著者

延原 時行

出版者

桃山学院大学

雑誌

桃山学院大学キリスト教論集 = St. Andrew's University journal of Christian studies (ISSN:0286973X)

巻号頁・発行日

no.50, pp.13-46, 2015-03-23

---

This lecture on "Amor Mundi and Process Philosophy: Reflections on Whitehead's Adventure or Resurrection Metaphysics" was delivered on October 11, at the 36th Annual Convention of Japan Society for Process Studies, at Momoyama Gakuin University or St. Andrew's University in Osaka. Beginning with a tanka: Hito ikani / hisan naru tomo / urakara zo / Kami tomo ni masu / mireba bishou zo( How miserable / humans might be in their lives / if seen from the back / that God is really with them / smile comes out in their faces), I will pursue the theme" how one can be geared toward love for the world despite miseries in one's life." 1. From the back; 2. God is really with us; 3. Seeing; and 4. Smile coming out, are four conditions for love for the world. In subsequent four sections I will deal with Hannah Arendt's Human Condition which has described a life-long critical dialogue with Martin Heidegger; Katsumi Takizawa's idea of an inseparable, non-identical, and irreversible relationship between God and humans critically re-considered; Whitehead's metaphysics of Adventure or the Resurrection in dialogue with Hans Jonas's Das Prinzip Leben; and John 21 to be re-interpreted from narrative theology into metaphysical theology in terms of the" Resurrection"-motif. What is pivotal is the denial of the Unmoved Mover which is hidden in Heidegger's philosophy of Sein's Geschichite and also in Takizawa's Pure The-anthropology as the source of change lying outside the universe or the world. In the case of Later Heidegger, Being─Language relationship is not mediated by any intermediary actualities and is overshadowed by the act of interpretation of the philosopher, namely, Heidegger. Arendt critiques this fact as the moment leading to Heidegger's companionship with the Nazis due to his uncritical judgment about the world affairs. In Takizawa's case, he thinks that the idea of pure the-anthropology is important in recognizing the God─Expression relation as the basic human "Bestimmung," which does not allow particular-historical elements to come in and decide. Also, Takizawa thinks that the "deep depths" or the Proto-factum Immanuel of the human existence is the sacred limitation beyond which no one can go down deeper. In this sense, the idea of the deep depths has a resemblance with the Aristotelian Unmoved Mover; it is unsurpassable as the firm basis for everything in the world while giving rise to the change of all things. For Whitehead, however, the change or transmutation of the Reality by the Adventure into its Unity of Appearance is pivotal in requiring the real occasions of the advancing world each claiming its due share of attention [AI=Adventures of Ideas=, 295]. We can acknowledge here Augustine's reference to the descending Agape as combined with the ascending Platonic Eros or Charitas (in Augustine's case). If our human life memories can ascend with the salvific help of the Risen Lord in order to be offered into the bosom of Heavenly Father, our resurrection can take place. Whitehead's final metaphysical scope is free to accept this vision in terms of his idea of the "reciprocal relation by virtue of which what is done in the world is transformed into the reality in heaven and the reality in heaven passes back into the world"( PR=Process and the Reality=, 351). In terms of Logos Theology appearing in the beginning of John's Gospel, the "reciprocal relation" is approachable by reason of the combination of the" Logos who was in the beginning"[ John 1 : 1 first line]and the" Logos who was with God [pros ton theon]" [John 1 : 1 second line]: the latter Logos is metaphysically deeper than and is inclusive of the former Logos. Incidentally, Takizawa refers to the idea of the "Logos in the beginning," but not to the "Logos with God," in terms of the Proto-factum Immanuel. Presumably, it is for this reason that Takizawa sticks to the idea of the "deep depths" which negates our deeper approach. However, the truth of the matter is that at the deeper ground of the "deep depths" the "Logos with God" is awaiting us to come down even after we perished. Further, the" Logos with God" flies and ascends paradoxically with those who have passed away by reason of the paradoxical principle: You go down deeper and deeper; and you ascend higher and higher. We know that the "reciprocal relation" is designated by Chardin as the "Center of the Universe" which is actually "Christ" (see Future of Man,esp. The two articles of my Credo: The Universe is centred─Evolutively {Above and Ahead; Christ is its Center{The Christian Phenomenon: Noogenesis=Christogenesis (=Paul)). John 21: 4 describes the "reciprocal relation" between the perishable world and immortal heaven as the fact: "Just after daybreak, Jesus stood on the beach; but the disciples did not know that it was Jesus." We must re-interpret and transform the narrative theology of John 21 into the language of a metaphysical theology such as Whitehead's vision of reality:" We perish and are immortal"[ PR, 351, 82]. From this vision of the Adventure or the Resurrection metaphysics I can think of the idea of a university appropriately in my own way. John Henry Newman's idea of the university is overshadowed by the religious sovereignty, which is radically different from Jacques Derrida's idea of the "university without condition." How can we discern the compatibility between the two? Probably we have to ask Whitehead's aims of education to come in to coordinate and say: religious sovereignty is supportable at the level of" romance," whereas in the case of Derrida's motif of the" university's profession without condition" the rhythm of "generalization" might be proper. Then, what about the precision-process? In this regard, we have to re-learn appropriately from the interreligious dialogue (esp. Buddhist- Christian dialogue) which has been flourishing during the 20th and 21st centuries.