RE-INTERPRETING DERRIDAS STRANGER TOWARDS KENOTIC HOSPITALITY QUA THE WAY OF PERFECT JOY

A thesis by Sem. Wilmar Lagunday Rosales

Presented to The faculty of the Our Lady of the Angels Seminary In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts In Philosophy Quezon City, Philippines

March 2012

_______________________ Mentor

_______________________ Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgement Dedication Table of contents CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION............... A. Background of the Study ..... B. Statement of the Problem....... C. Theoretical Framework...... D. Methodology..... E. Scope and Limitation.... F. Related Literature..... G. Thesis Schema... CHAPTER II: JACQUES DERRIDA (1930-2004) . A. Brief Biographical Sketch ... B. Intellectual Influences.. C. Major Works. D. Derridas Deconstructive Philosophy....... E. Other Relevant Derridean Concepts.... CHAPTER III: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. A. The Notion of Hospitality a. The Other Understanding of Hospitality (Different Presentations)... b.The Derridean Concept: The Guest-Host Framework... B. The Conceptual Basis and Framework.. a. Nothing Outside the Text - the Basis for (Re)-interpretation b. The Need to Negotiate a Desirable Unconditional Welcoming........ c. Metaphysics of the Self. 1. A Concise Survey of Desire i. The Desire to Know Ones Self. ii. The Desire to Care for the Self.. 2. On the Wings of Kardia (Consciousness & Inner Identity)... CHAPTER IV: THE ATTEMPT AT DECONSTRUCTION . A. Dismantling the Self in the World of Perfect Joy.... a. The Poverellian Deconstruction of Perfect Joy. b. A Concise Survey of Happiness and its Paradoxes... c. The Gift of Perfect Joy: Towards a De-centered Subjectivity......

B. The East-West Synthesis Towards Kenotic Hospitality.. a. The Illusion . b. Moratorium (The Need to Deconstruct the Cognitive Self) c. The Human Factor and the Philosophy of Growth (tamam, brh) d. The Way of Perfect Joy (Towards a Better State of Becoming) . C. The Gift of Death: Kenotic Hospitality Qua The Way of Perfect Joy.... a. The Concept of Kenosis (The Vedantic Key) . b. Twin Pre-Conditions of the Kenotic Perspective 1. Let It Flow (Openness to the Possibilities of the Gift) .. 2. Letting Go (The Dual Self-Emptying Approach ... i. Self-Pruning: An Ethics of Care for the True Self ii. An Ethics of Non-Exclusionary Alterity.. c. Kenotic Hospitality in a Nutshell... d. Prologue.... CHAPTER V: TOWARDS NEW FRONTIERS IN DECONSTRUCTION... A. Synopsis.... B. Philosophical Significance and Practical Implications.... BIBLIOGRAPHY

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
The stranger is infinitely incalculable, priceless and irreducible because to savor the trace of every stranger is a singular and irreplaceable experience. We want to know; we want to understand our experience. We cannot fully understand, yet we must understand our stranger we have to learn to live and deal with our strangers.1

A. Background of the Study This thesis is all about Jacques Derridas deconstruction on the theme Hospitality or unconditional welcoming which is inextricably linked to his notion about the stranger. Specifically, this philosophical inquiry is a proposed attempt to possibly reinterpret the concept of Stranger vis--vis Hospitality as a reconfiguration of Derridas Guest-Host framework towards a Metaphysic of the Self to explore the possibility of showing that Kenotic Hospitality could be the enhanced notion of unconditional welcoming and the experience of Perfect Joy as its logical consequence. The researcher here was primarily inspired by the Franciscan understanding of kenosis and perfect joy because no systematic study has yet been done dealing with the two concepts together as a subject of philosophical inquiry. One of Derridas principles in deconstruction states that nothing is outside the text. This is the basis why the researcher has attempted to reinterpret Derridas notion about the stranger in relation to the hospitality. Even Derrida is not exempted from his own deconstruction. To reinterpret is to deconstruct or to search the other meaning of this Derridean concept. The researcher observes that responsibility is not credible enough
1

Paraphrased from: Marko Zlomislic, Derridas Turn to Franciscan Philosophy, in Journal of Philosophy, Vol. II, Issue No. 2, pp. 66-73.

to justify Derridas praxis of unconditional welcoming. That is why the researcher assumes that there is a need to look for that missing link or that pre-condition or that kind of motivating force (desire) that will satisfy the requirements of rationality that will also make the practice of unconditional welcoming persuasive, convincing and desirable. But in order to achieve that enhanced understanding of unconditional welcoming, the researcher proposes a Metaphysics of the Self where the Subject must first go back to itself in order to confront the stranger within. Under this proposal, the Self as the Host negotiates with his own Stranger Within as its Guest in order to understand not only (1) the kind of justice it requires, but also in order to find out (2) what would make men willingly practice the kind of hospitality being preached by Derrida, which would hopefully allow the Subject to find the path that would possibly lead to an enhanced understanding of unconditional welcoming as Kenotic Hospitality which brings about perfect joy. This thesis privileges freedom and perfect joy over responsibility, in the light of what is in the nature of the human soul or in the very nature of the human specie (the human factor). To understand what motivates men, the researcher offers Kardia as an integral component under the Metaphysics of the Self, not only to justify how desire is processed within ones consciousness but also to offer a new way of understanding the relationship between mind, will and emotion (this is in contrast to the over-compartmentalized surgical treatment by Aristotle). A creature of deconstruction from the Hebraic tradition,

the researcher proposes that Kardia represent the essence, the spirit, the substance, the very core of ones being: the central processing network of the mind-will-emotion; the heart of the matter, and could also be the what is of the true inner identity. The Metaphysics thus aims to highlight, through the Kardia, the intertwined functions of the mind, the will, and the emotion that is availed by the Subject to demonstrate coordination and harmony within the cognitive framework (human capacity for cognitive integration and synthesis). To find this missing link that motivates the human soul, the researcher further suggests, as part of the Selfs metaphysical experience (self-deconstruction), the conduct of a selective survey on eudaimonia as the telos. Thus, the quest for what is desirable on the Wings of Kardia (consciousness) leads the researcher to a perusal of happiness from different Eastern and Western traditions (the process of mediation). After this brief survey, the researcher will attempt to conceive a notion of perfect joy that would not only be unmistakably Franciscan but also containing the rich influence from selected Oriental philosophies. Here, the researcher suggests that the philosophical insights gained be processed and synthesized through an eclectic method which privileges the human potentials that would allow the subject-Self to confront the reality of pain, suffering, and death under a Philosophy of Growth in response to the fundamental question.

The proposed philosophy of growth describes The Path of Perfect Joy as a way of life and as the road to maturity based on an ethics of sacrifice based on love which embraces an attitude of (1) openness to life (towards possibilities) together with (2) a dual kenotic approach towards life, in response to the fundamental question. This philosophical inquiry hopes to demonstrate that an enduring love that is found in the proposed ethics of sacrifice could possibly be the motivating force that could transform Derridas hospitality into a kenotic form of unconditional welcoming. The notion of self-sacrifice positively finds rational support as a form of Self-Pruning (or what is more commonly known as self-detachment in the oriental cultures or selfrenunciation in Christianity) as a part of the self-dismantling/deconstruction process being proposed in this thesis. The researcher also offers the philosophy of growth as a response to life in order to understand what matters most in life (the fundamental question). Knowing what matters most in life is what makes life worth living and dying for; and therefore it is about knowing where an enduring happiness can be found in life (telos). Kenotic Hospitality as the product of a mature perspective could possibly provide meaning and dignity to human existence. Thus, to know what matters most in life is also to know how to rationally respond to the stranger. As a whole, the researcher will thus try to show that Derridas unconditional welcoming can be understood with sense and credibility only as a kenotic expression

inscribed in a philosophy of growth that prescribes the Way of Perfect Joy as an ethics of sacrifice based on love. The researcher therefore hopes to contribute something of significance in fields of philosophy and franciscanism, specifically, (1) in the attempt to deconstruct Derridas unconditional welcoming as Kenotic Hospitality qua The Way of Perfect Joy, and (2) in the re-configuration of the Guest-Host framework into an epistemic Metaphysics of the Self towards Self-enlargement (consciousness). Moreover, this work is personally significant for the researcher because of the unique opportunity to share a philosophy of growth in response to the fundamental question what matters most in life. This work therefore becomes a reflection of the researchers own struggle and search for meaning. Finally, the researcher chose Derrida because his deconstruction provides the needed intellectual autonomy in the conduct of inquiries which opens new space for creative possibilities. For this researcher deconstruction is also (1) a very potent tool to combat perceived errors and (2) a very effective medium to creatively explore uncharted possibilities, and eventually, (3) as a demanding critical technique to re-think and discover rational possibilities towards the truth thus an opportunity to try out Derridas playing field and enter a subjective field of tensions and, from all these contradictions, make a choice of justice for the stranger.

B. Statement of the Problem

A philosophical inquiry into the politics of stranger could lead to a point of undecidability which breaks away from the traditional logic of identity. An encounter with Derridas notion of hospitality vis--vis stranger leaves a trace that creates a dilemma and disturbs the status quo. To re-interpret is to awaken and resurrect the question on the truth about the stranger and about the praxis of unconditional welcoming.
\

In trying to understand Derridas unconditional welcoming, the researcher observes, among others, that this praxis of hospitality cannot simply be understood in terms of responsibility. There must be something more than responsibility to propel us to give gratuitously because no person in his right senses would unconditionally welcome a stranger even at the least expected and most inconvenient time unless there is an inner driving force that motivates the host to open his doors and accommodate the stranger, otherwise it is not anymore freely done (volitional). His notion about responsibility is not enough to persuade and convince rational beings to freely adopt and practice this unconditional hospitality even in the political arena.
Why should I wake up in the middle of the night just to accommodate a complete stranger who could be a potential criminal? What is the sense of taking these risks? Why has it become my responsibility? It is not realistic, credible, or convincing. Moreover, responsibility is a restraint on freedom; and this sense of duty is not fool-proof and could be compromised. (Example: when the Nazi soldier is compelled, out of this high sense of duty and responsibility, to put the helpless Jews into the gas chamber and die).

The researcher entertains the possibility that this notion of unconditional welcoming is incomplete and unsatisfactory because hospitality is inextricably connected to a kenotic element as the best possible motivating force that might possibly enhance its ethical ground; hence, this thesis. For this purpose, the researcher will try to explore, develop, and articulate these concerns guided by the following set of questions:

1. Who is Jacques Derrida and what is his method of deconstruction? 2. What is Derridas concept of Hospitality in relation to the stranger? 3. What is the researchers reinterpretation of Derridas concept of Stranger in relation to Hospitality? 4. What are the philosophical implications of the reinterpretation as Kenotic Hospitality qua The Way of Perfect Joy?

C. Theoretical Framework The researcher will avail of the postmodern reality-frame of Jacques Derrida, using the deconstructive method. The researcher has chosen Derridas deconstructive analysis because it provides this researcher the needed intellectual autonomy which opens new space for creative possibilities that should eventually result to a critical re-working of every oeuvre of philosophy. Moreover, deconstruction releases us from the ossification of thought involved in thinking that a favored conceptual scheme is privileged over others.2 Deconstruction is thus best suited in investigations where traditional or common ways of thinking as an attitude are questioned in order to introduce new forms of consciousness and rationalities by exposing the manifold problematic tensions that may emerge through an examination of various contexts (including oriental philosophy, mythology, English literature, politics, religion, Franciscan spirituality, ethics, behavioral science, psychology, tourism, etc). Derridas perspective about the stranger and hospitality are not immune to permutations. The radical singularity of every encounter with the stranger gives birth to new forms of rationality and consciousness about life which could be an affirmation or
2

Thomas Mautner (ed.), The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy, Penguin Group, England, 2005, p.150.

10

threat to the status quo. For this project, the researcher relies on Derridas deconstructive principle: Nothing is Outside the Text. Using Derridas deconstructive method, the researcher will try to reconfigure Derridas original Host-Guest framework in order to reinvent an enhanced understanding of Derridas unconditional welcoming. To do this, the researcher proposes a Metaphysics of the Self where the Subject must first go back to itself in order to confront the stranger within. The Metaphysics of the Self would thus serve as the framework that would provide the Self the creative space and freedom (1) to present an alternative epistemological method (kardial consciousness) that would signal the start of a logical self-dismantling or self-deconstruction process and (2) to construct a humanist philosophy of growth as the synthesis of an east-west survey, that will eventually propose the dual self-emptying subjectivity of kenotic hospitality as the enhanced notion of unconditional welcoming that brings about perfect joy. The Way of Perfect Joy is the suggested name of the philosophy of growth which describes kenotic hospitality as a way of life (the marriage of western and oriental traditions). As a proposed humanist philosophy, The Way of Perfect Joy embraces both an ethics of the self and an ethics of alterity that comes under a broader ethics of sacrifice based on a non-exclusionary/all embracing love subject to all even to the point of death. In order to save on time and space, the researcher suggests that each topic found under Chapter III (Preliminary Considerations) would only be given their concise

11

treatment discussing only what are considered the essentials that would be necessary for the critical journey towards the path of perfect joy. Every step in Chapter IV (The Attempt at Deconstruction) would become a step in self-deconstruction and demonstrates the growth and progress in the Selfs consciousness towards its goal. In the process, the researcher will propose two innovative concepts: (1) Kardia describing the epistemological component of consciousness (mind-will-emotion), and (2) SelfPruning (love of self) the first kenotic component of the letting-go process which also justifies the positive reception by the Subject towards self-sacrifice as gain instead of loss (the psychological aspect). In this Metaphysics of Self, the researcher proposes several steps beginning with Platos recommendations (know yourself and take care of ones self) as the philosophical basis that will not only justify the Selfs introspection-projection (centripetal-centrifugal) but will also encourage and propel the Self to continue with the quest to understand the various Eastern and Western notions of happiness as the telos - in the quest for perfect joy. The East-West survey will become the groundwork for a philosophy of growth which, in turn, conceives the path of perfect joy (eudaimonia) as a dual kenotic way of life. In response to the fundamental question, the philosophy of growth (as the way of becoming) privileges whatever is in the very nature of the human soul (the human factor which is oftentimes intentionally disregarded or forgotten) including the desire and

12

capacity to love (the self and others) and be loved in return. It is also seeks to confront the realities of pain, suffering and death. The end result of this philosophical attempt will supposedly allow the researcher to demonstrate that a rationally desirable notion of unconditional hospitality is possible when it is viewed from a kenotic perspective (kenotic subjectivity); in other words, a neutral3 concept of Kenotic Hospitality as an ethics of sacrifice based on love4 that brings about perfect joy. The researcher further claims that such kenotic feature is not only compatible with Derridas notions of unconditionality, but also with the Franciscan praxis and understanding of kenosis and perfect joy. D. Methodology The researcher will use the expository and analytic method. In the attempt, the researcher appropriates, as his materials for deconstruction, selected concepts and principles which may be relevant in the development of this thesis from various Western and Eastern philosophers including useful Greek mythologies. The research materials will consist of books, pamphlets, journals, articles and other forms of publications some of which came from the OLAS library and the Rizal library at Ateneo De Manila, Q.C., while some significant data are taken from the electronic sources. The researcher will also consult thoroughly on the account of the said topic. The reader will observe all

3 4

Allows both secular and religious reading/interpretation of kenotic hospitality (two-way interpretation) Instead of Derridas grounding on friendship-fraternity alone

13

throughout the thesis that some of the words and phrases had been italicized and/or underlined. This is done in order to highlight the idea being emphasized by this student. E. Scope and Limitation This thesis, which is primarily a re-interpretation of Derridas stranger vis--vis unconditional welcoming, deals with the problem of the Self who tries to understand the stranger within so that the Self would, in turn, understand the truth about the stranger and the kind of justice required under Derridas unconditional hospitality. To understand the rational basis for hospitality, the researcher also brings into the fore the Franciscan notion of kenosis which is offered as a possible ethical ground in lieu of responsibility that would lead to the experience of perfect joy. This research is thus not only limited to the re-interpretation of Derridas Stranger, but also introduces a philosophy of growth as the synthesized product of the East-West survey in quest for the eudaimonia under a Metaphysics of the Self which eventually leads to kenosis that brings about perfect joy. The bulk of materials culled for purposes of deconstruction were not always Derridean. The researcher also appropriates various literatures in aid of deconstruction. Aside from Derridean sources, the researchers quest for the truth about the Stranger will be supported by the great thoughts of selected Western and Eastern philosophers, while the building blocks to re-conceptualize The Way of Perfect Joy will come not only from Franciscan sources but also from those which could be excavated from other Western and

14

Eastern thoughts. In the end, the researcher hopes to re-invent a secular understanding of kenotic Hospitality. F. Related Literature
1. Marko Zlomislic, Derridas Turn to Franciscan Philosophy, in Journal of Philosophy, Vol. II, Issue No. 2, 2008, pp. 65-76. Derrida was exposed to Franciscan thoughts (Francis perception of the self) through the poem of Hopkins. The appreciation of the self is taste that whatever the taste is. It is how the self interprets self-experience. We cannot capture what is the Self-Taste as the experience of the self because only the self can interpret what is the self-experience. This is because the self is incalculable, irreducible, and priceless. As a corollary, there is no neutral interpretation as far as philosophy is concerned; all is interpretation, and interpretation is the way the self interprets in response to the world. All in all, Self-Taste is self interpretation of ones experience. The notion of self-taste is significant in the sense that it has helped inspire the researcher to develop his metaphysics of the self as a subjective approach that eventually projects outward. 2. Hope May, On Socrates, Wadsworth Philosophers Series (Wadsworth Thompson Learning, Inc.) USA, 2000. This book will be a helpful guide to this research to formulate the method of going back to the self as far as Socratic elenchus is concerned and the value of his thoughts in terms of self-knowledge, morality, and human happiness. This book offers an alternative that the truth is not somewhere out there, but that it is in us, and that to know it, one only needs to lead an examined life. The researcher, on the otherhand, borrowed the concept of Socratic

15

eudaimonia enabling the Subject to deconstruct Aristotelian eudaimonia that has been mistranslated and misconstrued as happiness itself; and also this will be a helpful guide in the development of the way of perfect joy as a philosophy of growth.

3. Haecceity in Duns Scotus, in Medieval Theories of Haecceity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) http://www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-haecceity/
Haecceity is a concept created by Duns Scotus from the word haec, "this thing." According to Duns Scotus "Omne ens habet aliquod esse proprium" -- every entity has a singular essence.
Agamben describes Duns Scotus as responding to the scholastic's problem of the principium individuationis. Against St. Thomas, who sought the place of individuation in matter, Duns Scotus conceived individuation as an addition to nature or common form, but not the addition of another form, essence or property, but of the ultima realitas, the "utmostness" of the form itself. This Scotusian view sees each thing as highly individualized and different from all other things so much so that each object is to him almost separate species. The concept of this-ness or haecceity is that aura of irreplaceability which distinguishes this being or entity from the rest. What is unusual or distinct about this being or entity becomes a useful guide for discernment during the uncovering or bursting forth of the truth about their being.5

Haceeity enabled the researcher to understand what is in the nature of the human specie, in general, and what is distinctly unique in the human specie, as an individual. Specifically, the Scotusian notion of haceeity is very useful in the development of the researchers concept of let it flow to understand the radical singularity of all living beings. Haceeity is also instrumental in the students understanding of a non-exclusionary form of alterity subject to all which converts all living beings as singular-plural, meaning,

Cabintoy, Being Brother-Brother-Being, Unpublished Thesis, OLAS, Q. C., SY-2010-2011, pp. 73, 121

16

belonging to a generic class of others yet, at the same time, each retains this distinct singularity as the other like no other and therefore must be treated with equal respect.

4. Maria J. Binetti, Kierkegaard's Ethical Stage in Hegel's Logical Categories: Actual Possibility, Reality and Necessity, in Cosmos and History in The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, Vol. 3, No 2-3, 2007.
The internal logic of Kierkegaards thought coincides with the fundamental dialectical dynamism of Hegels philosophy. During the past decades, the history of philosophy has kept Kierkegaards and Hegels thought apart, and their long-standing opposition has swept through the speculative greatness of Kierkegaardian existentialism and the existential power of Hegelian philosophy. In contrast to such unfortunate misinterpretation, this article aims at showing the deep convergence that relates interiorly the Kierkegaardian ethical stage with the most important Hegelian logic categories. Kierkegaard and Hegel conceive of the idea as the real power of subjective becoming, and the existence as the actual concretion of the ideal. To both of them, the pure enrgeia of freedom, which starts in the abstract and aesthetical possibility of the subjective immediacy, realizes itself as the actual concretion of finitude, assuming time and contingency by the eternal and necessary force of duty. The Kierkegaardian repetition is nothing but this powerful idea, mediating the flux of finite differences in the eternal identity of subject. However, for Kierkegaard as well as for Hegel there is an absolute contradiction, which promotes the overcoming of ethics. This journal will contribute a lot to the concept of Kardia, which allows both a subjective and objective

17

perspective, and that of kenotic hospitality as a philosophy of growth that enables the researcher to deconstruct Cartesian philosophy (metaphysics). G. Thesis Schema Chapter I is the over-all plan which provides general information on the nature, purpose, form, content and main divisions of the discussions found in this thesis. Chapter II will provide a concise presentation of the Derridas life, works, and philosophy. The Preliminary Considerations in Chapter III will consist of an exposition of (a) the other understanding together with Derridas original position on hospitality, as well as (b) the conceptual basis and framework of this thesis which will briefly explain Derridas primary principle in deconstruction including the presentation of the proposed Metaphysics of the Self that highlights the Kardia. Chapter IV entitled The Attempt at Deconstruction essentially contains three (3) major analytical movements as proposals in deconstruction: (1) It starts with the initial attempt to deconstruct perfect joy as an object of the Subjects consciousness under the proposed Metaphysics of the Self. The researcher will also try to trace the originary philosophical concept of happiness including its paradoxes in life during the conduct of a brief survey. (2) This is followed by a Synthesis of Eastern and Western Thoughts on Happiness which contains the proposed philosophy of growth describing the path of Perfect Joy as a Way of Life that would eventually produce the notion of Kenotic Hospitality.

18

(3) The concluding analysis of this Chapter is the attempt to justify Kenotic Hospitality qua The Way of Perfect Joy as the enhanced notion of unconditional welcoming and as the best secular expression of a non-exclusionary all-embracing alterity subject to all. This chapter also traces the etymology of the word kenosis including their radical religious and philosophical applications by Lucien Richard, Jacques Derrida and Gianni Vattimo. In the process, a non-religious ethical notion of sacrifice based on love is cultivated in this research to become the cornerstone of a kenotic perspective. The term pruning is also introduced in lieu of the over-used concepts of self-renunciation and detachment which, in a more refreshing way, readily justifies a positive reception by the mature kenotic Subject towards the notion and praxis of sacrifice even unto death. A Prologue to the Chapter is added to highlight researchers evaluation on the supposed merits of Kenotic Hospitality. Chapter V is the summary and conclusion which will try to bring out the philosophical significance of the researchers findings.

19

CHAPTER II JACQUES DERRIDA (1930-2004)

A. Brief Biographical Sketch

One of the most prolific and creative twentieth century philosophers who developed a strategy called deconstruction was born of an assimilated French speaking Sephardic Jewish family in Algeria on July 15, 1930. He was reared in an environment of anti-semitism and transferred from one school to another because of this discriminatory practice. He immigrated to France to study philosophy in 1950 where he became a great and early admirer of James Joyce. Joyce violated the protocols of received academic discourse, a transgression that even the Marxists had avoided. Derridas work on phenomenology at the cole Normale Suprieure earned for him a scholarship to Harvard in 1956-57.6 From 1960 to 1964, Derrida taught philosophy and logic at the Sorbonne before eventually returning to the cole Normale Suprieure to teach the history of philosophy until 1984. Since the mid-1970s, Derrida spent a significant portion of his time teaching and lecturing abroad, particularly in the United States, where he has held visiting professorship at such universities as Yale, Cornell, and, more recently, at the University of California, Irvine, where he was a professor of humanities.7 In 1984, he became a director of studies at the cole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales.8

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (trans.), Of Grammatology, Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, USA, 1994. p. ix. Matthew Calarco and Peter Atterton (eds.), The Continental Ethics Reader, Routledge, NY, 2003, p. 207 8 Jeff Collins and Bill Mayblin, Introducing Derrida, Totem Books, USA, 1997, p. 13.

20

He died on October 8, 2004. His death was greeted with both an outpouring of moving eulogies from his admirers and several sharp attacks. The controversy arose because of the destabilizing and unsettling effects of "deconstruction" of our traditional views and understanding of things which caused his readers from various sectors considerable discomfort. This was the side of deconstruction that grabbed all the headlines during the 70s a kind of academic succs de scandale.
But what his critics according to Caputo missed is that his work is an affirmation and fidelity to the philosophical discipline, a love which in later years Derrida would call the "undeconstructible."

