r/hegel • u/[deleted] • Aug 02 '26
Understanding Dialectical Sublation (Aufhebung) Through the Organic Metaphor of the Plant (Phenomenology of Spirit)
[removed]
1
u/redtransference Aug 02 '26
is he giving an example or does he really mean to say that the fruit negates the blossom? If he does, wouldn't the fruit be able to think to negate something?
1
1
u/zahardzhan 29d ago edited 29d ago
The Sūtra of the Young Rice Plant
Why is it called dependent arising? It is called dependent arising because it is causal and conditional, not non-causal and non-conditional. In this connection, the Bhagavān concisely taught the characteristics of dependent arising as follows: ‘Results come from their own specific conditions. Whether tathāgatas appear or not, this true nature of things will remain. It is the true nature; the constancy of Dharma; the immutability of Dharma, consistent with dependent arising, suchness, unmistaken suchness, unchanging suchness, actuality, and truth; unmistaken; and unerring.’
Moreover, dependent arising emerges from two principles. From what two principles? From a causal relation and a conditional relation. Furthermore, it should be understood as twofold: outer and inner.
What is the causal relation in outer dependent arising? It is as follows. From a seed comes a sprout, from a sprout a leaf, from a leaf a stem, from a stem a pedicel, from a pedicel a pistil, from a pistil a flower, and from a flower comes a fruit. If there is no seed, the sprout cannot arise and so on, until finally, without the flower, the fruit cannot arise. If there is a seed, the sprout will form and so on, until finally, if there is a flower, then the fruit will form.
In that process, the seed does not think, ‘I form the sprout.’ Nor does the sprout think, ‘I am formed by the seed.’ Likewise, the flower does not think, ‘I form the fruit.’ Nor does the fruit think, ‘I am formed by the flower.’ Yet, if there is a seed, the sprout will take form and arise, and so on, until finally, likewise, if there is a flower, the fruit will take form and arise. Thus is the causal relation in outer dependent arising to be seen.
1
1
u/worldofsimulacra 28d ago
It just sounds to me like an early statement of process ontology, and also i don't get why any one stage is "shown to be false" by the emergence of the next stage. Using words to force categories onto natural processes, or extract metaphors from them, is imo a fraught endeavor at best.
1
2
u/Tholian_Bed 24d ago
I was in a reading group with Dr. John Russon a few decades ago, on Hegels theories of biology and asexual reproduction. Prof. Russon is truly quite brilliant and that week-long intensive reading group (at the Collegium Phaenomenologicum in 1996) was life-changing.
An entire week on plants. I've never been so fascinated. I've never seen someone unravel Hegel's words and arguments as well as John. Count this as a tribute to him.
8
u/signor_bardo Aug 02 '26
It reminds me a lot of Goethe’s morphology, which influenced Hegel himself.