Page 33 - GALIET METAPOIESIS AND TRUTH IV+

Galiet & Galiet
the waters and experiencing capaciousness of being for rivers reflect the light and darkness of the cosmos, in its waters, the cosmos gathers and celebrates how nature interacts with the beautiful forms of logos: a logos that is made sonnet whose octave and sestet form a harmonious unity of being. Were we to step out of the same rivers, we would cease to be. “Water is the source of soul,” says Heraclitus, “and earth is source of water.”121 There is a cyclical, natural relationship among earth, soul and water just as in Heidegger there is a cyclical relationship between being and becoming, appearing and concealing in Dasein. “Death for souls is the birth of water, death for water is the birth of earth.”122 When souls perish, water comes to be, that is, the soul gives way to water, it becomes water and water is made of souls. When water perishes then earth comes to be and becomes the very source of water, which is the very source of soul. “Earth is the source of water, and water is the source of soul,”123 he ends. Being and not being participate in the same cycle. While in the same river, we are; while not, we are not. Water, to Heraclitus, is the soul’s source, the very water that is the source of the soul-making river. 124
And what makes? P o e t r y. Poetry as making, as creating, perhaps, as praise of dawn 3⁄4 alabanza del alba 3⁄4 and spirit song.125
Nietzsche’s arboreal defence of Heraclitus’ flux theory and of poiesis 3⁄4 as invention, fabrication, making, in the Grecian sense 3⁄4 attests that even Plato first has to imagine, before thinking. Plato as Aristocles, poet and tragedian first, imagines, first, before Platonizing, thinking, philosophizing, before grasping noetically, without absurdity, that beauty denies its opposite. It is true that logically, beauty denies its opposite, A is not B; however, poetically, beauty flows into its opposite and vice versa, A into B and B into A without excluding the middle, yes, not as a mere opinion, appearance, but in Heidegger’s view, as reality itself, of the world, within the world where the eternal and unchanging aspect of the Idea can be said to reside in phusis’ own nature and phusis in the Idea, not just as aspect of the thing seen in reality, as Heidegger posits, but as aspect of something beyond and far grander than whatever humans can measure in thought, in perception. In this sense, contrary to Plato, phusis can yield to the Form and the Form to phusis becoming one only in difference, not in sameness. That is, the difference between the unchanging and the changing, the atemporal and temporal, permanent and impermanent are, poetically, aspects of the one. The reality of the Form, thus, belongs as much to phusis as to itself. Phusis, as phusis-in-itself, natural, primordial, coming into being
121 Waterfield, Robin. The First Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. F 44 Clement. Miscellanies 6.17.2 Stahlin/Fruchtel.
122 Waterfield, Robin. The First Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. F 44
123 Waterfield, Robin. The First Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. F 44
124 This needs to be interpreted in light of other translations and further research. 125 This was true for many ancient religions, particularly for the Vedic priests.
•33•