In the last fifteen years of his life, Derrida would start talking about religion, telling us about his "religion (without religion)," about his "prayers and tears," and about the Messiah. He would even write a kind of Jewish Confession called "Circumfession" - a haunting and enigmatic journal he kept while his beloved mother lay dying in Nice, a diary cum dialogue with St. Augustine, his equally weepy compatriot. His critics failed to see that deconstructing this, that and everything in the name of the undeconstructible is a lot like what religious people, especially Jews, would call the "critique of idols." Deconstruction is satisfied with nothing because it is waiting for the Messiah which Derrida translated into the philosophical figure of the "to come" ( venir): the very figure of the future (lavenir), of hope, and expectation. Deconstruction's meditation on the contingency of our beliefs and practiceson democracy, for exampleis made in the name of a promise in the sense that it is a democracy "to come" for which every existing democracy is a but a faint predecessor state.

21

This religious turn made many people nervous and uncomfortable but giving comfort is not what deconstruction was sent into the world to do.
When asked why he does not say "I am" an atheist (je suis, c'estmoi), he said it was because he did not know if he were, believing that he lacks the absolute authority of an authorial "I" to still his inner conflict. So the best he can do is to rightly pass for this or that and he is very sorry that he cannot do better. It reminds Caputo of the formula placed forward by Kierkegaard 's "Johannes Climacus" who deferred saying that he "is" a Christian but is doing the best he can to "become" one.

Derrida exposes us to the "secret" that there is no "Secret," no Big Capitalized Secret to which we have been wired upby scientific reason, by poetic or religious revelation, or by political persuasion. The secret that is no secret is: We do not in some deep way know who we are or what the world is.
That is not nihilism but a quasi-religious confession, the beginning of wisdom, the onset of faith and compassion. Derrida exposes the doubt that does not merely insinuate itself into faith but that in fact constitutes faith, for faith is faith precisely in the face of doubt and uncertainty, the passion of non-knowing. Violence on the other hand arises from having a low tolerance for uncertainty so that Derrida shows us why religious violence is bad faith.

On Derrida's terms, we do not know the name of what we desire with a desire beyond desire. That means leading a just life comes down to coping with such non-knowing, negotiating among the several competing names that fluctuate undecidably before us, each pretending to name what we are praying for.9

B. Intellectual Influences
Derrida was twice refused in the prestigious cole Normale Suprieure in Paris (where Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir and the majority of French intellectuals and academics began their careers), but he was eventually accepted to the institution at the age of 19. Hence he moved from Algiers to France, and soon after he also began to play a major role in the leftist
9

John D. Caputo, Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). Internet (11/19/11/ 11: 10 am): http://www.crosscurrents.org/caputo200506.htm

22

journal - in the sixties he was among the young intellectuals writing for the avant-garde journal Tel Quel.10 His initial work in philosophy was done largely through the lens of Husserl. Other important inspirations on his early thoughts include Nietzsche, Heidegger, Saussure, Levinas and Freud. Derrida acknowledges his indebtedness to all of these thinkers in the development of his approach to texts, which has come to be known as deconstruction.11
Derrida has also had many dialogues with philosophers like John Searle (see Limited Inc.), in which deconstruction has been roundly criticized, although perhaps unfairly at times. However, what is clear from the antipathy of such thinkers is that deconstruction challenges traditional philosophy in several important ways. Deconstruction has had an enormous influence in psychology, literary theory, cultural studies, linguistics, feminism, sociology and anthropology. Poised in the interstices between philosophy and non-philosophy (or philosophy and literature), it is not difficult to see why this is the case.12

C. Major Works
It was in 1967 that the founder of deconstruction really arrived as a philosopher of world importance. He published three momentous texts: (1) Of Grammatology, 2) Writing and Difference, and (3) Speech and Phenomena. All of these works have been influential for different reasons, but it is Of Grammatology that remains his most famous work.
In Of Grammatology, Derrida reveals and then undermines the speech-writing opposition that he argues has been such an influential factor in Western thought.13 His preoccupation with language in this text is typical of much of his early work, and since the publication of these and other major texts (including Dissemination, Glas, The Postcard, Spectres of Marx, The Gift of Death, and Politics of Friendship), deconstruction has gradually moved from occupying a major role in continental Europe, to also becoming a significant player in the Anglo-American philosophical context. This is particularly so in the areas of literary criticism, and cultural studies, where deconstructions method of textual analysis has inspired theorists like Paul de Man. He has also had lecturing positions at various universities the world over.14

11

Gayatri ChakravortySpivak (trans.), Of Grammatology, p. ix. Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 12 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 13 Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (trans.), Of Grammatology, pp.15859, 163 14 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida

10

23

D. Derridas Deconstructive Philosophy

Theut offered writing as a pharmakon a remedy for deficient memory and limited wisdom. Thamus, the god of gods, will have to decide: You (Theut), the father of writing stated exactly the opposite of what it will do. Those who write will stop exercising memory and become forgetful. They will rely on the external marks of writing instead of their internal capacity to remember things. You have discovered a pharmakon for reminding not for true memory. As for wisdom, you offer your students a mere appearance of it, not the reality without proper instruction, they will seem knowledgeable when they are quite ignorant ... they will carry the conceit of wisdom instead of being really wise. Derrida wants the great issue to continue to be taken up today: Derrida wants to keep it (the pros and cons) in play.15

Deconstruction is a philosophical language using a strange tongue (Is. 28:9-12; 1Cor. 14:21). Derrida developed a strategy called deconstruction in the mid 1960s distancing himself from the philosophical movements and traditions that preceded him on the French intellectual scene (phenomenology, existentialism, and structuralism).16 For Derrida, our traditional ways of thinking and perceiving the world (together with their hierarchies and classifications) may still be rationally reconfigured by way of deconstruction. There are many different terms that Derrida employs to describe what he considers to be the fundamental way(s) of thinking of the Western philosophical tradition. These include: logocentrism, phallogocentrism, and perhaps most famously, the metaphysics of presence, but also often simply metaphysics. These terms all have slightly different meanings:17 All of these terms of denigration, however, are united under the broad rubric of the term metaphysics.18 Derrida defines metaphysics as:
The enterprise of returning strategically, ideally, to an origin or to a priority thought to be simple, intact, normal, pure, standard, self-identical, in order then to think in terms of derivation, complication, deterioration, accident, etc.(Afterword to Limited Inc.)19 All metaphysicians, from Plato to Rousseau, Descartes to Husserl, conducted their works in this manner, conceiving good Jeff Collins and Bill Mayblin, Introducing Derrida, pp. 25-32 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 17 Affirmez la survie: Deconstructive Strategy. Internet (10/11/11/ 4:00 pm): http://derridaworks.blogspot.com/2007/08/deconstructive-strategy.html 18 Affirmez la survie: Deconstructive Strategy. Internet (10/11/11/ 4:00 pm): 19 Jack Reynolds, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity. Internet(11/25/11/12:30pm): http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24867-merleau-ponty-and-derrida-intertwiningembodiment-and-alterity/
16 15

24

to be before evil, the positive before the negative, the pure before the impure, the simple before the complex, the essential before the accidental, the imitated before the imitation, etc.20 Basically then, metaphysical thought always privileges one side of an opposition, and ignores or marginalizes the alternative term of that opposition.21

In an interview in 1981 Derrida explains: "deconstruction is always deeply concerned with the "other of language. The critique of logocentrism is above all else the search for the other and the other of language. The fundamental tendencies within Western thought, logocentrism: the belief in the existence of a permanent truth; egocentrism: the belief in a permanent self; phonocentrism: the priority of sound over the written word;

phallogocentrism: the dominance of the male over the female paradigm; ethnocentrism: the superiority of one culture and intellectual traditions over others are the targets of Derrida's deconstruction.22 Deconstruction therefore is primarily concerned with something tantamount to a critique of the Western philosophical tradition. In fact, deconstruction releases us from the ossification of thought involved in thinking that a favored conceptual scheme is privileged over others. Deconstruction is generally presented via an analysis of specific texts. Deconstruction seeks to re-think at least two aspects/objects: (a) literary and (b) philosophical. The literary aspect concerns the textual interpretation, where invention is essential to finding hidden alternative meanings in the text; while the philosophical aspect is the main target the metaphysics of presence, or simply metaphysics.23

20

21

Samuel Weber (trans.), Limited Inc. (inc. Afterword), Northwestern Univ. Press, Illinois, 1998, p. 236. Thomas Mautner (ed.), The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy, Penguin Group, England, 2005, p.150. 22 Deconstruction and the Other, Interview with Richard Kearney, in Kearney, Dialogues with Contemporary Continental Thinkers, Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1984, p.123 23 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida

25

Deconstruction is therefore not just an appeal for critical vigilance towards a metaphysical (conceptual) heritage from the West;24 deconstruction is in fact a defiant response of contemporary philosophizing against the objectivism, rationalism, and positivistic scientism of the modern era. It is also a devastating reaction against the structural conception of reality which presupposes the inevitability of universal linguistic structures which ultimately predetermine the essence of reality. 25

More importantly, deconstruction works towards preventing the worst violence. Indeed, deconstruction is a relentless pursuit of justice:26 deconstruction is justice (Force of Law).27 Deconstruction, as the practice of respecting alterity, both begins and ends with justice.28
Thus, deconstruction has been, at root, ethical - concerned for the paradigmatic marginalized described by the Old Testament: "the widow, the orphan, and the stranger." Deconstruction's recognition that everything is interpretation opens a space of questioning; a space to call into question the received and dominant interpretations that often claim not to be interpretations at all. As such, deconstruction is interested in interpretations that have been marginalized and sidelined, activating voices that have been silenced. This is the constructive, prophetic, aspect of Derrida's deconstruction: a concern for justice by being concerned about dominant, status quo interpretations that silence those who see differently. Forgiveness, tolerance, death, hospitality, justice are key areas discussed by Derrida in his writings which make it clear that Derrida is concerned about ethics. He has even dedicated his works like Of Hospitality, Politics of Friendship to ethical dialogues.29

Hence the philosophy of deconstruction is not aimed at destruction or annihilation or anything negative rather it engages decentering. In fact it encourages reconstruction but "How could you reconstruct anything without deconstruction?" All that deconstruction aims at is to celebrate the pluralities, differences. Derrida is not against ethics but that of a categorical framing of ethical principles.30

Paul Grimstad, The Idea of the Future of Deconstruction. Internet (10/11/11/10 am): http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewArticle/10/9 25 Ruel F. Pepa, Nurturing the Imagination of Resistance: Some Important Views from Contemporary Philosophers. Internet (11/12/11/2:00 pm): http://www.philosophos.com/philosophy_article_85.html 26 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 27 Chantal Mouffe (ed.), Deconstruction and Pragmatism, Routledge, New York, 1996 p. 34. 28 Diane Moira Duncan, The Pre-Text of Ethics: On Derrida and Levinas, Peter Lang Publishing Inc., New York, 2001, p.138. 29 Jack Reynolds, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity. Internet(11/25/11/12:30pm): 30 Richard Kearney and Mark Dooley (ed.), Hospitality, Justice and Responsibility in Questioning Ethics: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy, Routledge, USA, 1999, p.77.

24

26

E. Other Related Terms and Concepts

In trying to come-up with a radical concept of justice and equality in the field of political ethics, Derrida would use deconstruction to develop his various themes (e.g. hospitality, friendship, fraternity, gift of death), and eventually introduce us to a creative way of unlocking new possibilities that breaks away from the ossified ways of Western thoughts.

This involves an analysis of several literary materials on the topic (usually Aristotelian and Greek mythology, including religious sources) coupled with an appropriation and modification of applicable concepts by contemporary philosophers. In the end, this Derridean concept of justice and equality grounded on philia (friendship and hospitality) is supposed to be a pure form of democracy which excludes or marginalizes no one an international fraternity in the generic sense. Exorcised from liberal capitalist influences, it is democracy enjoyed by citizens belonging to one mondial family (regardless of gender, creed, race or nationality) under a one-world government. 1. Differance
My aim is not to justify the invention of this word but to intensify its play. Everything is strategic, and adventurous. For these reasons, there is nowhere to begin.31

Derrida first used the term diffrance in his 1963 paper "Cogito et histoire de la folie." This French term coined by Derrida plays on the fact that that the French word differer means both "to defer" and "to differ." (1) TO DEFER, meaning is forever "deferred" or postponed through an endless chain of signifiers. (2) TO DIFFER (relating to difference, sometimes referred to as espacement or "spacing") concerns the force which differentiates elements from one another and, in so doing, engenders binary oppositions and hierarchies which underpin
31

Jeff Collins and Bill Mayblin, Introducing Derrida, p.77

27

meaning itself.32 The verb differer has a play of both space and time: (1) things differ spatially; (2) putting something off is temporal.33 In short, differance refers to deconstructions playing field, the creative space, which opens up possibilities to invent or discover the other interpretations in a network of relationships between the specific text and their meanings. It is because of diffrance that meaning is possible. Regarding this field of tensions, it should be remembered that deconstruction cannot limit itself or proceed immediately to neutralization: deconstruction must practice an overturning of the classical opposition, and a general displacement of the system by means of a double gesture, a double science, a double writing/double reading.34 It is here where Derrida tries to show that the meaning of the concept is fluid by reversing the dichotomies and arbitrary categories to create an ambiguity/contradiction

(paradoxes/undecidability). It is on that condition alone that deconstruction will provide the means of intervening in the field of oppositions it criticizes.
Diffrance can be understood as signifying inequality and distinction, as well as identity and non-identity. At the same time, it is neither word nor concept, thought nor image, active nor passive. Diffrance prefers to play in the middle.35 According to Derrida, it indicates the middle voice, It precedes and sets up the opposition between passivity and activity. Diffrance always implies a playful movement. (It is never stagnant). It is through play that it produces (that which it produces). Through the very movement (of diffrance), a phenomenon that is experienced as present or that which appears on the stage of presence, shows itself as a relation to both the past and to the future. Both the past and the future create a present that is hollow - a present in relation to what is not. According to Merleau-Ponty, there is an intention which always outruns the presentness of the present. This intention always retains the mark of a past element.36 Through its play, diffrance produces what we understand as differences between
32

Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida Jeff Collins and Bill Mayblin, Introducing Derrida, p.75. 34 Joshua Kates, The Voice that Keeps Reading: Evans Strategies of Deconstruction, in Philosophy Today, Vol. 37, No. 3, 1993, p.321. 35 Mark C. Taylor, Deconstruction in Context, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986, pp. 400,401,404. 36 Alan Bass (trans.), Writing and Difference, University of Chicago Press, USA, 1980, p.105.
33

28

phenomena. It is the non-full, non-simple origin; it is the structured and differing origin of differences.37

Since its indeconstructability is not due to the metaphysics of presence, it must emerge in the very spacing of what can be deconstructed. In this spacing, theologians and philosophers find themselves searching for answers to questions that have not been appropriately articulated.38 2. Undecidability/Aporia Derrida has a recurring tendency to resuscitate terms in different contexts, and has recently become more and more preoccupied with what has come to be termed as possible-impossible aporias.
Aporia was originally a Greek term meaning puzzle, but it has come to mean something more like an impasse or paradox. Indeed, to complicate matters, undecidability returns in two discernible forms. In his recent work, Derrida often insists that the condition of the possibility (of mourning, giving, forgiving, and hospitality, to cite some of his most famous examples) is at once also the condition of their impossibility. In his explorations of these possible-impossible aporias, it becomes undecidable whether genuine giving, for example, is either a possible or an impossible ideal.39

In an interview by Richard Kearney on Hospitality, Justice and Responsibility, Derrida said: Ethics and politics start with undecidability:
If we know what to do, then there would be no problem, the decision would not be a decision but would simply be the application of rule. A decision has to go through undecidability and make a leap beyond the field of theoretical knowledge. So when I say I dont know what to do, this is not the negative condition of decision. It is rather the possibility of decision.40

Alan Bass (trans.), Writing and Difference, pp.130-131 The term appropriately is not to be understood as signifying any particular truth or rightness. In operating within the indeconstructable space, questions have to be articulated in a manner that makes room for un-truth. Ian Edwards, Derrida's (Ir)religion: A Theology (of Diffrance). Internet(11/25/11/1:00pm): http://www.janushead.org/6-1/Edwards.pdf 39 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 40 Richard Kearney and Mark Dooley (eds.), Hospitality, Justice and Responsibility in Questioning Ethics: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy, Routledge, USA, 1999, p. 66.
38

37

29

Undecidability is one of Derridas most important attempts to trouble dualisms, or more accurately, to reveal how they are always already troubled:
An undecidable (and there are many of them in deconstruction, eg. ghost, pharmakon, hymen, etc.) is something that cannot conform to either polarity of a dichotomy (eg. present/absent, cure/poison, and inside/outside in the above examples). For example, the figure of a ghost seems to be neither present nor absent, or alternatively it is both present and absent at the same time.41

a. Justice For Derrida, justice is outside or beyond the law, as it were, for law is a construct,42 and undeconstructible justice is necessarily not contained by the constructs of the law:
True justice is not calculable, not a matter of economics or an algorithm: Law is not justice. Law is the element of calculation, and it is just that there be law, but justice is incalculable, it requires us to calculate with the incalculable; and aporetic experiences are the experiences, as improbable as they are necessary, of justice, that is to say of moments in which the decision between just and unjust is never insured by rule.43

It is precisely through this calculating with the incalculable that we approach justice; our decisions and experiences, by grappling with the incalculable or aporetic. Derrida writes that the experience of impossibility, of undecidability, provides the moment for belief, a moment of utter tension when there are both the room and the call for something as immeasurable as justice. The undecidable nature of the situation calls for an increase in responsibility in order to be just.44
In his discussion on law and justice, Derrida identifies justice with deconstruction itself. He remarks: Deconstructive justice is not simply a regulative ideal to which real world law will always be aspiring and failing. Deconstructive justice is that possibility of justice always held open in law even as it fails itself. Deconstructive justice is that irrepressible call for justice that is always active within law, but that law in practice cannot finally achieve. Since, on the one
41

Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida Diane Moira Duncan, The Pre-Text of Ethics: On Derrida and Levinas, p.139. 43 John D. Caputo (trans.), Deconstruction in Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida, Routledge, Chapman and Hall, Inc., New York, 1997, p. 16. 44 Lori Branch, The Desert in the Desert: Faith and the Aporias of Law and Knowledge in Derrida and The Sayings of the Desert Fathers, Journal of the American Academy of Religion December 2003, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 818-819.
42

30

hand, justice can only appear in the world through the practice of law, and, on the other, law can never satisfactorily fulfill the call to justice, law as it is practiced is both the only way in which justice can become real, and simultaneously the clearest indication of the impossibility of complete justice. Law both exhibits and undermines justice at one and the same time.45

b. Mourning For The Other (Honoring the Other)

Derrida claims that responsibility for the other consists in respect for the Other and considers two (2) models of encroachment between self and other that is regularly associated with mourning: Derrida first points out the difference then shows the aporia involving introjection (love for the other in me) and incorporation (involves retaining the other as a pocket, or a foreign body within ones own body).46

In Memoires: for Paul de Man, Derrida also problematizes this success fails, failure succeeds formulation:
Adhering to a paradoxical logic, he suggested that the so-called successful mourning of the deceased other actually fails or at least is an unfaithful fidelity because the other person becomes a part of us, and in this interiorization their genuine alterity is no longer respected. On the other hand, failure to mourn the others death paradoxically appears to succeed, because the presence of the other person in their exteriority is prolonged. There is an aborted interiorization at the same time a respect for the other as other; hence, the possibility of an impossible bereavement, where the only possible way to mourn, is to be unable to do so. 47 Derridas point is that in mourning, the otherness of the other (tout autre) person resists both the process of incorporation as well as the process of introjection. The other can neither be preserved as a foreign entity, nor introjected fully within.48 Derrida suggests that responsibility towards the other is about respecting and even emphasizing this resistance.49

Nick Mansfield, Derrida and the Culture Debate: Autoimmunity, Law and Decision, Macquarie University Press. 46 Johnson (trans.), Fors: The Anglish Words of Nicolas Abraham and Maria Torok, University of Minnesota Press, 1986, p. xvii. 47 Lindsay, Culler, Cadava, &Kamuf (trans.), Memoires: For Paul de Man (The Wellek Library Lectures), Columbia University Press, NY, 1989, pp. 6, 35. 48 Jack Reynolds, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity. Internet(11/25/11/12:30pm): 49 Lindsay, Culler, Cadava, &Kamuf (trans.), Memoires: For Paul de Man, pp.160, 238.

45

31

In Spectres of Marx, Derrida tells us how we should remember and mourn for the death of Marx and Marxism - the Marxist dogma machine. In other words, what we should choose to inherit from Marx.
Derrida explains that Spectrality could be interpreted metaphorically aside from having temporal and ethical dimensions. While Derrida criticizes the inadequacies of Marxs metaphysics of presence (the onto-political aspect) which ended trapped within totalitarianism (human rights violations), Derrida recognizes the critical spirit of Marxism to expose the inability of liberal-capitalist democracy to live up to its ideals (equality). The emergence of a new political landscape demanded new modes of representation and a new form of struggle. Invoking the messianic, Derrida claims that communism cannot be erased because the goals of equality is a value which is part of the universal structure of human experience. Hence, democracy, justice, and communism could always, through time, undergo infinite mutation invested with unpredictable and new enlightened meanings. Derrida therefore advances the need for a new partyless political struggle in the international arena to address major issues on justice and equality facing mankind.50

c. The Gift of Death51 (The Boundless Parameter of Sacrifice)

Everyone is more or less afraid of the truth; and this is being human, for the truth is relating to being spirit - and this is very hard for flesh and blood. Between a human being and the truth lies dying to the world - this, you see, is why we are all more or less afraid.52

The Gift underlies our more basic nature. It eludes all categorization while at the same time provides a meta-context within which all human philosophy and religion (erroneous or otherwise) takes place. For the deconstructionist, the Gift is that boundless parameter within which all deconstruction takes place and progresses. Deconstructionist discussions have revolved around the Gift and it's implications toward political, philosophical, ethical and religious tradition:

50

Jules Townshend, Derrida's deconstruction of Marx(ism) in Contemporary Politics, Vol. 10, no.2, 2004, p. 167. 51 David Wills (trans.), The Gift of Death and Literature in Secret, Univ. of Chicago, 2nd ed., USA, 2008. 52 Alastair Hannay (trans.) Sren Kierkegaard: Papers and Journals (A Selection), Penguin Books, England, 1996, p.614.

32

Derrida relates responsibility (ethics/morality) to secrecy, the mystery of the sacred, the mysterium tremendum, through an analysis of the Czech philosopher Jan Patocka's Heretical Essays on the Philosophy of History. From Patocka, Derrida gleans the understanding of the mysterium tremendum as that which, when encountered, produces the terrible (tremendum) realization that what is required of us is our entire being. This sense of the mysterium rouses us to the responsibility of making a gift of our death, that is, of sacrificing one's self in the face of God.

Derrida also examines Heidegger and Levinas' claim that giving one's life for the other is the purest demonstration of individuality, an act requiring complete autonomy and which no other can accomplish in one's stead:
One cannot give one's life to replace other's death, since one's sacrifice cannot exempt the other from his or her own eventual death. What is given "is not some thing, but goodness itself, a giving goodness, the act of giving or the donation of the gift - a goodness that must not only forget itself but whose source remains inaccessible to the done. Derrida's aim is to establish the priority of self sacrifice as grounded not upon utilitarian grounds but upon its status as radically individualistic gift. This makes the gift of death not only a priority in relation to the individual's response to the mysterium but now also to responsibility toward mortal others. In either case it requires the individual to face the dread on losing oneself completely without assurance of recompense.

Derrida seeks to demonstrate that whereas responsibility and sacrifice ultimately transcend traditional ethics and morality, such responsibility causes one to tremble (tremendum) in that it alludes to an unpredictable future. Here Derrida turns to Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling as an exposition of such dread in the face of the unknown:
God as Wholly Other is that which can demand an absolute obedience which requires Abraham to transcend, even transgress his notion of what is moral or ethical. Derrida emphasizes the insoluble and paradoxical contradiction between responsibility in general (ethics), and absolute responsibility: in that instant of contradiction and paradox one truly assumes absolute responsibility for one's own action. This responsibility to the other immediately propels anyone into the risk of absolute sacrifice. Paradox, scandal, and aporia are themselves nothing other than sacrifice, the revelation of conceptual thinking at its limit - at its death and finitude. Tout Autre Est Tout Autre deals with Derrida's central conviction that, God, as wholly other, is to be found everywhere; there is something of the wholly other. Derrida horizontally extends the notion of absolute responsibility. Here Derrida replaces the traditional notion of God with the incorporeal, radically individualistic element of personal existence, and in so doing likewise transfers the origin of responsibility from a dreadful encounter with the transcendent mysterium to an indiscernible (secret) encounter with the invisible within oneself.

