,
2001). There seems to be a similar line of thoughts in both Freudian thinking
and these Japanese philosophers, as will be discussed later, but does it mean
that Freud was ahead of time, or just a coincidence? At least there is no indication that these two
had some significant communication. Still the question remains; could there be
a possibility that they can inform each other in order to further develop their
ideas?
Kitaro Nishida, often
called as the father of Kyoto School of philosophy, stressed that in Japanese
culture, no-mind (Mushin) or
emptying one’s mind are considered to be of particular importance. While the Western culture
assumes the presence which underlies existence, Japanese philosophy considers
nothingness as the basis for the existence (Heisig, 2001). He then postulates
the notion of “absolute nothingness”, which does not imply ordinary connotation
of non-existence, but it means that “the self has to be ‘made nothing’ so that it
could open up into its true self” (Heisig, p.62). "We might call it nothingness, but then it is not
nothingness which opposes being; it rather includes being. Or we might think of
it as the hidden reality, but then it is not the reality which did not yet
manifest itself; it must be the reality which, in an infinite manner,
transcends whatever is supposed to manifest itself; it must include the
infinite hidden reality." (Nishida, K. (1929) Acting to the Seeing, IV 155.)
Thus Nishida’s notion of
nothingness is discussed as lived and experience-near, and there seems to be an
influence form French philosopher Henri Bergson. Bergson states “seeing an
object by becoming it”, and Nishida states “our knowing a thing is to identify
with it. When we see a flower, we become flower” (An Inquiry into the Good) and
called it “Urphänomen”. This pure experience is where the boundary between we
and others disappear and while the ego nears toward object, the object also
approaches ego. behind this idea of mutual experience of things lies the idea
of William James.
Nishida, K. (1911) A Study of Good.
When we reach the bottom of the thing, we encounter
“absolute eternity”, something beyond ego. Fujita explains that in general
absolute existence lies outside of ego. However, Nishida is opposed to grasping
things in transcendental fashion.
Fujita, Masakatsu (藤田正勝 (2007) 『西田幾多郎：生きることと哲学』 岩波書店)