33

d. The Messianic Wholly Other Deconstructionism aims to slowly encompass and transform an ever greater spectrum of concepts central to the traditionally onto-theological worldview.
Messianism refers predominantly to the religions of the Messiahs i.e. the Muslim, Judaic and Christian religions. These religions proffer a Messiah of known characteristics, and the most obvious of numerous necessary characteristics for the Messiah, it seems, is that they must invariably be male. Sexuality might seem to be a strange prerequisite to tether to that which is beyond this world, wholly other, but it is only one of many. The messianic depends upon the various messianisms and Derrida admits that he cannot say which the more originary is.

For Derrida, the messianism of Abraham in his singular responsibility before God reveals the messianic structure of existence since we all share a similar relationship to alterity even if we have not named and circumscribed that experience according to the template provided by a particular religion. However, Derridas call/invocation for the wholly other to come, is not a call for a fixed or identifiable other of known characteristics, as understood in the average religious experience. His wholly other is indeterminable and can never actually arrive.
Derrida recounts a story of Maurice Blanchots where the Messiah was actually at the gates to a city, disguised in rags. After some time, the Messiah was finally recognized by a beggar, but the beggar could think of nothing more relevant to ask than: when will you come?(DN, 24) Even when the Messiah is there, he or she must still be yet to come, and this brings us back to the distinction between the messianic and the various historical messianisms.

The messianic structure of existence is open to the coming of an entirely ungraspable and unknown other. Derrida does not mean waiting for a future that will one day become present but openness towards an unknown futurity that is necessarily involved in what we take to be presence and hence also renders it impossible.53

53

Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida

34

I am careful to say let it come because if the other is precisely what is not invented, then the initiative or deconstructive inventiveness can consist only in opening, in uncloseting, in destabilizing foreclusionary structures, so as to allow for the passage toward the other.54

e. Politics Of Friendship (The Democracy To Come)

In all forms of government or constitution, one sees a form of friendship co-terminus with the relations of justice appear. The question of the proper name is obviously at the heart of the friendship problematic.

For Aristotle, there are three kinds of friendship: those founded (1) on virtue (family or primary friendship par excellence); (2) on usefulness (political friendship), and (3) on pleasure. The 2nd type of friendship has something troubling about it for the very order of this conceptuality as a whole. This type also has the traits of the 1st kind of friendship: (a) it constitutes a community (koinonia), and (2) it features justice (law). Friendship par excellence can only be human but above all there is thought for man only to the extent that it is thought of the other and the thought of the other qua mortal.
Translated into the language of the human and finite cogito: I think, therefore, I am the other; I think, therefore, I need the other (in order to think); I think therefore the possibility of friendship is lodged in the movement of my thought in so far as it demands, calls for, desires the other, the necessity of the other, the cause of the other at the heart of the cogito. But all thought does not necessarily translate into the logic of the cogito.

Derrida observers that the great ethico-politico-philosophical discourses were dominated and undermined by double exclusions especially in democracy where the brother (fraternity) relation prevails over the name of the father: (1) the exclusion of friendship between women and (2) the exclusion of friendship between a man and a woman.
Let no one accuse me of unjustly incriminating the figure of fraternity sublimated by Hugo as virility: The word Fraternity was not thrown into the depths, first from the heights of Calvary, then from the French Revolution of 1789. What the Revolution wants, God wants. It is where the supreme martyrdom pronounced the supreme words: Freedom, Equality, and Fraternity! Paris is the place of revolutionary revelation, the human Jerusalem.

But even if all friendship is in some respect political, there is only one kind of friendship.
The question What is friendship? but also Who is the friend (both or either sex)? is nothing but the question What is philosophy? When men are friends they have no need of justice, while when they are just they need friendship as well, and the truest form of justice is thought to be a friendly quality (Aristotle). Is this incommensurable friendship, this friendship we are
54

Waters & Godzich (eds.), Reading De Man Reading, University of Minnesota Press, USA, 1989, p. 60 (See also Internet (10/25/11/4:11 pm): http://jpkc.zju.edu.cn/k/541/4/3/13/6.html)

35

attempting to separate from the classical notions of fraternity? Is it still a fraternity a fraternity ranging infinitely beyond all literal figures of the brother, a fraternity that would no longer exclude anyone? It will be more than a nation, it will be a civilization, and it will be a family. When will we be ready for an experience of freedom and equality that is capable of respectfully experiencing that friendship, which would at last be just, just beyond the law, and measureless up against its measurelessness?55

CHAPTER III PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS A. The Notion of Hospitality a. The Other Understanding of Hospitality (Different Presentations)
Contemporary usage of the word, Hospitality, seems to have lost all its depth. Hospitality as an observed phenomenon around the globe means merely what hotels and restaurants do nowadays: making sure that rich people can enjoy lounging around. It could be synonymous with entertainment, with having chums around for dinner. The word could also be used to describe how corporate freeloaders get to watch live sport.56 In the Philippines, Filipinos celebrate hospitality as a way of life. In fact it has become an important trait which had been highlighted at the helm of a vigorous tourism program on the part of government. Filipinos also celebrate their fiestas to showcase their unique brand of hospitality. The culture of hospitality in the country has evolved into an extravagant barrio-fiesta bonanza of lavish meals and beverages plus entertainment galore and pageantry. In the old Philippine tradition, hospitality welcomes "the stranger" as one worthy of being

55

George Collins (trans.), The Politics of Friendship, Verso, London, 2005, pp 200-203, 224, 240, 251, 265-266, 278, 306. 56 Tobias Jones, Open-door Policy. Internet (12/10/11/ 1:00 pm): http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/13/tobias-jones-life-ordinary-hospitality.

36

considered a household member, marking a willingness to make room for another's unique presence. 1. Etymology and the Paradox of Hospitality Hospitality is derived from the Latin word hospes (meaning both guest and host)57 which in turn is formed from two words: hostis which originally meant guest, stranger, foreigner, and later morphed through French into the English word host, (meaning a large body of warlike individuals or army, which eventually came to mean hostile foreigner or enemy) and pets (meaning to have power). So the literal meaning of hospes is lord of strangers. Being a host means having power over guests.
Strangers were at once volatile and attractive. This ambiguity was reflected in the seemingly opposite terms surrounding relations with strangers: hostes, meaning both host and enemy; hostis, with roots in words suggesting both enemy and guest.58

The trunk of hospitem, which literally means lord of strangers shifted through Old French and New French while losing the h and the em, then picked up the h again on reentry into Modern English to hospital, and eventually gives us host, meaning someone who receives guests (guest is from the Germanic side), and also originally meant both host and guest and stranger and enemy). And finally, hostia meant victim or sacrifice and in Late Latin and French became a technical ecclesial term for the Body of Christ served during the Eucharist: the Host.59

Mircea Eliade (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion (Vol. 6), Macmillan Publishing Co.,N.Y.,1987, p.470. Babak Amouoghli, A Tale of Hospitality and Hostility. Internet(12/10/11/ 1:43 pm): http://www.philosophynow.org/issue84/Cache_Hidden 59 For the Love of Words: A [Guest] Sabbath Meditation on Hospitality. Internet (12/10/11/ 1:43 pm): http://schmexas.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/for-the-love-of-words-a-guest-sabbath-meditation-onhospitality/
58

57

37

2. Greek Mythology: Odysseus and Cyclops Today, those who are supposed to be wise do not open their bolted doors to strangers without proof of identity; we fear hitch-hikers, we advise children not to talk to strangers, and we do not expect visitors to bring a dish or bottle of wine when they come for a visit. Rules of etiquette require us to make our guests feel at home, but not to receive people we do not know as our guests in our house. This was not always the case; there was a time, long before the advent of coins, when hospitality to strangers saved lives. In the Iliad and the Odyssey, the practice of hospitality can be perceived as a cardinal virtue among their characters:
When Odysseus visited the land of the Phaeacians, their elderly hero Echeneus reminded their king: Alcinous, said he, it is not creditable to you that a stranger should be seen sitting among the ashes of your hearth; tell him, then, to rise and take a seat on a stool inlaid with silver and let the house-keeper give him some supper of whatever there may be in the house. King Alcinous offered hospitality without even knowing who Odysseus is, although he suspects his guest of being a god. Not only hospitality, but first his daughter, Nausicaa, and then an escort home, even after the unknown stranger assures him he's only mortal. Menalaus did the same without requiring their names, reminding his men that they were also strangers during their long journeys and often enjoyed the hospitality of other peoples houses before they were able to come home.60

Odysseus, the great wanderer is himself praised for his exemplary hosting. In both epics, the gods themselves sometimes put on human disguises and assume the role of guests who would later give them good news or extraordinary gifts. Thus, hospitality implies their reverence and respect for the gods that creates a readiness for reciprocal relationships with strangers. Those who do not attain such openness are considered

60

N.S. Gill, Odysseus the Stranger: The Worlds of Homer and Odysseus. Internet (12/10/11/ 2:00 pm): http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/homerodyssey/a/OdysseusStrange.htmhttp://ancienthistory.about.com/ od/homerodyssey/a/OdysseusStrange.htm

38

barbarians. A single act of welcoming usually by means of a meal can result in a bond of friendship that lasts for generations.61 Hospitality had rules and the most infamous breakers are the suitors of Penelope, the wife of Odysseus (Ulysses). Odysseus as a philosophical hero is hailed as model of tough friendship (that is, true friendship) by Philodemus, Plutarch and Maximus of Tyre. The unwillingness of Odysseus to accept received opinion at face value plus his creativity and the intelligent originality of his method makes him a moral reformer in a world marred by preconceptions. His unconventional behavior puts our conventional judgments to the question.62 Although he was clever and cunning, he used his craftiness in the pursuit of heroic deeds and never for selfish reasons. The hospitality story of Odysseus and Cyclops is all about meals and strangers, or rather strangers as meals:
This Homeric tale is layered with cultural meanings. The Cyclops, a race of giants, mirrored the custom of family worship, where each extended family-clan maintained independent, severe laws based on the religion of the family gods, the manes. To say the Cyclops had a single eye was to say that they had only one way of seeing things (one track mind): their only devotion was to their family and race; strangers were not tolerated. In fact, these Cyclops who lived on caves were infamous for their treatment of strangers. Their labyrinthian caves can be compared to the digestive tract (an extended idea of anamorphy by formalizing the element of the double-image as fractal and as a transition from cyclopean to a hospitable society).

In this traveler tale, Odysseus visits the cave of the Cyclops as an experiment to test their custom if he could avail the gift of hospitality which by tradition was intended for strangers. The experiment failed. The golden-tongued Greek was not able to charm the

61 62

Mircea Eliade (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion, p. 471. Silvia Montiglio, From Villain to Hero: Odysseus in Ancient Thought, University of Michigan, USA, 2001, pp.18-21

39

giant, Polyphemus (son of Neptune) who refused to honor the custom of hospitality and instead ate some of the travelers crew. Odysseus did not know that the Cyclops had another custom; the giants were practitioners of cannibalism. The escape of Odysseus comes only after managing a two-stage diversionary trick. Odysseus managed to escape, first, by blinding the giant and next by inventing the name nobody which served a double meaning. Odysseus and the remainder of his crew made their escape underneath sheepskins in order not to attract the neighboring Cyclops. When Polyphemus tried to alert his neighbors for help he shouted: Nobody has blinded me. However, the other giants could not make any sense out of what he was saying. Hospitality in Homers time was well shown during long travels (The Odyssey) through the guest-friend relationship known as xenia. There are many possible reasons why hospitality was more prevalent in those times.
(a) Traveling in Homers time was much more extensive and lengthier. The less advanced methods of transportation such as by boat or by foot were much slower and many more nights were spent away from home in many different locations. There were no hotels or inns where travelers could pay and stay the night. Even if there were, travelers probably could not afford to pay for every night they were gone. Because of this, travelers had to rely on the hospitality of others for shelter, food, and protection. There was, however, some payment for this hospitality in the form of a gift exchange. (b) Another possible reason was the fact that all nations during those times allowed travelers to enter their territory safely. Without such hospitality, strangers could be captured or even killed for entering a foreign land. The Greek guest-friendship xenia may have been formed from this. Xenia is the Greek relationship between two people from different regions. This allowed for the members of the relationship to safely travel into the other members territory and receive a place to stay and something to eat. (c) Another possible explanation for the amount of hospitality shown is that the Greeks believed the gods wanted them to show hospitality to anyone who showed up at their homes. It was also believed that turning away someone and not providing them this hospitality would result in some form of punishment from the gods. During this time, hospitality was treated as a test from the gods. This means that it is the god, Xenios Zeus, who demands magnificent hospitality upon all mortals. Since hosts had no way of knowing who their visitors were, they were forced to

40

treat every visitor as if they were a god. By treating every guest like a god, there is no mistake of accidentally treating a god differently, just in case one was to show up at their door disguised as a stranger. This appears to be done through fear, not generosity. In fact, many of the hosts ask Odysseus to pray for their happiness to the gods in return for their hospitality. (d) Finally, hospitality could have been used to spread ones name and bring them a sense of fame if they would provide a high standard of hospitality to strangers. It also could have been a way to show how wealthy one was.63

It is said that as the customs of hospitality spread with trade and exploration in the pre-classical Mediterranean world, political alliances were extended by the exchange of gifts and intermarriages.64 b. The Derridean Concept Of Hospitality: The Guest-Host Framework
Hospitality is a very general name for all our relations to the other.

The advent of the stranger, as Dillon states, is fundamentally deconstructive. It always brings to presence the strangeness, heterogeneity, and supplementariety of the human way of being as such, and thereby, also, the political challenge human being faces to address that strangeness in survivable and hospitable ways. 65 The relativity of the stranger exists because the stranger is a concept without a counter-concept: the category of the stranger is the counter-concept (or contrary concept) to all concepts of social order. And this, exactly, is the promise of the stranger. Hospitality is a contradictory concept and experience in itself that is possible only on the condition of its impossibility, producing itself as impossible, which is the condition of its possibility.

63

The Value of Hospitality, Internet (12/13/11/9:30 am): http://www1.union.edu/wareht/gkcultur/guide/8/web1.html 64 D. Kunze, The Missing Guest: The Twisted Topology of Hospitality in Eating Architecture by Paulette Singley, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, 2004, p. 169. 65 Mustafa Dike, Pera Peras Poros: Longings for Spaces of Hospitality. Internet (12/12/11/2:14 pm): http://www.uvm.edu/~jwaldron/Theory,%20Culture%20and%20Society/12dikec.pdf

41

The notion of hospitality also raises difficult questions concerning the distinction between the other and the stranger. The stranger is not necessarily an other although he/she could easily become one. The whole point of trying to advance a notion of hospitality is to welcome the stranger rather than rendering him/her as the other. It refers to solidarity of strangers in that every act of engagement is a form of solidarity. It is aimed at pointing to the perils of closure, at the prevention of closing spaces to the stranger, othering him/her. It is a notion aimed at encouraging engagement with the stranger without losing the spaces for alterity on both sides. The notion of hospitality allows the guest to remain a stranger instead of becoming another (on one extreme), or of being assimilated (on the other).66 (Incorporation and Introjection in Mourning/Honoring)

Derrida argues in Of Hospitality that hospitality is an aporia, a possible impossibility. He makes a distinction between two forms of hospitality: conditional and unconditional. Thus, Derrida explains the difference between the laws (plural) of hospitality and the law of unlimited hospitality: 1. The Laws of Hospitality (Conditional Hospitality)
Those rights and duties that are always conditioned and conditional, defined by Greco-Roman tradition and even the Judeo-Christian one, by all of law and all philosophy of law up to Kant and Hegel in particular, across the family, civil society and the state.

For a country to be hospitable towards immigrants, for example, we need guidelines, an immigration process, rights and duties, etc. For that, we need means of identification, such as a birth certificate or other papers. These conditions are synonymous with having the power to control guests. However, as we move further in the direction of conditions, we get further from hospitality.
Too much regulation leads to no hospitality: consider detention centers for immigrants. The imposed conditions can be so severe that the guest virtually becomes a hostage. But on the other hand, no conditions at all also lead to losing all thats necessary for the relationship of hospitality to continue. It is hospitable to welcome a guest into our home without setting conditions; but if this is allowed to an absolute degree, giving the guest everything we own, or if the guest takes over the house by any means, the house and everything else which enabled us to

66

Mustafa Dikec, Pera Peras Poros: Longings for Spaces of Hospitality. Internet (12/12/11/2:14 pm):

42

offer hospitality now belong to the guest. We are not at home anymore we are in a house that does not belong to us, and so cannot offer hospitality in it.

Derrida says that hostility is one of the many ways to regulate an undesirable foreigner. According to Derrida, anyone who encroaches on my home, on my ipseity [selfhood], on my power of hospitality, on my sovereignty as host, I start to regard as an undesirable foreigner, and virtually as an enemy. The irony is that this hostility towards the undesirable foreigner was triggered by the desire to protect what gives one the possibility to host. Derrida also talks of this desire: I want to be master at home, head of house, to be able to receive whomever I like there.67 Derrida further explains that we will regard as a hostile subject anyone who invades and threatens our mastery at home, and we risk becoming their hostage.68
There is a tradition of cosmopolitanism which comes to us from (1) Greek thought with the Stoics, who have a concept of the citizen of the world and from (2) St. Paul in the Christian tradition, a certain call for a citizen of the world as a brother. St. Paul says that we are all brothers, that is as sons of God, so we are not foreigners, we belong to the world as citizens of the world. We could simply dream of a democracy which would be cosmopolitical, a cosmopolitan form and it is in this tradition that we could follow up until Kant for instance, in whose concept of cosmopolitanism we find the conditions for hospitality. But in the concept of the cosmopolitical in Kant there are a number of conditions: first, you should of course welcome the stranger, the foreigner, to the extent that he is a citizen of another country, you grant him the right to visit and not to stay, and there are a number of other conditions. But this concept of the cosmopolitical is a very limited concept, limited precisely by the reference to the political, to the state, to the authority of the state, to citizenship, and to strict control of residency and period of stay.

His point is relatively simple; to be hospitable, it is first necessary that one must have the power to host. Hospitality hence makes claims to property ownership and it also partakes in the desire to establish a form of self-identity. Secondly, in order to be hospitable, the host must also have some kind of control over the people who are being hosted. If the guests take over a house through force, then the host is no longer being hospitable towards them

67

Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, Stanford University Press, USA, 2001, p. 53. 68 Babak AmouOghli, A Tale of Hospitality and Hostility. Internet(12/10/11/ 1:43 pm ):

43

precisely because they are no longer in control of the situation. Any attempt to behave hospitably is partly betrothed to the keeping of guests under control, to the closing of boundaries, to nationalism, and even to the exclusion of particular groups or ethnicities.69

2. The Law of Unlimited Hospitality (Alterity as Non-exclusionary Justice) To give the new arrival all of ones home and oneself, to give him or her ones own, our own, without asking a name or compensation, or fulfillment of even the smallest condition.70
I have to welcome the Other whoever he or she is unconditionally, without asking for a document, a name, a context, or a passport. That is the very first opening of my relation to the Other: to open my space, my home - my house, my language, my culture, my nation, my state, and myself. I don't have to open it, because it is open, it is open before I make a decision about it: then I have to keep it open or try to keep it open unconditionally. But of course this unconditionality is a frightening thing, it's scary. If we decide everyone will be able to enter my space, my house, my home, my city, my state, my language, and if we think what I think, namely that this is entering my space unconditionally may well be able to displace everything in my space, to upset, to undermine, to even destroy, then the worst may happen and I am open to this, the best and the worst. Since this unconditional hospitality may lead to a perversion of this ethics of friendship, we have to condition this unconditionality, to negotiate the relation between this unconditional injunction and the necessary condition, to organize this hospitality, which means laws, rights, conventions, borders of course, laws on immigration and so on and so forth.

If we contemplate giving up everything that we seek to possess and call our own, then most of us can empathize with just how difficult enacting any absolute hospitality would be. Despite this, however, Derrida insists that the whole idea of hospitality depends upon such an altruistic concept and is inconceivable without it. In fact, it is this internal tension that keeps the concept alive.71
Alterity is not only interruptive but constitutive as well. The point, then, it seems to me, is to take the question of the stranger, and the question of the stranger not as nuisances to be avoided, but rather as potentially liberating challenges, liberating in their capacity to question and urge one to question the closures that are comfortably taken for granted as safe spaces those safe spaces called home.

69

Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, pp. 151-5. 70 Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, p. 77. 71 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida

44

Hospitality is also about recognition that we are hosts and guests at the same time in multiple and shifting ways. Hospitality, in this sense, is a refusal to conceive the host and the guest as pre-constituted identities. It is about the recognition that they are mutually constitutive of each other, and thus, relational and shifting as all identities are.72

The following is a condensed excerpt from one of the interviews with Derrida 73 which shows how hospitality is connected with his political ethics as a deconstructive philosophy and why it should prompt us to begin our own deconstructive work and rethink our identity:
We all have, especially in Europe, this problem of immigration, to what extent we should welcome the Other so in order to think of a new politics of hospitality, a new relationship to citizenship - to re-think all these problems. I think that is how a New International in Spectres of Marx should go beyond the concept of the cosmopolitical strictly speaking. We have to do a lot of things and to work within that space within what we call politics today (whether in the domestic or international sphere). We must think and be oriented by something which is more than cosmopolitical, more than citizenship, beyond the classical concept of democracy. Democracy should not be limited by the classical concept of citizenship, by the concept of border and immigration. There is an urgent task to re-elaborate, to re-think, to reengage and to be committed differently with these issues. On the notion of welcoming someone, of being hospitable to them implies a form of acceptance and maybe inclusion and I think that the notion of inclusion is problematic because it tends to imply some form of assimilation, and again assimilating someone to what? Which carries us on to the notion of equality: people are not necessarily equal, nations are not equal, states are not equal - what is therefore the form of agency that will make them equal and perhaps avoid assimilation? I have to accept if I offer unconditional hospitality that the Other may ruin my own space or impose his or her own culture or his or her own language. That is the problem: hospitality should be neither assimilation, acculturation, nor simply the occupation of my space by the Other. That is why it has to be negotiated at every instant, and the decision for hospitality has to be invented at every second with all the risks involved, without a pre-given rule. That is what we have to invent - a new language for instance - to invent a new way of translating in which translation does not simply go one way but both ways, and how can we do that? That is the aporia, and this is political, the new form - but it had always been a form - of politics, but today it has, because of the development of communication, of crossing borders, of telecommunications, it has new forms of urgency. Everything I have said up to now was referring to what you called globalization, what we call in French mondialization. People try to have us swallow the idea that globalization means the free market, or that the concentration of tele-technological communications beyond the States is what makes globalization possible, and what should be supported or simply accepted. The transformation of international law implies a transformation of the global market, and you cannot touch the global market without touching capitalism. Capitalism is precisely tied to this
72 73

Mustafa Dikec, Pera Peras Poros: Longings for Spaces of Hospitality. Internet (12/12/11/2:14 pm): Geoffrey Bennington, Politics and Friendship: A Discussion with Jacques Derrida. Internet (1 December 1997): http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/pol+fr.html

45

organization of the political, the classical organization of the political. The development of new forms of capitalism is responsible for, on the one hand, the consolidation of the old concepts of politics, democracy, friendship, etc., but at the same time undermining this tradition. It is because of new developments of capitalism that everything is shaken. There is a deconstructing effect of capitalism that is why the approach to capitalism is very complex it is a central problem. In this field of concrete and urgent questions, we have to do both, to speak and to act. Democracy means, minimally, equality - and here you see why friendship is an important key, because in friendship, even in classical friendship, what is involved is reciprocity, equality, symmetry, and so on and so forth. There is no democracy except as equality among everyone.

When Derrida was asked: Do you think that there is this interplay of the Other and yourself in this friendship so that you are in some ways the Other and that the Other is in you?
Jacques Derrida answered in the affirmative. However he warns that it complicates the issue, because the Other is not simply the Other as coming from the outside so to speak. One is the one, I am the one, one is more or less the one and everyone is more or less the one and more or less one with him or herself, which means that the Other is already inside, and has to be sheltered and welcomed in a certain way. We also have to negotiate that is a complicated unconscious operation, to negotiate the hospitality within ourselves - to this one in ourselves, to this image that might exclude this other one or be allergic to this other one. We know that someone who does not negotiate this hospitality in him or herself in a certain way cannot be hospitable to the Other, that is what the Greeks taught us. That you have to solve the problem within yourself, and it is already a society, a multiplicity of heterogeneous singularities, to be really smiling to the Other. If you are at war with yourself you may be allergic to the Other, that is what complicates the issue. (Emphasis supplied)

B. The Conceptual Basis and Framework a. Nothing Outside the Text The Basis for (Re)-Interpretation Derridas deconstructionist philosophy somehow has been brought down supposedly to a single defining line: there is nothing outside the text.74 This is predicated upon the desire to expose us to that which is wholly other (tout autre) and to open us up to alternative possibilities.

74

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (trans.), Of Grammatology, p.158

46

"There is nothing but context"75 and "No meaning can be determined out of context, but no context permits saturation."76What he is actually saying is that there is nothing outside of context.
Like a text or book which must be interpreted, we are actually actively interpreting all of reality. The very experience of the things themselves is a matter of interpretation: If everything is interpreted, then that implies that there are other interpretations of everything as well. This deconstructionist view reminds us that we all have this tendency to see all of reality through our own lens, a lens made up of all of our previous knowledge and experience. This view has some important benefits for us. If we recognize that every view and all views in the world are merely interpretations of reality, this means that every view is on an even playing field. In fact many philosophers claim that there is no such thing as a neutral perspective. On the other hand, we need to be willing to give the same voice to others, hearing out their interpretation of reality. If we take a little bit of humility and admit that there are many interpretations other than ours, and that these interpretations exist because they make good sense to other people, when we share information with each other we will all be more inclined to listen and apply that information and interpret it rather than simply dismissing it as wrong.

Derrida is always reluctant to impose my text, your text designations too conspicuously in his texts. This is partly because it is even problematic to speak of a work of deconstruction, since deconstruction only highlights what was already revealed in the text itself.
All of the elements of a deconstructive intervention reside in the neglected cornerstones of an already existing system (MDM 72), and this equation is not altered in any significant way whether that system be conceived of as metaphysics generally, which must contain its nonmetaphysical track, or the writings of a specific thinker, which must also always testify to that which they are attempting to exclude (MDM 73). In fact, this postmodernist technique of Derrida gives the individual a voice, especially the marginalized.77

His more violent and transgressive aspect of deconstruction is illustrated by Derridas consistent exhortation to invent in your own language if you can or want to

75

Peggy Kamuf, (trans.), "Biodegradables: Seven Diary Fragments," in Critical Inquiry 15 (Summer 1989), p. 875.

James Hulbert (trans.),Living On in Harold Bloom et al., Deconstruction and Criticism, Seabury Press, New York 1979, p.81. 77 Jack Reynolds, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity. Internet (11/25/11/12:30pm):

76

47

hear mine; invent if you can or want to give my language to be understood.78 He is prone to making enigmatic suggestions like go there where you cannot go, to the impossible, it is indeed the only way of coming or going.79 His key terms are always changing, because depending upon who or what he is seeking to deconstruct, that point of equivocation will always be located in a different place.80
In his 2-Lecture series, The Specters of Marx, the other interpretation, the still-hidden ethical meaning cannot be found in a dislocated present but to do justice by working it out from the absent - to bring it back to its the rightful course, to what should have been the state of things had we not allowed ourselves to be dominated/dislocated by traditional ways of thinking; hence, time is out of joint. Through a spectacular hauntology, Derrida in this deconstruction project has successfully squeezed out a new Spirit of Marxism bereft of its oppressive totalitarian tendencies, which transformed Marxism into an incisive framework marked by a persistent socio-economic and political struggle towards a partyless international movement for justice and equality, on the same perennial footing with the ideals of democracy. In The Interpretation of Dreams, Derrida opens up the realm of analysis into new and unpredictable formssuch as meeting with an interdiction (when taking an analysis further is forbidden by a structural limit).

b. The Need to Negotiate a Desirable Unconditional Welcoming The researcher postulates that the praxis of Derridean hospitality is unacceptable and unsustainable on the basis of his circuitous explanation on responsibility alone. There must be something more than responsibility to propel us to give gratuitously because no person in his right senses would unconditionally welcome a stranger even at the least expected and most inconvenient time unless there is an inner driving force that motivates the host to open his doors and accommodate the stranger, otherwise it is not anymore
78

Patrick Mensah (trans.), Monolingualism of the Other or Prosthesis of Origin, Stanford University Press, California, 1998, p. 57. 79 David Wood, John P. Leavey and Ian McLeod (trans.), Thomas Dutoit (ed.), On The Name, Stanford University Press, California, 1995, p.75. 80 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida

48

freely done. His notion about responsibility is not enough to persuade and convince rational beings to freely adopt and practice this unconditional hospitality even in the political arena.
In fact, Peter Goldman, in his incisive comparative analysis of Derridas work with that of Czech Philosopher Jan Patocka, claimed that Derrida's analysis of responsibility in The Gift of Death is incoherent and marred by contradictions.81 In rejecting the so-called good conscience, Derrida himself described responsibility in The Gift of Death as the scandalous "betrayal" and "absolute sacrifice" of all other possible responsibilities (68-69) and added in defense of responsibility that in the hyperbolic language of deconstruction, the exercise of responsibility is absolute treachery (68), an incomprehensible and monstrous gift of death (96).

Indeed, why should I wake up in the middle of the night just to accommodate without any conditions a complete stranger who could just be a potential criminal and who could not only deprive me of everything I own, the hard-earned fruits of a lifetime, but also kill me, those who are dear to me and the rest of the household? What is the sense of taking all these risks? Why has it become my responsibility? And why should I betray myself? What is the point and where is the rationality in all this? Prior to the act of hospitality itself, the authentic Subject comes to a point of making a decision where the Subject is still free to take the risk or not. It is only then after deciding that the Subject begins to assume the responsibility. Prior to this decision, he is not obliged. In a hospitable world, one is free not to answer.82 This is well demonstrated by Derrida in his ethical deconstruction of the people of Sodom. The moment Lot welcomed the strangers he becomes totally responsible for his guests this
Peter Goldman, Christian Mystery and Responsibility, Gnosticism in Derrida's The Gift of Death. Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0401/pg_DERR.htm 82 Gerald L. Bruns, Derridas Cat (Who Am I?), in Research in Phenomenology, Vol.38, Issue 2008, pp. 204-423
81

49

hospitality includes protection from harms way, from being raped by the men of Sodom, even to the point of offering his own daughters in exchange for the dignity and honor of his guest who were about to be sexually molested.83 The researcher entertains the possibility that Derridas notion of unconditionality or atleast his explanations and justifications are incomplete and unsatisfactory. The researcher equally entertains the possibility that this Derridean kind of hospitality is hinged on a precondition and that it is inextricably connected to another ideal which should possibly serve as the appropriate or best possible motivation for humanity that might possibly enhance its ethical ground; hence, the need to go beyond the frontiers of hospitality to find out the truth behind the praxis of hospitality vis-a-vis the stranger. c. The Metaphysics of the Self
We also have to negotiate and solve the problem of hospitality within ourselves

Re-interpretation is always a subjective activity which necessarily starts from selfconsciousness that would later on allow the Self to project outward as an enlargement of the Self. But this subjectivity does not prevent the Self from understanding objective values and principles in life. The quest for that radically other hidden meaning of the stranger in relation to unconditional hospitality would therefore have to begin within the consciousness of the authentic thinking self. The experience begins with the self and this could only require
83

Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, pp. 151-153

50

deep contemplation in order to draw a metaphysical conclusion how the praxis of hospitality could possibly be best conceived beginning with ones subjective experience with his/her own stranger from within. Thus, the original guest-host framework and experience has to be re-configured and transformed as a Metaphysics of the Self where the Self as the Host encounters his/her own Stranger as the Guest Within. Both share one and the same lodging/domicile and require space within the house of consciousness. The researcher therefore would like to verify through self-taste the epistemic claims on the mental phenomena of re-interpretation and express his findings this time by way of eclectic deconstruction.
In the Gift of Death, Derrida replaces the traditional notion of God with the incorporeal, radically individualistic element of personal existence, and in so doing likewise transfers the origin of responsibility from a dreadful encounter with the transcendent mysterium to an indiscernible (secret) encounter with the invisible within oneself. The Other is already inside, and has to be sheltered and welcomed in a certain way. We also have to negotiate the hospitality within ourselves - to this one in ourselves, to this image that might exclude this other one or be allergic to this other one. We know that someone who does not negotiate this hospitality in him or herself in a certain way cannot be hospitable to the Other, that is what the Greeks taught us, that you have to solve the problem within yourself, and it is already a society, a multiplicity of heterogeneous singularities, to be really smiling to the Other. If you are at war with yourself you may be allergic to the Other, that is what complicates the issue.84 Derridas obsession, in this philosophical narrative woven around that fine theme of hospitality, takes its time in drawing the contours of an impossible, illicit geography of proximity. A proximity that would not be the opposite of an elsewhere come from outside and surrounding it, but close to close, that unbearable orb of intimacy that melts into hate. If we can say that murder and hate designate everything that excludes closeness, it is insofar as they ravage from within an original relationship to alterity.85 Derrida's insistence on the conscience deriving from secret intimacies with the invisibility of one's own otherness leaves little basis from which one might argue for its binding relevance to behavior. At best, it seems, the conscience so defined might give rise to a mystical encounter with oneself.86
84

Geoffrey Bennington, Politics and Friendship: A Discussion with Jacques Derrida. Internet (1 December 1997 or 08/08/11/ 10 am):http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/pol+fr.html 85 Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, p. 4. 86 Scott David Foutz, Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death. Internet (01/14/12/7:38 pm): http://www.quodlibet.net/gift.shtml

51

Socrates, the mystic philosopher, said that the secret to being wise was to realize that we really do not know much. Everybody wants to think that what they believe is right, and they cling to the beliefs that they are familiar with, even when they do not fully understand the issues. It takes a great deal of humility to admit the limits of ones knowledge.87

The authentic self needs to reflect to open its own eye of illumination in order to comprehend the truth behind the stranger vis--vis hospitality (or hospitality vis--vis the stranger). But in order to arrive at the best possible rational conception of hospitality, the researcher will have to use a certain degree of discrimination in the choosing the possible from the impossible or from the not yet possible or from the absent or what has not yet arrived. This is so because deconstruction makes appear an impossibility that becomes its proper and sole possibility.88 The researcher however admits that such interpretation will never be neutral (the eclectic basis) as in all theories offering new rational ways of interpreting reality in order to promote a new way of responding to life that would lead to a new way of living: change begins with the self - to change the world, this change must first begin with our selves.
Deep within us all, emergent when the noise of other appetites is stilled, there is a drive to know, to understand, to see why, to discover the reason, to find the cause, to explain, to know the unknown. It is our curiosity which motivates us to investigate and study. It can demand endless sacrifices that are made without regret though there is only the hope, never a certain

Chapter 5: Shattering the Sacred Myths in Ancient Greek Philosophy. Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.evolutionary-metaphysics.net/ancient_greek_philosophy.html 88 JacquesDerrida (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Internet (08/12/11/4:00 am): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/derrida/

87

52

promise of success.89 All men by nature desire to know. Both Nyayan and Vaishesikan philosophical traditions under Hinduism claim that the supreme good results from knowledge.90 According to Aristotle, the highest good for man can be found in theoretical inquiry and in the contemplation of truth. This alone brings complete and continuous happiness because it is the activity of the highest part of mans complex nature.91

Thus, the researcher probes into the vastness of an unfathomable and infinite space we come to know as the realm of consciousness with the singular mission to possibly understand and unlock the unexplored portals of hospitality: What could be this satisfactory concept of rational hospitality for the Derridean stranger? What will make it desire-able? What is desire? 1. A Concise Survey of Desire To understand the force which moves rational men to action, the quest for motivation begins with Aristotles orexis. The Greek word orexis ( , , )

means desire or longing, from Oregomai which stands for an excitement of the mind. Eventually in De Anima, Aristotle concludes that practical reason and desire act corporately as the sources of purposive motion (De Anima iii 10, 433a9-16), even though, ultimately, it is desire whose objects prick practical intellect and set it in motion (De Anima iii 10, 433a172).92According to Aristotle:
Orexis is a reaching out, or desire, which supplies the human being with a premise of the good (pp. 304, 306). This premise of the good comes by way of the uniquely human awareness of itself David Opderbeck, Lonergan on the Desire to Know, Through a Glass Darkly. Internet (09/28/11): http://www.tgdarkly.com/blog/?p=2288 90 Sanderson Beck, Ethics of Hindu Philosophy. Internet (01/06/12/9:43 pm): http://san.beck.org/EC11-Hindu.html#1 91 Runes, Dictionary of Philosophy, Citadel Press, NY, 2001, p. 40. 92 Aristotles Psychology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Internet (12/26/11/8:30 pm): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-psychology/
89

53

through an awareness of its object of desire. When applied to the emotional faculty, this intentional awareness that contains a view of its object ultimately culminates in a reflexive view of itself as triggered by thoughts of its object.

Despite his rigid hierarchies in the categories of knowledge and his consistent obsession with paradigms of intellection, Aristotle did accept modes of understanding other than formal logic. This is best evinced in his theory of emotions as outlined in his Rhetoric. According to this formula, emotion is a phenomenon that is linked to concrete human existence while at the same time being fundamentally involved with cognition.
Prior to Aristotle, emotion was viewed as an entity naturally opposed to reason and conceived of as something hostile to thoughtful judgement. It was Aristotles contribution, to offer a very different view of emotion, so that emotional appeal would no longer be viewed as an extrarational enchantment (p. 18). Aristotle effected such a change in two ways. First of all, he emphasized the cognitive side of emotional response. By construing thought as a necessary condition of emotion, he showed that emotional response is intelligent behaviour based in human cognition; though not following the strict laws of formal logic, thought, as a necessary condition, opens emotion up to reason. Secondly, Aristotle based his theory of the emotions upon the uniquely human irrational part of the soul. As a part of the soul that is aware of its concrete existence, the uniquely human irrational as formulated by Aristotle gave him a platform from which to exposit emotion as a uniquely human complex that is simultaneously linked to the concrete and the cognitive. Aristotles project not only brought rhetoric as based on emotion into the realm of the reasonable, it opened up the circle of the reasonable to include an alternative form of perception and consciousness. This provided a model and a strong foundation for subsequent thinkers to reconsider paradigms of both thought and rhetoric in the perpetual quest to reconcile the rational with the concrete.93

i. The Desire To Know Thyself

We tend to underestimate the importance of knowing ourselves. Many of us go through each day reacting to events and just getting by rather than making conscious choices based on who we are and what we want. When we don't know where we are headed it's hard to set goals, get motivated and determine the best course of action. Before we can do any of these things we must establish who we are. Knowing and understanding ourselves better, in turn, leads to better decision-making,94 allows us to prioritize and set goals, and eventually, to have a meaningful and productive existence. It also helps us avoid major mistakes in life. Brian Ogren, Aristotles Rhetoric and the Cognition of Being: Human Emotions and the RationalIrrational Dialectic. Internet (http://www.ul.ie/~philos/vol8/aristotle.html 94 Know Yourself - Essential Life Skills. Internet (12/26/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.essentiallifeskills.net/knowyourself.html
93

54

Knowing ones self then is the first step towards authenticity. In this inner world shared by the self and the stranger within, the raw encounters could be described as an annoying experience marred by ignorance and perplexities which often leads to contradictions, chaos, confusion, violence, fear, anxiety and enmity. At this point, the researcher appropriates Mahatma Gandhis philosophical view and interpretation of Arjunas attitude in Bhagavad Gita from Hindu philosophy. According to Gandhi the battlefield is the soul, while Arjuna represents man's higher impulses struggling against evil. According to him, the text is not concerned with actual warfare so much as with the "battle that goes on within each individual heart"95 The encounter with the stranger within creates a dilemma and disturbs the status quo. Thus, in this metaphysics of the self, the arjunal self finally realizes that it would neither be ethical to disregard, to forget, nor to tame this stranger within: while it supposedly manifests symptoms of bestial tendencies, it is not a beast; it is simply the raw/unripe Other within. Rather than foisting a negative or indifferent attitude towards the guest from within, the self resolves this dilemma and negotiates by befriending the stranger; as a friend, the Self becomes the devoted good father-mother (the source) who will not feed its begotten child poison to eat; thus more aware and self-absorbed, through patience and fidelity (authenticity), the Self, thru a benevolent praxis of ascendancy, fosters an informed alliance and practices care to better understand the stranger that just grew from within. The stranger was begotten without the self having willed
95

Timothy Conway, Mahatma Gandhi and the Principles of Satyagraha/Truth-Force and Ahimsa/Nonviolence: Mahatma Gandhi, Life and Teachings. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.enlightened-spirituality.org/Mahatma_Gandhi.html

55

the affinity and procession thru a common umbilical line. The Other is already within the Self (akin to a thrown existence). If there is to be inner peace and harmony, the Other Within is to be understood, welcomed and sheltered as a practical response. Together, under the aegis of the host-self, they enter a firm partnership to brave the perils of the world; to find their rightful place under the sun; to discover the richer meaning of their shared destiny. One is the One! In the authentic subject, the experience culminates in a reflexive view of itself. The authentic subject is the one who desires to know ones self. The desire to know ones self gains access and space within when the Selfs present consciousness of the stranger is interrupted, suspended, and set aside as a certain kind of rupture through intentionality. The rupture provides the moratorium space to know ones self and eventually how to take care of ones self (constitutive). The researcher would like to demonstrate that the Delphic and Care dicta, together with their avowed goals of truth, wisdom, and perfection of the soul, reflect the initial signs of growth & progress in the long road to maturity in this quest for that best possible motivation behind hospitality (towards the font of and rationale behind hospitality). The edict of moratorium in turn summons the mind, the emotion, and the will to make a response to the oracle which puts into question the host-selfs dealing with his guest within: Is this the ethical way to treat your stranger-guest within? By what ethical principle should the relationship between the Host and Guest Within be governed? The silhouette stranger transmits a faint

56

pranic/vital message (through the umbilical line, through the kindred arteries and veins of self-awareness) for care, for hospitality.

ii. The Desire to Care for Ones Self In the Hellenistic and imperial periods, the Socratic notion of "taking care of oneself" became a common, universal philosophical theme. Care of the self was not an abstract advice but an extremely widespread activity, a network of obligations and services to the soul.96 Taking care of ones self is the first principle in Platonist philosophy. This means that knowledge of the self is only the consequence of caring for ones self.97
In Plato's Apology, Socrates presents himself before his judges as a master of epimeleia heautou. You are not ashamed to care for the acquisition of wealth and for reputation and honor, he tells them, but you do not concern yourselves with yourselves, that is, with wisdom, truth and the perfection of the soul. He, on the other hand, watches over the citizens to make sure they occupy themselves with themselves. Socrates says three important things with regard to his invitation to others to occupy themselves with themselves: (1) His mission was conferred on him by the gods, and he won't abandon it except with his last breath. (2) For this task he demands no reward; he is disinterested; he performs it out of benevolence. (3) His mission is useful for the city more useful than the Athenians military victory at Olympia - because in teaching people to occupy themselves with themselves, he teaches them to occupy themselves with the city.98

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle considers philia to be both necessary as a means to happiness and noble or fine in itself (1155a56). Aristotle describes philia as a form of love for another and explains that in order to feel the highest form of philia for another,

L. H. Martin, Michel Foucault, Technologies of the Self. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.foucault.info/documents/foucault.technologiesOfSelf.en.html 97 L. H. Martin, Michel Foucault, Technologies of the Self. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm): 98 L. H. Martin, Michel Foucault, Technologies of the Self. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm):

96

57

one must feel it for oneself; the object of philia is, after all, "another oneself."99 Thus for Aristotle self-love is compatible with love of others (1168b1719, 1168b2527).
The good person must be a self-lover, since he will both help himself and benefit others by performing fine actions. But the vicious person must not love himself, since he will harm both himself and his neighbors by following his base feelings (1169a1215).100

Eight centuries later, one finds that Christian self-denial/asceticism, like ancient philosophy, places itself under the same sign of concern with oneself. The obligation to know the self is one of the elements of its central preoccupation.
Between these two extremes - Socrates and Gregory of Nyssa - taking care of oneself constituted not only a principle but also a constant practice. Epicurus writes that it is never too early, never too late, to occupy oneself with one's soul. One should philosophize when one is young and also when one is old. It was a task to be carried on throughout life. Teachings about everyday life were organized around taking care of oneself in order to help every member of the group with the mutual work of salvation. Michel Foucault interpreted care for self as a form of Technology of the Self, as a self-formation technique to refashion ones life like a Greek work of art the art of living. For Foucault, Technology of the Self is a creative exercise of a positive form of power. After living a sexually active gay life which led to Aids, Foucault advised moderation and lived the remainder of his days cultivating friendship in the most meaningful way he could.101

From the foregoing texts, we recognize the notion that it is not selfish to focus on care and concern for self and is most often associated with some form of altruism. We also observe that care for self is connected with knowing ones self and involves the truth about ones self and the obligation to be honest with our selves. 2. On the Wings of Kardia (
)

With all your mind, with all your heart, and with all your strength

In the attempt to fully comprehend the significance behind the twin axioms (knowing and caring for the self), the reflexive Self turns to Kardia a creature of
Steven Luper-Foy and Curtis Brown, The Moral Life, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, USA, 1992, pp. 33-36. 100 Philia. Internet (12/27/11/12:30 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philia 101 L. H. Martin, Michel Foucault, Technologies of the Self. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm):
99

58

deconstruction from the Hebraic traditions combined with a Hegelian-Kierkegaardian approach plus a touch of authenticity from Heidegger to help find the motivating force behind unconditional hospitality.
The ideas presented here have, perhaps, in one form or another and at some point of time, crossed the thoughts of many, for they are reflections on the very nature of our being. Having been left deeply unsatisfied with the attempted objectivation of a phenomenon that is irreducibly subjective, I leave here my own account of what is, to me, the necessary fact of my being. The mediations presented here are, I feel, what transcend the physical facts about the objective world, and are, therefore, independent from them. They cannot logically be refuted, nor can they undermine anything that our scientific enquiry is capable of providing us. Given the inaccessibility of my subjective self to others, one may treat my ideas as mystical speculations. However, since they are reflections on the phenomenon that is my incontrovertible first-person existence, they are, to me, the absolute truth about my consciousness.102

In a moment of intense meditation, the self-absorbed Subject under this Metaphysics of the Self summons the mind, the emotions, and the will to cooperate in this newfound cognitive enterprise to ponder and find out what gives delight, what gives pleasure, what would motivate men to practice unconditional welcoming, that would possibly help define a more satisfactory and more rational conception of unconditional hospitality, and thus also help discover the appropriate ethical response to strangers.
In English, the term heart is seen as the seat of emotion or kindness (i.e. good-hearted, coldhearted, soft-hearted, hard-hearted or broken-hearted). In Hebrew, the term "heart" has a broader meaning, going beyond the meaning held by Western culture, to include the thoughts and logic of a person. In contrast, English considers the term mind to represent the seat of thought. It is for this reason that there is no Hebrew term for the English word mind. In the Old Testament, the word heart is always used figuratively; in fact it was mentioned over 800 times in the bible, but never referred to the physical pump that drives the blood in the body. The Hebrew people see the heart as the source of ones inner self, the seat of emotion, understanding, volitional will and conscience. Thus, the heart can think, understand and be intentional. Jewish thought understood that human nature had a complex and intertwined quality. Despite the development of human language for the purpose of precise communication, the Bible and the subtle nuances of Hebrew language affirm the complexity of both the material and non-material aspects of human
102

Hane Htut Maung, Consciousness: An Enquiry into the Metaphysics of the Self, Lulu Press,USA,2006,p. 9

59

nature.It was only during the New Testament times when the richness of the Greek language came in to indicate with clarity and distinguish the heart from the mind. Unlike the Hebrew language, the Greek language had a word equivalent for mind, which distinguishes it from the heart.103

The researcher proposes that Kardia represent the essence, the spirit, the substance, the very core of ones being: the central network, the processing center of the mind-will-emotion; the heart of the matter, and could also be the what is of ones inner identity. The Stranger may be viewed as a frequent visitor and stays in this lodge as a guest. The host-self or True Self may, in order to maintain/preserve its power to host negotiates just terms and conditions (based on Derridas non-exclusionary notion of justice). The host self is animated by genuine friendship par excellence (alterity) to define the extent/limits of hospitality during the strangers temporary occupancy of this lodge (Aristotles philia of the first kind: also described by Derrida as friendship within the family). The stranger-guest within is treated as a member of the family. Under this deconstructive approach, the Kardia would therefore mean many things other than the physical heart. In metaphysical terms, it is the incorporeal which is the consciousness itself that is associated with the mind, will, and feelings. Because of this association with the mind, the will and the emotion, the Kardia could also be understood as the causative, activating, or essential principle which animates the Self. It is the heart of the matter which includes the past and present thoughts and the logic or reasons. Kardia is the cause of the purposive activity: the activity of developing toward self-consciousness,

103

The Material Aspect of Humanity Heart and Mind. Internet (01/06/12/9:57 pm): http://helpmewithbiblestudy.org/7Humans/EssenceHeartMind.aspx

60

freedom, truth, etc that generates comprehension. It is the conveyor and the vessel which bears the inputs that defines our thoughts, our feelings, our intentions and our drives which contribute to help define our personality. It is the what-is of our inner identity, the true self as it in fact is. The relating self is identified through its Kardia even as the Kardia provides the inner identity; hence, Kardia denotes the essential nature of the self and the very core of ones personality our Kardia tells us who we really are. The spirit penetrates/pierces through the Kardia to read the purity of our thoughts and intentions.
It would be a mistake to suppose that our present ideals, in which thinking is separated from feeling, are rooted once and for all in mans nature; or even that the organization of our thinking is set for all time in the rational hemisphere of the brain.104

There will always be this self-interpretation (self-taste105) and this interpretation by the self of the objects of its thoughts. And no matter how it is interpreted (whether from an objective or subjective angle), it will never be a neutral interpretation. It will only be a question of proximity which is processed within the central network (Kardia) where the will, the mind, and the emotions inter-act. The human soul is not a machine that appears to be interpreting without emotions (machines function in accordance with a logic built into the program). The dangers therefore of the so-called scientific thinking (objectivity) is to preach a fiction in human logic and promote how to think like machines/computers instead of how to think as humans.106 Let us consider for a moment how one can suddenly explode in
104

105

Suzi Gablik, The Re-enchantment of Art, Thames and Hudson Inc., USA, 1991, pp. 56-57. Mark Ziomislic, Derridas turn to Franciscans Philosophy. Internet (December 2008.pdf): http://www.kritike.org/journal/issue 4/zlomislic 106 The same holds true with some philosophy which promotes how to think more like other animal species rather than as human specie. Today we are slowly being eaten up by computer logic at the expense of interpersonal skills in the cultivation of human relationship.

61

laughter or in tears or in anger, or could even get a heart attack after reading the contents of a letter or newspaper; while the same missive may not evoke the same response from another person). Kardia is the spirit and this spirit is the truth about the Self. Bertrand Russell, more or less, confirms this potential for harmonious and coordinated function:
The mind which has become accustomed to the freedom and impartiality of philosophic contemplation will preserve something of the same freedom and impartiality in the world of action and emotion. It will view its purposes and desires as parts of the whole, with the absence of insistence that results from seeing them as infinitesimal fragments in a world of which all the rest is unaffected by any one man's deeds. The impartiality which, in contemplation, is the unalloyed desire for truth, is the very same quality of mind which, in action, is justice, and in emotion is that universal love which can be given to all, and not only to those who are judged useful or admirable. Thus contemplation enlarges not only the objects of our thoughts, but also the objects of our actions and our affections: it makes us citizens of the universe, not only of one walled city at war with all the rest. In this, citizenship of the universe consists man's true freedom and his liberation from the thralldom of narrow hopes and fears.107 In fact, Brentano claims that all mental phenomena exhibit intentionality. The drastic distinction between inner world and outer world was most popularized by Ren Descartes when he solidified his principle of Cartesian dualism.108

The Self has the potential towards knowledge, towards the truth about human existence, towards self-actualization, through its self-consciousness. In other words, the self becomes object to itself and comes to know itself to be this object. It becomes self-consciously, selfthinking thought. It is conscious (a) of itself as its own world and (b) of the world as perceived by the self (Kierkegaardian-Hegelian):
Actuality of ones authenticity always involves the unity of the mind, the will and the emotion. Kardia itself is the freedom to overcome the distinctions that waters down the true significance of the mind, the will, and the emotion. It is also that existential freedom which allows the thinking self to entertain possibilities to become the authentic Homo Sapiens-in-the-world and that authentic Being-towards-Death (from the authentic Heideggerian Being). It is the

107

Bertrand Russell, Value of Philosophy, in Nigel Warburton, Philosophy: Basic Readings, Routledge, USA 2005, p.28. 108 Philosophy of the Mind Internet (12/26/11/3:34 pm):http://www.en.com/wiki/Philosophy_of_the_Mind/

62

freedom that allows the self-absorbed self to become that authentic Being-in-and-for-Itself (in essence and in actuality), that Being-for-Another (perceptibility).109

To see beyond the individuals perspective is to engage with the world from a participating consciousness (Gabliks terminology) rather than an observing one.
The mode of distanced, objective knowing, removed from moral and social responsibility is now proving to be something of an evolutionary dead-end. Objectivity strips away emotion, wants only facts and is detached from feeling. Objectivity serves as a distancing device, offering the illusion of impregnable strength, certainty and control. Becoming uniquely ourselves need not be framed through the model of the separate Cartesian ego.110 In fact, Aristotles project on rhetoric opened alternative forms of perception and consciousness.111

CHAPTER IV THE ATTEMPT AT DECONSTRUCTION A. Dismantling the Self in the World of Perfect Joy
Derrida's aim is to establish the priority of self sacrifice as grounded not upon utilitarian grounds but upon its status as radically individualistic gift. What is given and this would also represent a kind of death is not some thing, but goodness itself, a giving goodness, the act of giving or the donation of the gift.112

Children, who grew up under the Catholic tradition, usually look forward to the yuletide season not only because of this over-all atmosphere of goodness, but also because it is a time to receive something new a Christmas gift. In restless anticipation, many are in the habit of trying to decode the mysterium, trying to guess what is inside the gift. During more serious moments, we try to ponder what would be the best gift we could offer For Derrida, the Gift is that boundless parameter within which all deconstruction takes place and
109

Carl Mickelsen, Hegel Glossary. Internet (12/23/11/11:25pm): http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/texts/Hegel%20Glossary.htm 110 Suzi Gablik, The Re-enchantment of Art, p. 178. 111 Brian Ogren, Aristotles Rhetoric and the Cognition of Being: Human Emotions and the RationalIrrational Dialectic. Internet, http://www.ul.ie/~philos/vol8/aristotle.html David Wills (trans.), The Gift of Death and Literature in Secret, p.41.

112

63

progresses.113 It speaks of a kind of responsibility which Derrida describes as the Gift of Death
J. R. R. Tolkien gives reality a new twist by writing in the form of myth. Love turns death into a gift and transforms defeat into victory. His mythology deconstructs the world around him, turns it upside down, and presents it in an entirely new light. It becomes a world in which faith without faith becomes faith, hope without hope becomes hope, and myth becomes more real than reality. The catalyst for this free play of words and meanings, the element that allows things to turn around and reverse themselves, is love. Love defines the ultimate use of deconstruction and love allows myth to invade the reality of this world and become fact. In Tolkien's work, love motivates faith to reach beyond the boundaries of the known, to rekindle hope in the midst of the uncertain.114

Joseph Campbell claims that mythology is no toy for children:

When we are invited to join the object of our fear in the other world of myth, the transformation of the personality becomes a living experience, and we encounter something that cannot be received on the theoretical basis, or controlled by rational explanation. When this happens, ancient forms of consciousness begin to acquire an importance and meaning beyond the purely historical, as we discover them within our own psyche.115

John Caputo explains the function of deconstruction in this manner:

"Deconstruction gives old texts new readings, old traditions new twists. It urges that regularizing structures and normalizing institutions everything from literature to democracy function more freely, more open-endedly."116

a. The Poverellian Deconstruction of Perfect Joy One winter day St. Francis was coming to St. Mary of the Angels from Perugia with Brother Leo, and the bitter cold made them suffer keenly. St. Francis called to Brother Leo, who was walking a bit ahead of him, and he said:
Brother Leo, even if the Friars Minor in every country give a great example of holiness and integrity and good edification, nevertheless write down and note carefully that perfect joy is not in that.

And when he had walked on a bit, St. Francis called him again, saying:

113

Scott David Foutz, Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death. Internet (01/14/12/7:38 pm): http://www.quodlibet.net/gift.shtml 114 Anne Marie Gazzolo, The Measure ofLove. Internet (01/14/12/9:08 pm): http://momentsofgracelotr.com/The-Measure-of-Love.htm 115 Suzi Gablik, The Reenchantment of Art, Thames and Hudson Inc., USA, 1991, p. 49. 116 Project MUSE Tolkien Studies Love: The Gift of Death. Internet (01/15/12/ 11:43am): http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/tolkien_studies/v002/2.1greenwood.html

64

Brother Leo, even if a Friar Minor gives sight to the blind, heals the paralyzed, drives out devils, gives hearing back to the deaf, makes the lame walk, and restores speech to the dumb, and what is still more, brings back to life a man who has been dead four days, write that perfect joy is not in that.

And going on a bit, St. Francis cried out again in a strong voice:
Brother Leo, if a Friar Minor knew all languages and all sciences and Scripture, if he also knew bow to prophesy and to reveal not only the future but also the secrets of the consciences and minds of others, write down and note carefully that perfect joy is not in that.

And as they walked on, after a while St. Francis called again forcefully:
Brother Leo, Little Lamb of God, even if a Friar minor could speak with the voice of an angel, and knew the courses of the stars and the powers of herbs, and knew all about the treasures in the earth, and if he knew the qualities of birds and fishes, animals, humans, roots, trees, rocks, and waters, write down and note carefully that true joy is not in that.

And going on a bit farther, St. Francis called again strongly:

Brother Leo, even if a Friar Minor could preach so well that he should convert all infidels to the faith of Christ, write that perfect joy is not there.

Now when he had been talking this way for a distance of two miles, Brother Leo in great amazement asked him: "Father, I beg you in God's name to tell me where perfect joy is. And St. Francis replied:
When we come to St. Mary of the Angels, soaked by the rain and frozen by the cold, all soiled with mud and suffering from hunger, and we ring at the gate of the Place and the brother porter comes and says angrily: 'Who are you?' And we say: 'We are two of your brothers.' And he contradicts us, saying: 'You are not telling the truth. Rather you are two rascals who go around deceiving people and stealing what they give to the poor. Go away! And he does not open for us, but makes us stand outside in the snow and rain, cold and hungry, until night falls-then if we endure all those insults and cruel rebuffs patiently, without being troubled and without complaining, and if we reflect humbly and charitably that that porter really knows us and that God makes him speak against us, oh, Brother Leo, write that perfect joy is there! And if we continue to knock and the porter comes out in anger, and drives us away with curses and hard blows like bothersome scoundrels, saying: Get away from here; you dirty thieves-go to the hospital! Who do you think you are? You certainly would not eat or sleep here!--and if we bear it patiently and take the insults with joy and love in our hearts, Oh, Brother Leo, write that that is perfect joy! And if later, suffering intensely from hunger and the painful cold, with night falling, we still knock and call, and crying loudly beg them to open for us and let us come in for the love of God, and he grows still more angry and says: 'Those fellows are bold and shameless ruffians. I will give them what they deserve.' And he comes out with a knotty club, and grasping us by the cowl throws us onto the ground, rolling us in the mud and snow, and beats us with that club so much that he covers our bodies with wounds -- if we endure all those evils and insults and blows with joy and patience, reflecting that we must accept and bear the sufferings of the Blessed Christ patiently for love of Him, oh, Brother Leo, write: that is perfect joy! And now hear the conclusion, Brother Leo. Above all the graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit which Christ gives to His friends is that of conquering

65

oneself and willingly enduring sufferings, insults, humiliations, and hardships for the love of Christ. For we cannot glory in all those other marvelous gifts of God, as they are not ours but God's, as the Apostle says: 'What have you that you have not received?' But we can glory in the cross of tribulations and afflictions, because that is ours, and so the Apostle says: 'I will not glory save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. To whom be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.117

Giving to others is rooted in the scriptural idea that to those whom much is given, much will be expected; giving is, in the Catholic social tradition, rooted in justice. Those who have more than they need also have an obligation to share with neighbors whose basic needs are not being met. Still, at the heart of this paradox is not justice, but love.
And love asks not that we give of our excess only, but rather that we give everything we have, even unto death. It is the message of the Cross that the Love that saved the world gave unto death. And when we are baptized, we enter into this death, as St. Paul says. We have died to the world, so that we may live for Christ.118

b. A Concise Survey of Happiness And its Paradoxes

Down through the ages, philosophers and poets, politicians and theologians, friends and strangers have argued about the nature of happiness. They have not been able to settle on what happiness is exactly, but that has not kept them from chasing it down. In the final analysis, happiness may be a lot easier to experience than to define.119 And yet, more than 2,000 years ago, there was a man who had enough wisdom and psychology to understand the fundamental question and the thinking ways of men. This exemplary man taught that the key to life is in the praxis of the heart and not just the mind (knowledge) alone; thus, he encouraged his followers to practice what he preached with their entire mind-will-emotion. He also advised his people to set aside their worldly concerns; instead they were encouraged to seek first a regime(n) of justice (Gods righteousness as a way of life), with the cryptic assurance to attend to what man really yearns and thirsts for in their hearts (Matt 6:33). It was a promise of inner tranquility and perfect joy! Be still he assures to soothe us, do not be afraid there is no cause to fear and tremble.

One of the tragic distortions today under western metaphysical thinking is the way selfinterest has been presented without bothering to make distinctions. The cobwebs of western
Raphael Brown (trans.), Little flower of St. Francis, in Marion Habig (ed.), St. Francis of Assisi, Writings and Early Biograpies: English Omnibus of the Sources for the Life of St. Francis, Franciscans Herald Press, Chicago, USA, 1973, pp. 1319-1320. 118 PerfectJoy.Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://www.archden.org/index.cfm/ID/2980 119 Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3616709/The-quest-for-happiness-down.html
117

66

metaphysical thoughts have undermined a wholesome search for happiness from a clean slate. Unlike in the East, contemporary Western thinkers identified mans self-interest as the Ego and eventually gave self-interest a bad name. In the West, we cannot anymore talk about self-interest and self-interestedness without their narcissistic and pejorative connotations and is therefore something that is ethically inappropriate. Ego has become an evil within. Yet, as if to confirm the Amnesia among western-trained thinkers, Aristotle did preach that it was perfectly alright to love ones self and made clear distinctions between two kinds of self-love (1168b1719).120 Long before Derrida, there was Aristotle who already formulated the concept philia translated as friendship in a broader sense.
In fact, Derrida also adopted Aristotles three (3) categories of friendship. In his circuitous attempt to come up with an ideal notion of justice in the political arena, Derrida sought Aristotles understanding of philia in order to reconceive the ideal of justice based on that kind of alterity that is found in brotherhood and friendship par excellence as an indispensable and constitutive element of hospitality. For Epicurus, the purpose of philosophy was to attain the happy tranquil life and proposed living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends.

The Stoics think of philosophy not as an interesting pastime or even a particular body of knowledge but as a way of life. They define philosophy as a kind of practice or exercise (asksis) in the expertise concerning what is beneficial (Aetius, 26A).
According to Stoic philosophers, happiness is a good flow of life, "the sum of all good; for the sake of which everything is done. To live a happy life is to lead a virtuous life. A virtuous life in accordance with nature is a happy life (Zeno). One must live in accordance with nature in order to be happy. To reach the end is to reach happiness. Here, the perfection of reason is thus also important because it is the means to find that peaceful and tranquil life which is the purpose of ones nature (the good life); and by doing so, man attains happiness. Without reason, such concern for orderliness, moderation, and seemliness may not be achieved and thus peace and tranquility may cease to exist.121 According to Plato, a happy life consists in moral actions flowing forth from a virtuous character. True happiness, according to Plato, is found only in the

120 121

Philia. Internet (01/15/12/ 1:03 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philia Jennylene San Diego, The Stoic and the Epicurean Philosophy on the Good Life. Internet (01/15/12/ 1:03 pm): http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/uc_bakaoukas4d1.htm

67

performance of one's own duty.122Happiness is an objective quality and is equated with moral and intellectual virtue. For Plato it is crucial that the rational element must rule over appetite and spirit in order to attain happiness and well-being.123Aristotle describes eudaimonia as the telos the ultimate end and purpose of human existence (Nicomachean Ethics). It is a goal and not just a temporary state and therefore one cannot really make any pronouncements about whether one has lived a happy life until it is over. Hence, the celebrated adage attributed to the Greek statesman Solon: "Call no man happy until he is dead."124 For Aristotle, happiness is the perfection of human nature. Since man is a rational being, human happiness depends on the exercise of his reason in an excellent manner. Thus Aristotle concludes that the human function is to utilize in an excellent manner the part of the soul that requires intellectual contemplation because this is the ultimate realization of our rational capacities (the use of reason). Thus among all virtues, the excellence of the perfected cognitive activity is the pleasantest. Unfortunately, Aristotle, the first taxonomist of emotions, describes eudaimonia simply as an activity rather than an emotion or a state.125By introducing happiness as a concept by which we should evaluate ourselves, Aristotle has virtually made happiness an elusive goaland in this way this happiness has created its own discontent (56-57, 60).126

In the East, the pursuit of bliss has always been conducted in the context of religion. For the mystics, bliss is a religious/spiritual experience of transcendental joy characterized either by their union with Ultimate Reality or the realization of ones true mind. As a mental state (state of consciousness), the researcher agrees that we have to first distinguish between positive self-interests (Atman, the true self; the Greater Self, the moral self) and negative self-interests (Annata, the not-self; the Lesser Self, the physiological self). Focus on the atman is self-edifying; while focus on the annata is self-destructive. Atleast, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Mill tried to distinguish between happiness and pleasure as objects of desire; in

122

Plato and AristotleInternet (01/15/12/ 1:19 pm): http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/ancientlandmarks/PlatoAndAristotle.html 123 Achieving Happiness: More Advice from Plato.Internet (01/15/12/ 2:09 pm): http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ethics-everyone/201009/achieving-happiness-more-advice-plato 124 Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3616709/The-quest-for-happiness-down.html 125 The connection between eudaimonia and happiness is indirect, in Jonathan Barnes, Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 2000, p. 124. 126 Work Without Dread: Metaphysics of Happiness. Internet (01/15/12/ 3:09 pm): http://workwithoutdread.blogspot.com/2007/10/metaphysics-of-happiness.html

68

the same way, why should the West not make a distinction between positive and negative self-interests?
In the East, there are two great phases in the education of every contemplative: and they are called in the language of the mystics, the purification of the senses and the purification of the will. This purification of the senses is the Deconstruction of the Cognition, while the purification of the will is the Deconstruction of the Self. Both are achieved through Meditation.127Deconstruction or Dismantling of the Self or the abnegation of the self is a standard part of every bliss-seeking tradition. For them bliss is the final goal of the spiritual life. They recommend that one should live in a state of contentment, joy, and praise, even as one pursues the path to ultimate bliss. According to their philosophy, various degrees of happiness are discerned, depending upon the level of one's spiritual awareness. The highest level is attained only with the complete cessation of self-centered desires and denial of self in relation to the Absolute. They also assert that heavenly joys are in every way superior to mundane pleasures; a heart filled with bliss is itself a prerequisite for realizing higher, more refined states of divine happiness. Still, some eastern thinkers would even like to distinguish happiness, joy, and bliss according to the level of energies involved: thus, Joy is beyond Happiness, and Bliss exceeds the combined energies of both Happiness and Joy. 128

As a philosophy, Hinduism is the union between reason and intuition. Hinduism has sought to recognize principles and practices that would lead any individual to become a better human being and live in harmony with dharma (the right way of living or the eternal law).
Vedanta has been a word to describe a group of philosophical traditions concerned with the selfrealization by which one understands the ultimate nature of reality (Brahman).129 The practice of Dharma leads to the attainment of the Moksha (the highest of all desirable things) where the practitioner experiences peace, joy, strength and tranquility within himself. His life becomes thoroughly disciplined. His powers and capacities are exceedingly intensified. He realizes that there is one underlying homogeneous essence, a living truth, behind these names and forms. He is transmuted into divinity. His whole nature gets transformed. He becomes one with the Eternal. He beholds Brahman pervading the whole world. Real happiness comes from
127

David E. Cortesi, Secular Wholeness: A Skeptic's Paths to a Richer Life, Trafford Publishing, USA, 2001, pp. 97-101. 128 Defining Happiness, Joy & Bliss - 3 Different Energies Internet (01/15/12/ 3:29 pm): http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=3624 129 In a nutshell, Brahman is formless, infinite and eternal. All reality has its source in Brahman. It is the material and efficient cause of creation. Brahman is all knowing and it is knowledge itself. The supreme good results from knowledge. Hinduism seeks to overcome the illusory world through knowledge and intuition. According to Vedanta, the highest aim of existence is the realization of the identity or union of the individuals Innermost Self (atman) with the Ultimate Reality (Brahman). Brahman could therefore be construed as the experience of bliss. Hindu Dharma-Veda. Internet (01/15/12/ 4:29 pm): http://veda.wikidot.com/hinduism

69

detachment from all needs. The main aim of detachment is to liberate the self through meditation (Zen). Zen practitioners, who have meditated for a long time, realize their connection to the larger whole. They maintain that the happiest people are those who lose their self-consciousness and merge with some larger purpose or activity - when we transcend the normal boundaries of our selves and become part of something larger (the continuum experience). Anand (Bliss) means perfect joy, enjoyment of divine power or heavenly joy. It is the state of mind of the householder who performs his duties keeping his mind absorbed in contemplation all the time and remaining in a state of perpetual bliss or anand. In Sikhism, anand means spiritual happiness. It is non-physical and non-material character. It is a spiritual state of the soul where all kinds of needs and requirements are fulfilled: the person who is internally detached from the physical world and still continues to discharge all his responsibilities towards his family and other human beings attains a state of bliss (Pauri 4-7, p. 917). He lives in the world, conducts all the social activities, and serves his fellow beings to the best of his capacity. He enjoys the comforts, but does not get lost in the pleasures. This is the attitude of detachment of a person who lives in the world but still remains cut off from the evil effects of the worldly attractions of maya (illusion). The soul is (1) misled by matter, and (2) subsequently entangled and entrapped. This tendency is the maya. Only in goodness does the soul begin to develop wisdom to see things in the real light. Thus, enlightenment means moving away from tamas (ignorance) towards sattva (illumination of knowledge). By so doing, the soul gradually escapes the clutches of maya and moves towards liberation. However, without the Gurus blessing, it is impossible to attain Anand.

After having nearly starved himself to death, Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha or Enlightened/Awakened One) realized that extreme forms of self-denial did not work and later discovered a path of moderation called the Middle Way to attain Enlightenment.
The Buddha is only a guide and a teacher of the Eightfold path that leads to spiritual awakening. The journey to attain a deeper form of happiness requires an unflinching look into the face of a reality where all life is seen as dukkha or mental dysfunction. Nibbana or Nirvana (everlasting peace) is that state of deliverance from all suffering and sorrow. Ultimate Happiness is only achieved by overcoming craving (ill-desire) in all form. The doctrine of not-self (anatta) is central to Buddhism: the physical body cannot be a permanent, trustworthy self because it is finite, mutable, and failure-prone. If we identify "self" with the body (the flesh), then we do not only set our Self up in the pursuit of desire-driven pleasures for the body (which could lead to hedonism, selfishness, greed, exploitation and domination); we also set our Self up for an identity crisis (which could lead to mental disorders and suicides).

The starting point of Confucian philosophy is the daily duty to cultivate our closest loving relationships (filial piety) - the expression of happiness. Happiness is not just a matter of self-interest; it is to be created and performed in a social context.
The Chinese Confucian thinker, Mencius, taught that a person will experience intoxicating joy if one celebrates the practice of the great virtues, especially through music. He was convinced that the mind played a mediating role between the "lesser self" (the physiological self) and the "greater self" (the moral self) and that getting the priorities right between these two would lead

70

to sage-hood. He argued that if we did not feel satisfaction or pleasure in nourishing one's "vital force" with "righteous deeds", that force would shrivel up (Mencius,6A:15, 2A:2).

For Zhuangzi, ultimate happiness is nothing but Wu Wei, the skill of doing nothing against the Way (Dao). Zhuangzi draws a clear distinction between two kinds of happiness:
Most people value wealth, fame, and physical comfort, through delicious tastes, beautiful colors, attractive clothing and music. Once they dip their toes in these fleeting joys, they try to obtain more, and become uneasy if they cannot do so. The Dao, a mysterious power which fills the cosmos and is reflected in the workings of nature, is the source of a much deeper form of happiness.130 Thus, for Zhuang Zi "perfect joy is to be without joy." This means that there is joy in life in simply being oneself, in letting things be, not in striving for it. Contentment and wellbeing become possible the moment you cease to act with them in view, and if you practice nondoing wu-wei, you will have both happiness and well-being. There is no need to strive for happiness because happiness is already there in nature, in what is natural and spontaneous, in the dao which is not a thing, but the One, the whole. More than just letting things be, avoiding striving for happiness is the positive movement of resting in serenity (in tranquility). We humans dwell in the midst of nature and are part of the Dao itself, only need to harness this power. This is done through the practice of wuwei, which Zhuangzi often refers to as the skill of going along with things, or as we say nowadays, going with the flow. Unless one frees oneself from the cares of the world, one cannot be tranquil in dao, one cannot free oneself from the cares of the world, for it is our rational mind that has led us away from the intuitive Dao. It is precisely in the recognition that we cannot control our fates, and yielding to that reality, that contentment will be found. Zhuangzi's philosophy is skeptical, arguing that life is limited and knowledge to be gained is unlimited; to use the limited to pursue the unlimited, he said, was foolish. To be happy is to cease being concerned with things and to embrace the One, the dao, who is silent and tranquil.131

In Catholicism, the ultimate (eschatological) end of human existence consists in felicity (Latin equivalent to the Greek eudaimonia), or "blessed happiness", described by the 13thcentury philosopher-theologian Thomas Aquinas as a Beatific Vision of God's essence in the next life.
The eschatological tradition which is centered upon the so-called Last Things is profoundly anthropological but above all, it is centered on Christ and the Trinity. The Union with God is realized in the Beatific Vision of the Divine Being face to-face (1Cor 13:12). Meeting God face-to-face is to encounter the mystery of the living God face-to-face and experience the interior life of God, that is, to know Gods divine nature. The knowledge of God face-to-face is the knowledge of God as God (1Cor 13:12); for we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).
130

Zhuangzi -Pursuit of Happiness. Internet (12/22/11/ 2:34 pm): http://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/zhuangzi/ 131 Manuel B. Dy, CHAPTER XIX: ZHUANG ZI'S PERFECT JOY: An Answer to the Contemporary Predicament? Internet (10/29/11/1:20 pm):http://www.crvp.org/book/Series03/III-11/chapter_xix.htm

71

Divinization is the Lambs Gift of Self to His Bride. As the fullness of Good, God is the fullness of life. And this is eternal life because it has no limits in time and space. Happiness springs from the knowledge of the truth, from the vision of God face to face, from sharing in His life. This happiness is so profoundly a part of mans deepest aspiration. This closing is the fulfillment of mans desire which was from the very beginning written in mans heart and stamped in his body as male and female. Christ, who became man, shares the same sentiment and yearning with the rest of humanity that is why he wants everyone to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth so that we may experience the fullness of life (1 Tm. 2:4) to have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10).132

Contemporary Western thinkers have a variety of notable approaches to explain the concept of happiness:
Augustine wrote: the ultimate goal of all human endeavors lies in happiness. Happiness, man can receive but not by satisfaction of goods of this world. Lasting happiness is possible only by living in God. John Locke claims that the desire for happiness is a natural law that is implanted into us by God and motivates everything we do. For Jeremy Bentham, founder of classical utilitarianism, happiness is the greatest good, but rejects feelings/emotions as unreliable moral determinants and goals of actions. He also opposes self-denial/asceticism because it opposes the natural influences of pleasure and pain. Mill equated happiness with pleasure but postulates that higher pleasures of the mind are better than lower pleasures of the body. His Greatest Happiness Principle holds that the more pleasure and the least pain an action causes, the better it is morally, and so: Seek the greatest good for the greatest number. For Kant, virtue is neither necessary nor sufficient for happiness - the slipperiness of happiness meant that it could never be a reliable guide to evaluating moral action.133Hegel is convinced that happiness is simply not a useful category of inquiry: history does not produce happiness; history is not the soil in which happiness grows. Sigmund Freud maintained that happiness is "something essentially subjective."Agreeing with William James that the desire for happiness is a universal impulse, Freud stressed that this impulse is nonetheless so idiosyncratic and opaque as to be hidden in most cases from the outside observer. If we acknowledge that happiness itself is an idea, and a powerful one at that, it should not surprise us, for example, that Marx and Engels considered happiness to be an integral part of their system, nothing less than the solution to the riddle of history. "The overcoming of religion as the illusory happiness of the people," Marx observed "is the demand for their real happiness." Alas, what "real happiness" might actually entail is never revealed by Marx. But what is revealing, at least when it comes to treating happiness as a historical concept, is his insistence that we can attain it on our own, in the space once occupied by God. Marquis de Sades ethics of pain holds that the pursuit of pain, or imposing it, may be just as useful and as pleasurable, and that this indeed is the purpose of the state - to indulge the desire to inflict pain in revenge, for instance, via the law (in his time most punishment was in fact the dealing out of pain). Nietzsche wrote much about the meaning of pain as it relates to the meaning of life in general. Among his more famous quotes are related to pain:"Did you ever say yes to a pleasure? Oh my friends, then you also said yes to all pain. All things are linked, Christopher West, Theology of the Body Explained: A Commentary on John Paul II's Gospel of the Body, Ascension Press, USA, 2004, pp. 242-270. 133 Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3616709/The-quest-for-happiness-down.html
132

72

entwined, in love with one another. What is good? Everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, is power itself; what is bad? Everything that is born of weakness; what is happiness? The feeling that power increases - that a resistance is overcome(from The Anti-Christ). German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer taught pessimism as a way to overcome illusion and attain happiness. On Joy and Sorrow, Kahlil Gibran remarks: Your joy is your sorrow unmasked: when you are joyous, look deep into your heart and you shall find it is only that which has given you sorrow that is giving you joy. When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight (The Prophet, 1923). According to Soren Kierkegaard, man, as a physical being, is always turned toward the outside, thinking that his happiness lies outside him, but finally turns inward and discovers that the source is within him. In The Happiness Hypothesis, Jonathan Haidt claimed that psychologically, it had been shown that a person has in his brain an area for experiences of God. Haidt observes that the enlightened person is happier than an unenlightened one. An atheist himself, Haidt also believes that religion makes one happy, if not lived too dogmatic and intolerantly. American philosopher Robert Nozick in Anarchy, State, and Utopia revealed that hedonistic pleasure is not the ultimate goal of human life, and that happiness or "the good life" therefore requires more than maximization of pleasure. Some happiness-researchers would like to distinguish that happiness is a mental and emotional state, while both pleasure and pain are physical experiences. On the otherhand, there are those who would contend that mental pleasures and pains are emotions, and that physical pleasures and pains are experiences.134In Mans Search for Meaning, Viktor Frankl remarks: Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side effect of one's personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one's surrender to a person other than oneself. John Stuart Mill agrees: I now think that happiness can only be attained by not making it the direct end. I think that only those who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness are happy. Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness along the way. Happiness cannot be acquired directly; it can only be acquired indirectly (Henry Sidgwick).135

Happiness as a metaphysical idea is an "enigmatic signifier," one whose meaning overflows the ability to grasp it and therefore keeps us going in search of something which has not been properly identified. Even Aristotle presents an aporia when he demonstrated the conflict between philia and the self-sufficient nature of a fulfilled life:
It is said that the blessedly happy and self-sufficient people have no need of friends. For they already have [all] the goods, and hence, being self-sufficient, need nothing added (1169b4 6).To solve the conundrum, Aristotle offers three (3) answers: 1. The first is based on the inherent goodness of acting for and being concerned for others ("the excellent person labors for his friends and for his native country, and will die for them if he Larry Hauser, A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind. Internet (01/15/12/ 4:56 pm): http://www.wutsamada.com/phlmind/pleapain.htm 135 Levi Meier, Ancient Secrets: Using the Stories of the Bible to Improve Our Everyday Lives. Internet (01/15/12/ 5:04 pm): http://books.google.com.ph
134

73

must" [1169a1920]); thus, being a wholly virtuous and fulfilled person necessarily involves having others for whom one is concerned without them, one's life is incomplete: the solitary person's life is hard, since it is not easy for him to be continuously active all by himself; but in relation to others and in their company it is easier (1170a68). 2. Good people's life together allows the cultivation of virtue (1170a12). 3. Finally, he argues that one's friend is "another oneself", and so the pleasure that the virtuous person gets from his own life is also found in the life of another virtuous person. Anyone who is to be happy, then, must have excellent friends (1170b19).Aristotle also holds: "the only ultimately justifiable reason for doing anything is that acting in that way will contribute to a fulfilled life." The good person does not perform the altruistic act to make herself alone happy; she performs it in order to help the friend, and in performing it makes both her friend and herself happy. The action is thus good both in itself and for the effect it has on the agent's happiness.136

From the foregoing, we need to examine closer and find out the various levels of self-interest according to their desirability in order to understand why many times men would deny their selves in favor of a greater self-interest/self-benefit. The Self needs to dismantle and deconstruct to attain perfect joy. Perhaps by unmasking the true self, we will never again have to view gestures of hospitality or altruism/alterity as monstrous acts of betrayal of ones self. Is the Ego the self or is it just a desire? Is ego the representation of the evil within? Is evil an outer force or something from within? Deconstructing self-interest could also mean going back to the originary experience: As soon as a new human life is born, the infant positively responds to life.
The positive responses found in breathing, feeding, sleeping, and crying, all show mans raw and natural inclination towards life. Man wants to live. Our leading scientists and bio-engineers today are not only resorting to herbal medicine and other non-traditional therapeutic approaches but also continue to experiment on stem cells and are relentless in their search for that elusive fountain of youth and that elixir of life that would prolong human life, eliminate aging and disease, enhance our potencies, and make us live forever. Man wants to live forever. We love ourselves so much we want to live forever.

136

Philia Internet (01/15/12/ 1:03 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philia

74

Unfortunately, man is not immortal. But for the authentic Homo Sapiens, the reality of death gives rise to a subjectivity that man is first and foremost an ethical being.137 It is said that Christianity is a response to the inevitability of death. Under this bliss-seeking tradition, the freedom-loving Self is given a choice: the path of unending suffering and misery, or the path to eternal life and bliss.
The self is to make an obvious choice between a curse and a blessing. Because the self loves itself, the self naturally wants to live forever. The rational self is supposed to take the logical path that leads to immortality. However, the price of taking the path to immortality is a life of renunciation, of foregoing, and giving up many things in favor of a far greater benefit eternal bliss.

The desirable Christian life is the fundamental question in Luke 18:18: What must I do to live forever?
In the bliss-seeking tradition of Christians, the blessed life is the happy life, with Christ as the exemplary model and at the center of their faith. This blessed life is expressed in the Beatitudes in accordance with the great mandate of love for God and for neighbor. The perfect joy of the Christian community is experienced in the genuine praxis of charity in truth. In the Old Testament, Noah and Job were called perfect because they were blameless and righteous men. The righteous man for his own good willingly cooperates with the plan of the Maker. And so, man is emancipated by Gods grace but man must cooperate (John Paul II). The word perfect in Hebrew is TAMIYM (taw-meem') meaning entire, but also means truth, integrity, from the root word TAMAM (taw-mam') meaning coming to completion or to its fullness and is used in its spiritual sense - to grow ripe in the fullness of Truth, in the love of God (the ultimate reality).

A similar understanding of tamam is reflected in Hope Mays book, On Socrates. May explains that eudaimonia is the point that one reaches when one attains the completion and perfection of their nature:
The Greeks believed that the desire for eudaimonia is in everybody, and hence that everybody yearns and searches for it, and hence for the perfection of themselves. Accordingly, the perfection of oneself was believed to be the most pleasurable and complete state that a human being can reach, and unlike other states, being eudaimon was permanent (On Socrates Eudaimonism).138
137

Peter J. Leithart, Derrida on Gift. Internet (08/10/11/ 2: 15 pm): http://www.leithart.com/archives/002003.php 138 Hope May, On Socrates (Wadsworth Philosophers Series), Wadsworth Publishing, UK, 1999, pp. 88-89.

75

The Christian solution to the human dilemma where the happiness of man lies is cryptically articulated in The Peace Prayer of Saint Francis.139
Here is a Christian paradox: To gain ones life, one must first lose it: happiness depends on being willing to give everything for others. The more perfect the sacrifices, the more perfect the joy.140 In Tolkiens the Lord of the Rings, we find the mysteries of friendship lived in the face of death, and of the self-sacrifice that is necessary that others may live. We also find in it something both terrible and comforting: that the one who is telling the story in which we live knows our sufferings and our grief and the sadness of death; that somehow they have been there since before the beginning of the world. Even greater than the bitterness of our failures and our death and our descent into nothingness is the rescue that awaits us, swift, unexpected, bringing joy more poignant than grief, a joy made possible only by the existence of sadness, a good brought about by the evil, but which overcomes evil with the love whose name is pity. The Lord of the Rings breathes mercy throughout. Tolkien faces the reality of conflict and death, but does not see them as the last word. To strive (knowing that apart from grace, victory is impossible) is the final heroism. Mercy is love as it exists in a world of death. Tolkien seeks to justify the ways of God to man, especially the way that man finds hardest, the gift of death. Without death, man could not achieve the greatest love - that of self-sacrifice - to die for another, as God himself chose to do. God allowed death in the world so that he, too, could die and give his life to and for his creatures. Beyond this acceptance of the bitterest facts of life is something that can be attained only by tasting them to the full. Sam addresses Gandalf: I thought you were dead! But then I thought I was dead myself. Is everything sad going to come untrue? No, but beyond sadness is something that can come only after sadness: Their joy was like swords, and they passed in thought out to regions where pain and delight flow together and tears are the very wine of blessedness. The hero descends into death and is wounded forever, but his very wounds are his glory, a testimony to a merciful love that goes through and beyond death. The Lamb is victorious, and his victory is that he now stands forever as one slain.141

Perfect Joy could also be the Brahman experience from the Sanskrit verb root, brh, meaning to grow (brhati, that which grows, and brhmayati, that which causes to grow).
The mature soul is the awakened self who has attained a level of enlightenment on the ultimate nature of reality. The authentic subject is the earnest seeker of true knowledge who goes through a gradual unfolding process in the exercise of his reason and freedom. Maturity is a process of gradual growth and there is no logical progression from one state of being to another. The transition or transformation requires a dramatic change (metanoia) a leap from one state of being to another completely different one. The delightful feeling one gets after an

139

This beautiful prayer does not appear in any known writings of St Francis. The prayer was apparently written in France during WWI, perhaps by Fr. Bouquerel. Internet (01/16/12/10:37 am): http://wahiduddin.net/saint_francis_of_assisi.htm 140 Perfect Joy, Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://www.archden.org/index.cfm/ID/2980 141 The Heroes of Middle-Earth. Internet (01/16/12/11:05 am): http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-01-029-f

76

illumination experience is a sweet feeling of personal triumph and gratefulness that leads to inner tranquility. This illumination experience becomes a turning point in ones existence.

c. The Gift of Perfect Joy: Towards a De-centered Subjectivity

The aporia that surrounds the gift revolves around the paradoxical thought that a genuine gift cannot actually be understood as a gift.142

In this Metaphysics of the Self, the gift of perfect joy is the Gift of Self to itself. This in itself is the aporia. How can this gift be truly considered a gift using Derridas standards? The giver experiences the gift of perfect joy as a consequence of the exercise of unconditional hospitality. Both the Giver and the Receiver here have not done anything to violate the rigorous rules of Derridean hospitality. And yet the Giver received something in return by reason of his/her Hospitality. The Giver somehow felt this pleasant sense of well-being and a deep sense of self-satisfaction a sense of fulfillment. Under Derridean standards, the Giver is said to have already received a counter-gift; the giver received the gift of perfect joy. If we are to evaluate further this subjective phenomenon from a Derridean perspective, the counter-gift of perfect joy may be viewed as a Faulty Gift but Without Fault (researchers own phraseology):
It is a faulty gift because of the compensating element as a consequence of hospitality. But it is also without fault because the counter-gift did not come from the recipient of hospitality; but as a unique emotive response from within the giver himself; hence, a Gift of Self to itself (Doubling Effect). It was a gift that was not sought by the giver at the onset of hospitality. The giver practiced hospitality with the purity of intentions and without any illusions of recompense from the receiver. In fact, the Perfect Joy Experience is often unrecognized as a benefit. The gift of perfect joy came about as a natural reflexive-response from within the cognitive Self. Such intense affect is a normal phenomenon being in the nature of man to experience more

142

Jack Reynolds, Possible and Impossible, Self and Other, and the Reversibility of Merleau-Ponty and Derrida. Internet (01/16/12/11:20 am): http://philpapers.org/rec/REYPAI

77

abiding or enduring emotions. After having given goodness in the purity of intentions, the giver in turn feels an equal energy of goodness or well-being.

Perfect Joy (like happiness) is thus observed as a mental and emotional experience as a concrete lived experience. It has also been considered as a desirable state of well being attained on account of or due to an act which is impressed with profound meaning or value in human existence. This experience is supposed to define an ethical path that makes life worth living and dying for. It is said that a joyful disposition exudes well-being - a positive energy, an aura of well-being that shines around the person and creates a positive impression about ones personality. It is observed as an over-all sense of personal satisfaction and contentment (equanimity). It could acquire an abiding and enduring quality. A humble and pleasant disposition comes with the wisdom about life and human existence. It also comes with maturity: a receptive and responsive sensitivity to life and human nature. Life becomes bearable. But what is the distinguishing feature that makes Perfect Joy stand-out from the rest of the surveyed concepts of happiness?
1. In this thesis, it is proposed that Perfect Joy is experienced as that feeling of goodness par excellence. The notion provides a de-centered subjectivity: self-enlargement towards alterity. 2. The researcher also postulates that Perfect Joy is a distinct affect that is only experienced as a result of an intense cognitive awareness on the profound meaning attached to a kenotic act that involves the idea of sacrifice based on love. Thus, unlike the classical understanding of happiness, it may be experienced even during the kenotic act itself, but only if the cognitive requirement is present. The kenotic subjectivity pre-supposes that the element of sacrifice is a genuine expression of love for the other (and not simply a token gesture), without which, it would be impossible to experience perfect joy or to discern the intimate and profound significance of the act on the life of the giver and the receiver. 3. Moreover, this kenotic perspective comes about only after attaining a mature level of psychological development.

78

4. It is further suggested that this joy is perfected by the very righteousness of the kenotic act itself. This righteousness is grounded in an ethics of sacrifice based on an all-embracing/nonexclusionary love (instead of philia) as the enhanced expression of justice for the stranger.

Thus, it is proposed that the above initial considerations would serve as the philosophical basis to re-invent Derridas notion of unconditional welcoming (alterity) as Kenotic Hospitality the enhanced notion of Hospitality which is not grounded on responsibility but on love. It is argued that responsibility only burdens freedom and could undermine the truth; while love is free to do whatever it sets out to do. Love, as a force, harms no one (it does no violence to the other), rather it builds us up towards the eudaimonia. B. The East-West Synthesis Towards Kenotic Hospitality
A decision has to go through undecidability and make a leap beyond the field of theoretical knowledge. So when I say I do not know what to do, this is not the negative condition of decision. It is rather the possibility of decision"143

What are the ways by which man experience consciousness and how does man interpret reality? What makes it real? What makes this experience credible? What makes it meaningful? Today there are some scientifically inclined thinkers who dismiss the

possibility of a purposeful creative process in nature and therefore for them, human existence is but a selfish and meaningless struggle for power. And yet, until now the scientific community has not been able to come up with a plausible explanation why the universe exists, nor was the community able to disprove that human life does not have some kind of cosmic purpose. Whether there is indeed a cosmic purpose or not, the

143

Richard Kearney and Mark Dooley, Hospitality, Justice and Responsibility in Questioning Ethics: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy, Routledge, USA, 1999, p. 66.

79

rational response would be: to keep our minds open to both possibilities, and to thoroughly examine them both to their eventual conclusions.144
What if this intelligence in the vastness of outer space which scientists were looking for is incorporeal like the wind (a dark matter)? Will they still find this intelligent life-form? Intelligence implies a sense of order and purpose. It also implies wisdom. What is our notion about God? If God is God, then do we really believe that the taxonomist can put God on the operating table? God is not God for nothing. But it is more grievous, even as it is mentally dishonest, to delude ourselves as God (the folly of Satan). If He is God and we are not God, then who are we? If God does exist, then we really do not have any choice at all; whether we believe it or not, whether we can or can not prove it, God exists.

The best rhetoric an atheist could offer is that there is no after-life; only an after death life on earth continues Even philosophers are trapped in their own logic entertaining the possibilities of the Unchanging, the Absolute, yet they cannot by the logic of their own discipline claim an absolute truth. Everything is theory.145 Can we then define philosophy as the habit of speculating with the use of reason? Is that all a human mind can do? Speculate, seek affirmation from others, decide and act on those speculations? A life of theories? What for? What about reality? Whatever happened to those quests for truth, for true knowledge?
Philosophy does not answer questions; philosophy questions answers.146 Philosophic contemplation does not, in its widest survey, divide the universe into two hostile camps - friends and foes, helpful and hostile, good and bad it views the whole impartially. And since no definite answers can be known to be true, we nevertheless deal with them because the questions (1) enlarge our conception of what is possible, (2) enrich our intellectual imagination and (3) diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because (4) through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good. All acquisition of knowledge is an enlargement of the Self, but this enlargement is best attained when it is not directly sought. In fact, the unalloyed self-contemplation starts from Chapter 17: Evolutionary Metaphysics in Shattering the Sacred Myths Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.evolutionary-metaphysics.net/metaphysics.html 145 On the End of Postmodernism and the Rise of Realism Internet (01/02/12/ 1:51 pm): http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Postmodernism.htm 146 Ruel F. Pepa, Nurturing the Imagination of Resistance: Some Important Views from Contemporary Philosophers. Internet (11/12/11/2:00 pm): http://www.philosophos.com/philosophy_article_85.html
144

80

the not-Self and through its greatness the boundaries of Self are enlarged; through the infinity of the universe the mind which contemplates it achieves some share in infinity.147Everyone is more or less afraid of the truth; and this is being human, for the truth is relating to being spirit and this is very hard for flesh and blood Between a human being and the truth lies dying to the world this, you see, is why we are all more or less afraid.148 And yet many great discoveries started out as experiments, as hypothetical statements, based on an idea, a belief, a hunch, an intuition, or perhaps simply a spark of inspiration. Soren Kierkegaard once said: during the first period of a man's life the greatest danger is not to take the risk.

At every period of the world's history some philosopher has asked the eternal question: Is there, in the universe or outside of it, an underlying Reality which is eternal, immovable, unchanging? The ancient Egyptians believed, as Hermes taught: "Reality is not upon the earth, my son. Nothing on earth is real. There are only appearances. Appearance is the supreme illusion." In the still more ancient East, only the eternal and changeless was called Reality. All that is subject to change through differentiation; and decay was called Maya, or illusion.149 On the other hand, even after the metaphysical death of God, western metaphysics has left behind a weakened and dysfunctional perspective of reality, while it tries to cleanse itself from all authoritarian influences (the so-called fallacy of appealing to an authority); human subjectivity had to re-claim certainty and meaning in its own right (the problematique). The tremendous changes human civilization went through in our on-going history requires a serious re-assessment of the epistemological-ontological understanding of things to rethink its logic and find out the what-is-amiss - to retrieve from antiquity what was forgotten and enter again the space of a fine-tuned epistemological continuum to reclaim and integrate what is truly inherent in the human soul.
Bertrand Russell, Value of Philosophy, in Nigel Warburton, Philosophy: Basic Readings, p. 27. Alastair Hannay (trans.) Sren Kierkegaard: Papers and Journals (A Selection), 1996, p.614. 149 Ancient Landmarks: Plato and Aristotle. Internet (01/16/12/9:25 am): http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/ancientlandmarks/PlatoAndAristotle.html
148 147

81

a. The Illusion
The freedom from the illusion of Self is the true spiritual freedom that lies on the far side of the door labeled sacrifice. It is the door that many approach at some stage of their spiritual journey but only a few tried to push open against the weight of their own fears and doubts.150

History tells us that humanity has been looking for meaning in the wrong places. It was somehow (1) partly because of our unique cultural tradition, the way we have been brought up to think and respond in life; and (2) partly because of the wrong desires which dominate the person from within.
Man has been betrayed by his own society. Greed, the insatiable desire for more, has
been the root cause of all the evils of global capitalism that has vexed men under a spell of teleconsumerism. More resources (money, human and natural) equals more production, more production means more profit; more profit does not only mean more purchasing power and more freedom that leads to a hedonistic existence, but could also mean more power over men (sense of superiority). The singular will-to-power has spawned the will to dominate, to exploit and to eliminate/destroy any obstacle along the way (personal autonomy and power). As Kahlil Gibran once said: unless the exchange be (done) in love and kindly justice, it will but lead some to greed and others to hunger. In an age of fast information exchange, man could only try to cope up with the latest in a techno-culture of instant convenience and gratification. We have allowed ourselves to be entertained under a bubble, an illusion, a superficial existence which we have unwittingly invented to keep ourselves busy. We have deluded ourselves in a continual attitude of denial (escapism). With the help of media, we have been captivated to cope and cooperate, to need what we do not need under the barrel of an economic gun (globalization) and thereby constrained to play a fast-paced consumerist game dictated by the first world economies in order to survive. The new game made it seem impossible to choose another option. It seems like there is no other way, and, many times, it appears that there is no way out there is no escape. Everything points to a downhill trend in human values even as man feels the unprecedented fury of nature. The growing pressures of cataclysmic events are coming to a point that it will not anymore allow our pressured selves to enjoy the ethics we proposed under normal circumstances. We are entering a time of great crisis and tribulation after an age of great distortions; a time of peace without peace; man is at the dawn of a new consciousness for the entire humanity it bids us to re-examine the way we perceive everything around us. How do we perceive reality today? The accelerated pace of life brought about by the advances in electronic technology and the stiff competition to survive, and the sense of urgency and duty do not allow us anymore to be self-aware and conscious of ourselves. Man has allowed himself to be governed by the corporate clock at the expense of relationships and our homes. Most of the time, we are unconscious about ourselves; we live in auto-pilot, stuck in our old habits; and we cannot see our way out.151 We never had the time to pause for a while (moratorium) Bruce Lyon, The Secret of Sacrifice. Internet(11/16/11/ 10 am): http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~blyon/Articles/secretsacrifice.htm 151 Being Present with Inner Awareness. Internet (01/17/12/11:41 am): http://www.women-at-heart.com/being-present.html
150

82

to evaluate and philosophize why we think and feel and act this way or that way (contemplation): why do I behave this way?

In When Society Becomes an Addict, Anne Wilson Schaef points out that our belief in the addictive system as the only reality is itself an illusion making us believe that there is no other reality:
The loss of our visionary being has led us into addictive functioning; and the addictive nature of consumer society separates us from an awareness of ourselves as visionary beings. To move toward recovery, we must admit addiction on a systemic level and move beyond our own participation in this disease process. We must see our present culture for what it is: an addictive system. The sickness of our time is not the absence of mythic vision, which is ever present in the unconscious, but our cultures denial that it exists and that it has significance in modern life. Visionary seeing is a force against the literal mind, which believes that things are only as they appear most of the neurosis and the vacuum of meaning from which we suffer result from the isolation of the ego-mind from the archetypical unconscious (Carl Jung). Societies have always found their deepest value and sense of meaning ultimately in this realm of the mythic and the transcendental. Jung even went so far as to claim that myths are more sustaining in our lives than economic security. In the visionary mode, myths from all times and cultures are available to us; we touch into a seemingly magical dimension from which emanates a sense of the mysterious and the sacred; we have experiential access to the past or future, and the limitations of our cultural conditioning are transcended. This is not the objective knowledge of the spectator observing at a distance, analyzing, or describing without being drawn. Rather, it is sacred ego-deconstruction a practice not to be undertaken lightly in which the self experiences directly the deep connection between the human world, the plant world and the animal world. One is no longer just looking at the tree, enjoying it through ones senses: one has become the tree.152

The role of ethics is supposed to find out (what ought) what is commendably human, humane and humanizing in accordance with the natural functions of the human soul. In Aesops fables, animals were assigned human attributes; at the other end of the pole, we find some radical philosophers today who want to privilege the animal or the bestial qualities in man to justify his negative tendencies within. Yet, not all animals are wild and ferocious.
In The Animal That Therefore I am, Derrida expresses his intense oppositions to the concept of the Animal. According to Derrida, the confusion of all non-human living things within the general and common category of the animal is not simply a sin against rigorous thinking, vigilance, lucidity, or empirical authority, it is also a crime. Derrida coins the word animot

152

Suzi Gablik, The Re-enchantment of Art, pp. 49, 52, 56, 57.

83

(combining the Latin anima, meaning soul, with the French mot, meaning word) and suggests that the reader mentally substitute this word whenever animal is used.153

We can only speculate on the reason why Derrida has chosen a domesticated animal as his philosophical pet (Derridas cat: the other like no other):
This cat he explains does not belong to the animal specie or genus of that sort but is the irreplaceable living beingwho enters my space, into this place where it can encounter me, see me, even see me naked.154

Would it be a surprise to say that Filipinos are actually fond of and even mesmerized by bestial qualities? This glamorized appeal is portrayed in Filipino propensity with the Chinese zodiac calendar (Year of the Black Sea Dragon) and Kung fu movies (Snake in the Eagles Shadow). There are also not a few Filipinos, especially the rich and older set, who are more attached and could be observed intimately talking to their pets (and plants) than with fellow humans (philia for animals). Language is friendship.155 Perhaps it is because animals and plants do not have the gift of human language and therefore unable to talk back. It has been said that the eyes can also say many things but for Derrida, the staring eyes of the cat made him very uncomfortable that it made him ask, Who am I? and could only wonder how he appears (Who is he?) from the point of view of this other who is not human. In a hospitable world one is free not to

Jacques Derrida, The Animal That Therefore I am, Fordham Univ. Press, New York, 2008, pp. 47-49. Do You Believe in the Animal?,Boria Sax Review of Jacques Derrida: The Animal That Therefore I Am. Internet (12/19/11/ 10:28 am): http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=14720 155 Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond p. 98. And see also in Pascale-Anne Brault and Michael Naas (trans.), Adieu to Emmanuel Levinas, Stanford University Press, California, 1997, pp. 10, 51, 91, 96.
154

153

84

answer. Excuse me, whose Cat am I supposed to be? This is the start that opens a new perspective a world of more differences (in honoring alterity) for deconstruction.156
Gerald Bruns asks, what does it mean to no longer be able to say I? That is, to recognize ourselves as beings who are singular-plural: entities from which nothing can be excluded, not animals, not machines, not each other? Has the human become a poetic concept, like the divine in need of constant revision? What does it mean to be compelled to ask these questions? To be more human (or is it less)? To be more (is it less) free? Clearly, being human has never been a given (On Ceasing to be Human).157

We simply take too many things for granted and never bothered to even stop to inquire into the quality of our thoughts and actions. We have become forgetful, we allowed ourselves to be uncritically swept away by the they-self and even by the novelty of dangerous ideologies and philosophies (a case of misprudence). In the end, we have become strangers to ourselves. We do not really know who we are. In Derridas terms:
We do not know the name of what we desire with a desire beyond desire. That means leading a just life comes down to coping with such non-knowing, negotiating among the several competing names that fluctuate undecidably before us, each pretending to name what we are praying for.158

b. Moratorium (The Need to Deconstruct the Cognitive Self) It is therefore important to take a pause (moratorium) in order to pay attention to ourselves to know ourselves. We have to explore again ourselves to gain better insights about ourselves. I interpret, therefore I am I use mind-will-emotion; therefore I am being and becoming / I deconstructI dismantle the self; therefore, I am becoming)
We must enter again into ourselves if we want to find ourselves (Augustine of Hippo). We cannot be mentally dishonest to ourselves (verum dictibi ipsi). It is not healthy to be in a state of denial. We cannot escape the truth about ourselves because the truth will find us (Bishop

Gerald L. Bruns, Derridas Cat (Whom Am I?)Research in Phenomenology, Vol. 38, Issue, 2008, pp. 404 -423 157 Bruns was talking about a philosophy of communion, a challenge to see the world again in the nonexclusionary eyes of pure altruists, perhaps the way Francis and some cosmics did. Internet (12/28/2011 11:09 pm): http://english.nd.edu/news/25962-newest-book-by-prof-gerald-bruns/ 158 John D. Caputo, Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). Internet (11/19/11/ 11: 10 am):

156

85

Ambrose).159The truth is within us because it is the truth about ourselves.160 We have to consciously understand ourselves so we may also be able to consciously choose a new way of being. We have to pay attention to be able to transform ourselves and grow to become better persons. And it is only when we gradually notice these small rays of truth about ourselves when we start feeling this inner need, this desire to change and improve ourselves in a genuine manner.

Finding the path that leads to perfect joy could be a very difficult and confusing experience. It is like being stuck in an intersection full of intoxicating street signs pointing in all directions. How would I get there? It has already been said: we fail to attain happiness (and in our case, perfect joy) if we deliberately seek it.
So many intelligent people equate fun and pleasure with happiness. If fun and pleasure are equated with happiness, then pain must be equated with unhappiness.161 But, in fact, the opposite is true: more often than not, things that lead to happiness involve some pain.162 Most of us have been deluded into believing that happiness can only be achieved through a fun-filled, pain-free life. Despite the fact that fun-filled activities do little to contribute to our over-all happiness, people continue to cling to the idea that in order to be happy, we need to have fun.163

The Epicurean Man164 today has created an amusement-park society to help us relax and temporarily forget our problems.
However, they do not bring happiness, because their positive effects end when the fun ends.165 Instead it has led man into the very emotion he was exactly trying to avoid: unhappiness. Many of the things we do to achieve happiness actually stifle it. The fun-filled world is filled with unhappiness.166 Many people think they will be happy if they get a better job, but this makes happiness reliant on the future and keeps the person unsatisfied in the present. And instead of getting happier as they become better off, people get stuck on a hedonistic treadmill: their

Frederick Casidsid, Self-Discovery Module, Unpublished Recolletos School of Theology, Q.C., 2011 Hope May, On Socrates (Wadsworth Philosophers Series), Wadsworth Publishing, UK, 1999, pp.2-3. 161 Happiness Equates with Fun? Internet (01/19/12/10:14 am): http://www.tk76recycle.com/show_news.asp?id=39 162 Lessons in Happiness from Hollywood Internet (01/19/12/10:18 am): http://www.simpletoremember.com/jewish/blog/lessons-in-happiness-from-hollywood/ 163 Judd Biasiotto and Tommy Dorsey, In Pursuit Of Happiness Internet (01/19/12/10:26 am): http://www.dorseywright.com/internal/index_pursuitofhappiness_int.htm 164 Epicureanism got its bad name because of a hedonist normative claim that pleasure and pain is (1) the only ultimately good- and bad-making features of human life and also (2) the only ultimate ends of all our voluntary pursuit and avoidance. 165 Happiness Equates with Fun? Internet (01/19/12/10:14 am): http://www.tk76recycle.com/show_news.asp?id=39 166 Judd Biasiotto and Tommy Dorsey, In Pursuit Of Happiness Internet (01/19/12/10:26 am):
160

159

86

expectations rise at the same pace as their incomes, and the happiness they seek remains constantly just out of reach.167

Ezra Bayda reminds us that happiness should be a by-product of a fulfilling life and not a goal.168
Today's philosophy of happiness is strongly influenced by the Happiness Research. Happiness Research is the quantitative study of happiness, positive and negative affect, well-being, quality of life and life satisfaction. Happiness is a state of mind; it is inherent in our soul. Someone can be extremely unhappy while experiencing pleasure and someone can be happy even though external circumstances are unpleasant. Happiness has little in common with fun and pleasure. They are not the same thing.169Fun is what we experience during the act. Happiness is what we experience after an act.170It is a deeper and more abiding emotion. Pleasure is not sustainable; it is not continuous.171 There are no guarantees with pleasure, it is brief and when separated from our essential purpose, pleasure leaves emptiness and pain as its aftermath. While pleasure is totally reliant on the five senses, happiness could be independent of them.172

Finally, Suzi Gablik in The Re-enchantment of Art warns us of the pitfalls of Cartesian Dualism that has bewitched our consciousness of the things around us and offers the perspective of the continuum:
It is the essence of modern alienation that we are bewitched by our particular vision of separateness the mechanistic idea that we can know the world only from the outside by distancing ourselves from it. Cartesian dualism sees no connection between the subjective world of thought and the objective, outer world. Today, this dualistic Cartesian subject versus object model of cognition is being replaced by a new picture, which sees the inner and outer world as a continuumultimately, it is the visionary self the form of consciousness that has been discredited and suppressed in modern society that is able to see this fundamental unity as well as the duality of existence. In the non-dualistic view, everything in the universe is understood as dancing energy patterns interweaving a single continuum. As for us, we are not just observers of the pattern but its co-creators; and our relationship with the nature is not something as external and independent of ourselves. When we experience the world as our own body, illusions of duality dissolve, and with them, old assumptions about a distinct and separate ego-self codified by our culture. Here, the boundary between the self and the world has been dissolved so that everything exists in a state of radical interpretation.173

Alex A. Lluch and Helen Eckmann , Finding Ways to Be Happy in Simple Principles to Feel Better & Live Longer, WS Publishing Group, California, 2008, p. 78. 168 Ezra Bayda, Beyond Happiness: The Zen Way to True Contentment, Shambhala Publication, Inc., Massachusetts, 2010, pp. 4, 7, 24,132. (Kindly see Internet: books.google.com.ph). 169 Victory Oyeleke, Does Pleasure Equate to Happiness? Internet (10/11/11/2:00 pm): http://www.tribune.com.ng/sun/sunday-zest/3159-does-pleasure-equate-to-happiness 170 Zig Ziglar, A Goals Program is a must in Over the Top, The Zig Ziglar Corporation, 1994. 171 Paradox of Hedonism .Internet ( 01/19/12/11:49 am): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_hedonism 172 Victory Oyeleke, Does Pleasure Equate to Happiness? Internet (10/11/11/2:00 pm): 173 Suzi Gablik, The Re-enchantment of Art, pp. 54-55.

167

87

c. The Human Factor and the Philosophy of Growth (Tamam,brh)

We cannot really say about anything we have not experienced or projected atleast in our thoughts.

Instead of inquiring first into the possible rational motive behind the praxis of hospitality, perhaps, this project should have started with the question about our human nature. When the researcher proposed this thesis, the fundamental question which should have steered this inquiry, should have been:
What is natural in man? Is the logic being presented by Derrida and the rest of the philosophers (including this researcher) in agreement with our human nature? Speaking of hospitality, is there a spring from which it flows, a far greater virtue which can rightly be identified as basic in our nature as humans, something which could also be considered not only a part of our rational nature but also an undeniable part of our natural appetite (desire)? Or as philosopher Stanley Cavell puts it: Can a human being be free of human nature?174

Having thus in mind, the human soul functions to seek it without need of external prodding or encouragement just to do so. Hence, it becomes possible for humans to cultivate it with a passion. By passion, the researcher means whole-hearted devotion as a rational appetite. This must be so because it is fundamental in the rational man; it is also a basic desire. Happiness is simply the desirable emotive consequence of this originary desire which leads to inner peace.
Tamam: The Ripening Process and its Paradoxes All flora and fauna go through an
auto-movement process called growth. It is a manifestation of life. Among human beings, barring untimely death, every one supposedly goes through a stage of development in life. The word growth has become synonymous with development and progress. Thus, we try to classify the different levels or dimensions of human growth based on our heritage of knowledge. Experts in different fields would also devise ways to describe the human conditions and responses. We explore ways to enhance our condition and go through personality development programs, selfhelp modules, or self-awareness/discernment exercises, spiritual exercises or otherwise. Even a philosophical glimpse on growth already transcends a variety of sub-disciplines including epistemology, metaphysics, religion, anthropology, human nature, psychology, psychoanalysis, neuro-science, politics and ethics. But what is unsettling in the history of mankind is that despite
174

Gerald L. Bruns, On Ceasing to be Human, Stanford University Press, California, 2011, Prologue.

88

our milestone celebrations of human achievements, the Homo Sapiens failed to integrate the wisdom from the ages into the cultural fabric of daily life (Dysfunctionalism). Being aware early in life of the practical significance of the ripening process and working on it has never been ingrained in us. Learning to do it has simply become a program or module of special interest just another consumer commodity to choose from.

The way to maturity and the ability to grow and develop our interpersonal skills have been diluted by a culture of instant gratification (instant coffee, instant internet connections, faster travels & communications around the globe). The way to maturity never became a way of life. Humanity failed to learn from the lessons of the past (George Santayanna). Grow Up!
We usually hear this expression among grown-ups, but we seldom give it some deep thought. And yet, the paradox is that, deep within, man always wants to improve and feel better about him/her self. It is natural to desire to become a better person. However, it is in the way each man tried to interpret these signals from within when frustrations and disappointments arise. Life is complex and was never meant to be easy.

The researcher therefore postulates that psychological growth (which leads to that wholesome disposition known as maturity) is a human function, with cognitive and emotive appeal, and its cultivation a desirable state to be in. Analogously, a wellcultivated or well-developed Kardia leads to inner harmony and consistency of human functions. d. The Way of Perfect Joy (Towards a Better State of Becoming) The student proposes The Way of Perfect Joy as a way of life (dharmic175). It is a philosophy of doing life confronted by the reality of pain, suffering, and death. It is a maturing sense of Self that is continually conscious through self-deconstruction that is

175

The way of Perfect Joy is in some sense similar to the Hindu understanding of Dharma or the right way of living.

89

always critically open to possibilities.176 The way of perfect joy is a passionate journey on the level of ideas and in the realm of relationships to attain perfection. I deconstructreconstruct; therefore I am becoming kenosis. To walk the path of perfect joy is a desirable state of be-ing that is all at once selfdiffusive (kenotic) and dignifying (empowering). It is an ethical path a dialectic way of continual negotiations and adjustments through life a double movement towards a better state the synthesis of becoming a better person: (1) Cognitive Content - It is the affirmation of the true self, the moral self, steered on the
path of deconstruction in response to the fundamental question that leads to perfect joy (the anand). (2) Cognitive Form - It is further suggested that The Way to Perfect Joy also involves Kardial purification designed to re-direct the mind, the will and the emotion towards greater harmony and coordination.

Together, the above double movements in self-dismantling (self-deconstruction), is the path to maturity that must be cultivated to attain eudaimonia. The self-dismantling experience leads the Cognitive Self at the doorstep of kenosis to become the building block to develop a philosophy of growth that describes the Way of Perfect Joy as a kenotic way of life. The student assumes that kenosis is the key to unlock the secrets of a fulfilling existence. As a philosophy of growth, The Way of Perfect Joy has the following primary features: (1) The Way (the path that leads to) of Perfect Joy (the philosophy or way of life) is the means to attain perfect joy (the feeling of goodness par excellence). The researcher therefore argues that, contrary to contemporary western beliefs, happiness in terms of
176

In Hinduism, the mature soul is the awakened self who has attained a level of enlightenment on the ultimate nature of reality.

90

perfect joy can after all be pursued by following the path laid down under this proposed philosophy of growth. The great paradox (like the path to eternal life) is that the hardened soul simply chose to look the other way around.
To be clear, the quest for that enhanced notion of unconditional welcoming leads the Seeker at the doorstep of kenosis that is inscribed in a Philosophy of Growth known as The Way of Perfect Joy (the fulfilling life) which, in turn, describes the practice of Kenotic Hospitality that brings about the experience of Perfect Joy. Perfect Joy, as that feeling of goodness par excellence, is the ideal state of Kenotic Hospitality. As an affect, Perfect Joy is a reflexive response to the cognitive awareness of the Subject on the profound value assigned to the selfemptying experience or encounter. This means that Perfect Joy is experienced by reason of Kenotic Hospitality. In Kenotic Hospitality love and sacrifice always goes together; hence, it is only logical that the hallmarks (main feature) of perfect joy would also be that of sacrifice based on love. Otherwise stated, the conscious Subject experienced perfect joy because of this sacrifice based love that is inherent in Kenotic Hospitality. Thus, unlike our classical understanding of happiness, perfect joy may be experienced even during the act of Kenotic Hospitality itself as a profound experience. So it has been proposed that joy is experienced only when the act of hospitality is deeply impressed with meaning and purpose. It is further suggested that it is love which makes the unconditional welcoming a most meaningful personal experience: love allows us to understand what matters most in life. But this joy is perfected only by that sense of righteousness in the notion of self-sacrifice that is inherent in this kenotic expression of love. For it is this kenotic love which enables us to endure pain and suffering with joy. Thus, where there is Kenotic Hospitality, Perfect Joy is just right behind. It is when the feeling is sustained and abides after the act that the Subject experiences this blissful sense of self-satisfaction and fulfillment peut etre (par excellence). From a Christian perspective, it is the love of strangers (philoxenia) that brings us to a face-to-face experience with God (Matthew 25:40). [See, eschatological encounter for contrast: God in the Stranger vis-a-vis God as God]

(2) The Way of Perfect Joy is designed to improve ourselves, to become better persons,
towards a mature perspective in life. A mature perspective leads to a mature way of responding in life which, in turn, leads to a mature way of life (lifestyle). Altruism, which is a distinguishing mark of Kenotic Hospitality, is one of the hallmarks of a mature perspective. Thus, the researcher postulates that the kenotic perspective found in The Way of Perfect Joy requires the earnest cultivation in an excellent manner of a mature perspective in life. On the other hand, Perfect Joy is here understood as a peak experience that comes from a mature perspective.

91

Growing up requires Kardial coordination. The lifetime exercise of the desirable features embraced under this proposed philosophy of growth is to be viewed as a virtue which demands discipline, sacrifice, and even pain.
Growing up to become a mature person is a gradual and oftentimes a very painful process. It is a desirable state to be in. More often than not, an emotionally immature person behaves like an ego-centric child self-obsessed and self-absorbed. Immature people could be exceptionally intelligent or talented persons, yet they could hardly handle their own emotions and not a few could also be insensitive and exploitative. They do not know how to deal with criticism and rebuke. They have been used to satisfying themselves and desire all the attention they could get. Many of them cannot endure hardship. They do not understand the true meaning of self-denial and therefore they do not know how to tame and discipline their flesh. They are simply focused on their needs. They could also have a very different way of viewing justice. The emotionally immature person is such a selfish person [that he/she is incapable of extending, in a sustained manner, Derridas unconditional hospitality (alterity par excellence)].

One of the unmistakable marks of maturity is altruism. Altruism is not an unnatural attitude; it is not contrary to human nature as many would presuppose.
There are some thinkers who believe that man is basically selfish, self-autonomous, and has no need for others, a belief which in effect is a rejection not only of mans natural need to communicate and relate, but also his natural ability to show love and concern for others. If it were so, then humanity would have ceased to exist. Altruism comes from our ability to care, which in turn comes from our cognitive faculty to place value on different objects of perception. Things become distinct objects of cognition by learning to compare and differentiate one from the other. We learn to recognize the existence of something, to distinguish and know the value of one by either comparing or relating it to another existent or being through our various senses (including common sense as explained by Aristotle). In the same way, we only come to experience a positive sense of self-worth, when we try to relate ourselves with the rest of our own kind (the human species).

What good does it do to a super rich man when he is the only one alive? He still needs somebody to appreciate and value what he has and what he has done. Without the other, it would be hard for us to find meaning in what we are doing on this planet and why we are here. It is still a form of inward (introspective) contemplation mediated by the presence of others, so that to pay attention to ourselves would eventually require us to pay attention to what is other than the self.

92

Meaning comes from having a sense of being useful (the freedom in our functionality), in being of assistance, and in being needed; and thus from this experience we derive a satisfactory sense of accomplishment, a sense of worth that is confirmed by that delightful feeling of inner contentment and tranquility (inner peace). This is so because we do not want to feel useless, unneeded, or neglected. A useless life is a meaningless life. To satisfy this basic psychological need we can choose directions that lead to happiness, a sense of fulfillment and purpose in life (the eudaimonia). But it has been also said that to find this meaning would require summoning the strength to understand what we have and what we do not have, to know what we can and cannot do, to understand who we are and who we are not, and to know what we really need to live rather than just exist.

To find the meaning of things and assigning meanings are part of mans rationality. It is part of our desire to know. On the other hand, language came about because of the Selfs desire to communicate with others. It is one of the best things that happened to humanity.
The Self needs to express, to communicate. Language allowed the Self to be understood by other human beings. The Self desires to communicate; it is also part of our rational nature. Language allowed the Self to be able to express what the Self wants to convey to the other. Without the other, verbal and written language would be of little use for the Self. Because of the desire to communicate, the Self also needs to give its trust to someone who can understand, someone who is willing to listen someone who is also willing to help and to give.

If man does not really need the human other, then there would be no need for language. The essence of language is friendship and hospitality. I relate, therefore I am.

C. The Gift of Death: Kenotic Hospitality Qua The Way of Perfect Joy
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference. -Reinhold Niebuhr

Today, it is not anymore enough to question answers! It now becomes urgent to be part of the answer, to actively cooperate in finding the answers, the solutions to our societal problems. No one wants to live with a grumbler in the house a fault-finder who neither lifts a finger nor offer concrete ideas to help solve problems (pseudo-activism). For Derrida, we have to act, to actively participate within that space to effect the needed transformations (example: the transformation of domestic and international laws). For Francis, the life of a Friar Minor is tied to the kenosis of Christ. The researcher was emboldened (a) to expand the Franciscan notion of Perfect Joy as the consequence of the

93

kenotic experience; (b) to transpose it as a gift in the Derridean tradition of deconstruction; and (c) to incorporate the same as a part of a philosophy of growth (the way of Perfect Joy as an East-West synthesis), primarily because there is no available literature that has attempted to systematize the notion of Perfect Joy as a serious philosophical theme or study. The researcher explores the possibility of offering two movements under a philosophy of growth in the attempt to provide a better alternative to responsibility by looking for a more credible, more convincing and more persuasive basis for the exercise of Derridas unconditional welcoming. These two-fold movements are also viewed as the twin preconditions or components of a kenotic perspective necessary to attain the moksha the highest of all desirable things (the fulfilling existence).
(1) The first pre-condition is the pre-requisite attitude of openness to possibilities and may be understood as a forerunner which involves the creation of a thinking space that is at once critical of what is in the nature of things. This includes receptiveness to the reality of pain, suffering and death (ethical). It is akin to John the Baptist who clears the way from the cobwebs of western metaphysics to admit the tout autre (par excellence) who is to come. This, in turn, paves the way or introduces the next movement; (2) The second pre-condition involves the twin kenotic principles of self-pruning and alterity. It involves sacrifice based on an enduring love for self and for others, respectively. (3) Together, the two pre-conditions constitute the researchers idea of the kenotic perspective. In other words, both constitute the building blocks of kenotic hospitality (4) Although kenosis and perfect joy are undeniably Christian in origin, the researcher suggests that love as used here is primarily a non-exclusionary term; in other words, a secular or nonreligious understanding about an all-embracing love. It applies to self-love and the love of enemy and may also be understood in the social context as that love practiced by a community, as a deterrent to greed (profits, unbridled exploitation of resources, monopolies) in economic terms or, politically, the love of country enshrined in our preamble (Philippine Constitution) as a way of doing government without discrimination transcending all kinds of borders (without boundaries). It is therefore not just caritas as suggested by Pope Benedict XVI and Gianni Vattimo, but also similar to the Palli word metta and Mo Tses notions of love jian. This way it becomes truly universal in the sense that even atheists and non-believers could readily adopt and relate without being required to be converted first. From a Christian perspective, the

94

hidden theological implications of this abiding principle (value) remain unimpaired, notwithstanding the secularized attempt.177

In the process, the researcher would like to demonstrate that the kenotic elements under this philosophy of growth (1) provides an enhanced understanding of unconditional welcoming, (2) makes the praxis of unconditional hospitality desirable without need of further encouragement, and (3) eventually leads to the experience of perfect joy. In other words, the student-researcher proposes Kenotic Hospitality as the enhanced understanding of Derridas Unconditional Welcoming which this time does not only involve an ethics of alterity but also an ethics of the self. As praxis, it is the Gift of Death; as to its effects, it offers the Gift of Perfect Joy. On the otherhand, the missing link would be love the animating force that transforms Derridas unconditional welcoming into the kenotic praxis of hospitality.

a. The Concept of Kenosis (The Vedantic Key) Kenosis is a Greek term for self-emptying (ekenosen), or self-humbling. The ancient Greek word kn sis means an "emptying", from kens "empty". The word

is mainly used in a Christian theological context.

For example in Philippians 2:7, "Jesus made himself nothing ( e kn se) ..."(NIV) or "...he emptied himself..." (NRSV), using the verb form ken to empty. In this passage, Paul was not primarily putting forth a theory about God; rather he was using God's humility exhibited in the incarnation event as a call for Christians to be similarly subservient to others. It also describes the humble circumstances of his birth. Kenosis has also been used to refer to the

177

The researcher cannot help but to go along with the long-established fiction in the so-called pure philosophical disciplines as if religion is detached in the discourse about life [as if we are also detached from speculative thought (philosophy) and mythology]. It is a paradox towards a pagan universality that resists the very nature of religion as a daily conduct. Ones daily conduct is his/her religion.

95

later work of Jesus in going to the Cross and giving himself over entirely to the will of the Father and the vulnerability of a human death.178 The kenosis of Christ denotes self sacrificial love which includes the willingness to give up his divinity! Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death even death on a cross. Therefore God also highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:6-11). If we want to be human fully human human like Christ, we need to empty ourselves in order to be filled with the self sacrificial love in order to serve others. Kenosis is the only way to be human.179

Kenosis (for-otherness) constitutes the person as person. A Self that is tuned towards the other finds self-fulfillment (the eudaimonia):
The issue of authentic selfhood turns on the issue of love for neighbors. We are authentic selves only in direct proportion to our ability to be affected by and related to others. There is no love without compassion. Compassion evokes our consciousness of the unity of the human race, the knowledge that all people are bound together by the human condition. Compassion does not lead to commiseration but to comfort, to being strong with the other. In extending hospitality for the stranger all the alienation and injustice of homelessness is exposed. In the kenotic life everyone is our neighbor, whoever happens to be at hand, unconditionally, without discrimination. This is why a kenotic love includes the love of enemy (Derridas hostipitality). Such love is based neither on favoritism nor instinctive aversion. There can be no exclusiveness, no partiality, and no elitism. Kenotic love is characterized essentially by its universality. It is the foundation of interdependence. Interdependence is a way of being, of existing without domination, without force, without difference in status. The practice of hospitality as advocated in Matthew 25: 34-46 is not only an obvious ethical demand but also a hermeneutical principle of comprehension. It is a challenge to see the stranger the way Jesus Christ did.180

Since philosophys religious turn, present-day philosophers use the concept of kenosis to search for new ways of speaking about God in an era after the death of God. Thus, Gianni Vattimo makes a connection between secularization and the end of metaphysics as forms of kenosis, in which the Christian God sheds more and more of his traditional metaphysical properties, in order to arrive at the real truth of Christianity. Derridas
Extensive Definition of Kenosis. Internet (12/27/11/12:00 pm): http://kenosis.askdefine.com/ Kenosis: The Only Way to Be Human. Internet (12/28/11/2:00 pm): http://frted.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/kenosis-the-only-way-to-be-human/ 180 Lucien Richard, OMI, Living the Hospitality of God, Paulist Press, New Jersey, 2000, pp. 77-78.
179 178

96

wanderings through negative theology are also inspired by kenosis. We need a kenosis, an emptying of language, says Derrida, to allow a new way of speaking about God.181
Gianni Vattimo is known for his optimistic nihilism in Weak Thought (il pensiero debole) which for him is an affirmation of the present condition of existence characterized by the increasing erosion of the traditional metaphysical and rational foundations of modernism. Vattimo argues that it is not a reactive and destructive expression of nihilism but rather an optimistic phase of intellectual and cultural realization that will lead to an actual ethical, social and political transformation. The concept of kenosis (the self-emptying or weakening of God) expressed in Philippians 2:6-8 takes on particular significance for Vattimo, lending support not only for his conviction that the theologically loaded metaphysics of the West necessarily leads to the secularization of contemporary society and thought, but also that the early Christian notion of agap prefigures the anti-metaphysical revolution embraced by weak thought. How can Vattimo wish to distort metaphysics with an ethic of values? By reading the history of philosophy through a religious perspective, rather than reading the history of Christianity through a philosophical lens, Vattimo is able to see love (charity/caritas) as the point of convergence between philosophy's downward path and the historical transmission of Christianity. As the message of the Christian gospel empties into philosophical nihilism, it finds its precise fulfillment and destiny. For Vattimo, it is incumbent on philosophers to become politicians, which is the most political choice today, because it is necessary from a democratic point of view, whereas becoming a career politician is, politically speaking, only second best. As Marx is often quoted: a philosophy that does not become non-philosophy is useless182

The researcher would like to explore how the above data could be harnessed to develop a philosophical rather than a theological concept of Kenotic Hospitality. Thus, an eclectic concept of kenosis is herein considered as the vedantic183 key to possibly defog the mist that has beclouded and undermined the eudaimonic quest since antiquity.
b. Twin Pre-Conditions of the Kenotic Perspective (towards Moksha)

181

Rene van Riessen, Hermeneutics of Kenosis: The Road of Dispossession in Man as a Place of God: Levinas' Hermeneutics of Kenosis, Springer Publisher, Netherlands, 2007, p. 173. [See Internet (01/19/12/1:16 pm): http://www.springerlink.com/.../g08u1rg6w026606]. 182 Santiago Zabala (ed.), Weakening Philosophy: Essays in Honor of Gianni Vattimo. Internet (01/15/12/ 2:00 pm): http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/23057-weakening-philosophy-essays-in-honour-of-gianni-vattimo/ 183 Vedantic as used here refers to that potential to transcend the limits of self-identity and to see ones connection with the larger picture; thus, ones connection with others - harmony in alterity (unity in diversity).

97

1. Let It Flow (Openness to the Possibilities of the Gift) The researcher proposes that Let it flow (an eclectic combination of the subjectivities of (1) Derrida on the gift, and that of (2) Zenos good flow of life in accordance with nature with that of Zhuang Zi on the wu-wei) signifies not only this openness to the boundless expression of hospitality as a radical individualistic gift but also this openness to life that respects the natural flow and order of all things: The first suggests the messianic openness for things to come. It connotes the boundless parameter of deconstruction the critical space for creative possibilities. It is an open- minded attitude not only for further truths, but also a fallibilistic kind of broadminded disposition in the articulation of questions that makes room for untruth.184
For theists, it could mean letting God be God. For Catholics, it could be openness to the gifts of the Spirit who blows where it wills. At this point, it should be reminded that even Derrida postulates that if that God as Wholly Other (Tout Autre Est Tout Autre) is not invented, then the deconstructive enterprise is nothing more than a process of opening, uncloseting, to allow the passage toward the Other (kindly see Chapter II). As the Pentecostals put it: it is a certain kind of hospitality that is not willing to close down the possibility of God, and in the possibility that God is at work in all kinds of diverse ways and contexts185 Richard L. Purtill argues: In a world that challenges and question every proposition, we must reason in order to believe and, while reasoning alone will not lead to religious commitment, it can give us reason to believe.186 Viktor Frankl approvingly quotes the words of Nietzsche: He who has a Why to live for can bear almost any How.187

The second is openness to life that includes respect for nature, the natural habitat and anything that is in the nature of things (that also takes into account the human factor).
184

Ian Edwards, Derrida's (Ir)religion: A Theology (of Diffrance). Internet (11/25/11/1:00pm):http://www.janushead.org/6-1/Edwards.pdf 185 Engaging and Understanding Difference and Otherness: Yong and Williams. Internet (01/19/12/2:21 pm):http://prodigal.typepad.com/prodigal_kiwi/2011/06/engaging-and-understanding-difference-andotherness-yong-and-williams.html 186 Purtill, Richard L., Reason to Believe: Why Faith Makes Sense, Eerdmans Publishing, USA, 1974. p. 82 187 Harold Kushner cites Viktor E. Frankl in Mans Search For Meaning, Beacon Press, USA, 2006, p. xi.

98

As a result, the Self seeks foremost to preserve and promote what is human, and the pursuit of what is humane and what is humanizing in man. It also connotes a reverence for the value of life (live & let live). It is equated with letting things be. It is learning to listen intently and feel the pulse of life in nature. Hence, it is an attitude that does not want to tamper with nature. It also suggests a realistic view of life and the ability to accept the facts and facticity about life as they unfold which allows the Subject to confront the reality of pain, suffering, and even death. It is associated with the ability to adjust & to gracefully accept adversity and human limitations. Openness seeks a new language, new articulation; new rational expressions to arrive at the truth about man in general and every man in his/her singularity (uniqueness). Let it flow also brings an awareness of the inter-connectedness of things (the continuum-communio perspective) which allows the Seeker (1) to acknowledge the radical singularity of all living beings (2) to acquire a sense of purpose188in all forms of life, and thus (3) respond accordingly. Such pursuit leads to the path of Perfect Joy. Perfect Joy here becomes an appreciative response towards life: towards the unpredictable gifts of life, the unexpected favorable turn, the surprise visits of truth, the unfathomable kindness of events, for the gracious provisions of this earth, for the
188

Evidence in positive psychology suggests that people who focus on living with a sense of purpose as they age are more likely to remain cognitively intact, have better mental health and even live longer than people who focus on achieving feelings of happiness. [Kindly see Shirley S. Wang, Is Happiness Overrated?: Study Finds Physical Benefits to Some (Not All) Good Feelings. Internet (01/19/12/2:02 pm): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704893604576200471545379388.html]

99

solutions that cannot be anticipated, for the awe and wonder at the puzzles of creation. More than anything else, we experience perfect joy when we have gone beyond ourselves in order to reach out and empty ourselves for a cause greater than ourselves. From a NeoPlatonist perspective of mystics, it is the emotive response which rejoices in the selfemptying provisions of the One, the infinite life-force which is greater than us. 2. Let It Go (The Dual Self-Emptying Approach)
Derrida's aim is to establish the priority of self sacrifice as grounded not upon utilitarian grounds but upon its status as radically individualistic gift.

It is proposed that Letting Go described as an Ethic of Sacrifice Based on Love (the gift of goodness to the self and for the other) is to be understood as an emptying process which works two ways:
The first action is related to our dealings with the Not-Self or the Physiological Self, and involves Self-Pruning based on the love of self (letting go those worldly concerns which Ezra Bayda describes as our attachments and addictions, our expectations, our sense of entitlement, and our fear-based emotions). In the Christian context, this would mean a life of self-denial, renouncing worldly fame, wealth, and power and involves temperance and the avoidance of sin. In the Franciscan tradition, this is the life of poverty and simplicity. This attitude has an expanded meaning for the Friars Minor because it involves humility, a lowering of the Self subject to all especially the poor, the oppressed, the neglected, the powerless, the voiceless, and the marginalized. (Derrida has also rallied behind the cause of the marginalized). It is from this Franciscan concept of humble and self-less service that the second twin action of sacrifice based on love for the other was initially conceived and adapted in a philosophy of growth. This philosophy of growth is the product of the researchers synthesis of eastern and western thoughts. Eventually, this Alterity is developed here as the praxis of non-exclusionary alterity subject to all. In this project, this second component is the altruistic response to our totally other (the stranger). This response is the consequence of an understanding/illumination which inspires the Kardia to care, to reach-out, and show kindness and concern for others.

In the Christian context this selfless or disinterested stance is understood as selfemptying act based on love as an expression of love (the righteous/perfect life). In

100

Derridean terms, this is hospitality towards death based on responsibility as an expression of justice.189 i. Self-Pruning: An Ethics of Care for the True Self The authentic Self will have to learn to let go, to give-up and forego many things. The Self will have to learn to detach and liberate itself from the Illusion of Self. The key word to describe this first action is Self-Pruning which is the affirmation of the True Self (Atman, the Greater Self, or the Moral Self) and the rejection of the Not-Self (Annata, the Lesser Self, or the Mis-oriented Self).190 It is proposed that Self-Pruning (detachment) is a gift of goodness to the Self. If we view detachment in terms of self-denial, it may easily be perceived as a form of sacrifice. But it could also be positively understood as a form of self-love that allows the Self to love others a radical impoverishment for the sake of self in order to make the desirable response for the Stranger. Essentially, it is an ethics of care for the true self. Emboldened by the new literary space offered by deconstruction towards justice and inspired by allegorical/figurative methods of reasoning, the researcher proposes the pruning perspective (trimming/weeding-out) to justify the positive view of the Self who

189 190

Rachel Bowlby(trans.), Of Hospitality/ Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to Respond, p.144. Judd Biasiotto and Tommy Dorsey, In Pursuit Of Happiness Internet (01/19/12/10:26 am):

101

assumes a kenotic perspective.191 It is argued that the pruning perspective192allows the subject to view sacrifice as gain instead of loss. Hence, the pruned subjectivity is the mature perspective which is viewed as an enhancement of the human potential to function in an excellent manner. It is therefore suggested that, in the kenotic perspective, the Subject goes through this pruning process to bring out the true self (the Pruned Self) to its optimum condition and therefore desirable level. There is a wealth of analogy in pruning aside from its freshness.
Aristotle himself argues that love of self is not incompatible with the altruistic love for friends (philia) which became Derridas basis for his concept of hospitality (philoxenia: love of strangers). One who claims to feel love in an authentic manner -not as a way possessing but as a way of being per se and being towards the other (Augustinian) will not only have love for self but also love for the other; for love cannot be love unless it is understood in its complete sense.

Metaphysically, true love of self, as a type of self-interest or self-interestedness, is not an inappropriate mental attitude, in the same way, that it is in our very nature to desire to care for our selves and to desire to know ourselves and whatever there-is in-the-world. It is in our interest as an individual-in-the-world to attend to these selfconcerns if we are to grow and if we truly care. We prune ourselves because we want to improve in life and become better persons (love of self).

191

Pruning is a horticultural practice involving the selective removal of parts of a plant such as branches, buds, or roots. The reasons to prune includes deadwood removal, shaping (by controlling or directing growth), improving or maintaining health, reducing risk from falling branches, preparing nursery specimens for transplanting, and both harvesting and increasing the yield or quality of flowers and fruits, (01/02/12 8:33 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruning 192 To prune in French tailler, includes to polish, while elaguer, also means to cut out the fancy stuff. In German, backpflaume or beischneiden includes circumscision while streichen also means to delete. In Dutch, besnoeien also means to dress, while trimmen, includes attitude control. Internet (01/02/12 8:33 pm): http://www.websters-online-distionary.ordg/defintions/prune?

102

It is said that the secret of loving others is not to control them; but the secret of loving ourselves is to control ourselves. If man is to dress the earth, it must first learn and understand how to dress himself from within. The self must learn to control itself if it has to attain mastery over its will, to overcome the itch and the burning sensation, those pangs and avarice of the flesh that threatens to overwhelm and weaken any resistance. The self will have to find a way to withstand and stay away from those false siren calls193 of desire. The Self must learn to control itself if it has to bloom to maturity.
Life is all about problem-solving and it is natural to have problems, it is a part of life; but it is in the way we deal with problems that really counts.

To be able to respond accordingly and avoid further complications, the Self must be mature enough to master its will, its mind, and its emotions - the Kardia. This feat requires self-control. To control oneself is one of the selfs daily goals in life.
Indic traditions are rich not only in recommendations of non-attachment as a path to tranquility but also in their long history of analysis of conscious states associated with traditional meditation practices designed to produce calm concentration (Zen Meditation). Plato had his Socrates argue that both pleasure and pain are not related as contraries or dimensional opposites. In Plato and later Greek thinkers, as also among those of ancient India, discussion often turns to pleasure's role as a cause or object of desire and on the search for a true pleasure that involves no desire or need and hence none of the suffering, tension, or stress connected with these. The Self has to liberate itself from inferior desires that could never provide true happiness. Stuart Mill advised against the more activated and desire-driven forms of pleasure which were perceived to be lacking most of what make life worth living. Such advice had antecedents in Plato's hostility to pleasure connected with strong desires.194 It is most crucial therefore that to be able to detach from the worldly concerns that troubles ones existence, the Self will have to learn to take a pause and contemplate on the things that really matters most in life. The Self cannot properly discern what matters most if it is continually distracted by things that constantly makes the Self restless (anxious) and by the

193

In Greek mythology, the Seirenes (or Sirens) were three sea nymphs who lured sailors to their death with a bewitching song, see Internet (01/19/12/3:04 pm): http://www.theoi.com/Pontios/Seirenes.html 194 Chapter 15: Ancient Greek Philosophy in Shattering the Sacred Myths Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.evolutionary-metaphysics.net/ancient_greek_philosophy.html

103

things that drives it to pursue flawed priorities in life that ultimately undermines the Selfs wholesome growth as a human being.195

The authentic self will have to deconstruct again, to sort it out until what remains are the bare essentials.196 Knowing what the bare essentials are, is to know what matters most in life. This is most significant because if we know what really matters most in life then we will also know how to respond to strangers.
More often than not, those who have less in life knows what it means to live by the day, what is needed to be able to survive in a day, how much it really cost to last the day; and yet the paradox is that they are not aware (and therefore also do not know any better) that man need not really go through the glitters of a luxury-driven existence just to be human to experience an excellent life (the good life). Most of those material surplus or extras are usually the vanities of a capricious existence which could distract the uninitiated immature self from attaining its true self.197

As Derrida would phrase the paradox: the secret is that there is no secret, but in some deep way, we just dont know who we are or what the world is198
Man cannot live forever. Heidegger once said that from the moment a person is born, the possibility that one can die any minute already begins (Being-towards-Death). People usually grow old and begin to weaken and eventually die. People could get sick or meet untimely deaths in accidents or from acts of violence, from acts of cruelty and injustice. Anything can happen as the seconds pass away. Tomorrow and later cannot promise that each one of us will still continue to be here. What remains uncertain is exactly when. Each one of us cannot escape death. This awareness that everything is temporary should motivate each and everyone to carefully plan out ones temporary stay on earth. The authentic self asks: how is it supposed to spend Quality Time during a limited earthly existence. Perhaps, when we recognize that we do have a limited existence we begin to ask ourselves: what then are the things that really matter in life? What then is life all about? And what if the self was diagnosed and advised that it only has one year to live? How about a month to live, a week or even just a day? How will the dying self propose to live the remaining days of its life? With whom will the dying Self spend those most intimate final moments?199

Many among us young people have aversions talking about death. Death is a morbid and distasteful topic; it is not one which we could enthusiastically talk about in a cheerful
Frederick Casidsid, Self-Discovery Module, Unpublished Recolletos School of Theology, Q.C.,2011. Bertrand Russell offered what he called "a form of Occam's Razor": A principle that generally recommends selecting from among competing hypotheses the one that makes the fewest new assumptions. This principle suggests that we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor 197 Orlando Gamata, Module on Discernment, Unpublished, Recolletos School of Theology, Q.C., 2011. 198 John D. Caputo, Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). Internet (11/19/11/ 11: 10 am): http://www.crosscurrents.org/caputo200506.htm 199 Orlando Gamata, Module on Discernment, Unpublished, Recolletos School of Theology, Q.C., 2011.
196 195

104

way. Many young people also have this escapist or unrealistic belief that: death simply cannot happen to me. It cannot happen to me anytime soon. I am too young to die.
There are indeed many people who simply refuse to confront and accept the fact about our mortal or limited existence. And it is precisely because of this aversion, this state of denial, that many youths today never bother to reflect and understand what really matters most in life. Eventually, the younger generation usually find themselves making the wrong decisions in life.

It is said that how the Self intends to spend intimately those final days on earth is the best way to be everyday of our lives!
With whom would that be? Many ofcourse will choose family (which only shows how important family is) and still there are some who prefer to spend it with the needy. Whoever they may be, this demonstration only confirms that relationships (in connection with the human faculty to relate) indeed play a crucial role in the human souls search for meaning in life. It is how we are supposed to live (as if today is the last day of our lives)! We want every moment to count. We want Quality Life. We want to live and die with dignity. 200 I relate, therefore I am (relationships).

For the authentic Homo Sapiens, the reality of death gives rise to a subjectivity that man is first and foremost an ethical being.201If the Self is conscious about dying everyday, about his finitude, then it will understand what really matters most in life. The self will be able to distinguish between surplus and bare essentials. The bare essentials consist in learning to value the gifts of life. And the bare essentials are what matters most in life. When we release what is extraneous in our lives, we can recognize what really matters.202
But to know what matters most in life, it would not be enough just to pay attention to the self; one must also pay attention to others. Corollarily, to rely on knowledge alone would not be enough to understand the truths about life and respond accordingly; we also need to listen intimately to the pulse of life, of the things and events around us teeming with life through our hearts.

200 201

Orlando Gamata, Module on Discernment, Unpublished, Recolletos School of Theology, 2011 Peter J. Leithart, Derrida on Gift. Internet (08/10/11/ 2: 15 pm): http://www.leithart.com/archives/002003.php 202 Kenosis. Internet (01/19/12/3:00 pm): http://www.kenosisspiritkeepers.org/

105

The kenotic encounter requires attentive listening and the willingness to enter into anothers world and be transformed by this world. The welcome of hospitality performs the transformation of oneself by the existence of the other.203 This is the domain of alterity.

ii. An Ethics of Non-Exclusionary Alterity

One who truly values the gift of life must also have the wisdom how to use it

The other twin action under this self-emptying project is the praxis of nonexclusionary alterity (subject to all) and also involves the concept of self-sacrifice based on love for others. It is said that one cannot begin to experience love for the other (alterity) unless the self transcends and discovers oneself outside his own self.
It does not need much philosophy to understand that love was never meant to be a one-way process. It is a normal part of our humanity to love in return. It is also a normal part of human nature to desire to be loved. To love in return and the desire to be loved are both inextricably linked to mans natural desire to be quenched by that meaningful kind of existence to thirst for the good life. The strict adherence to duty without taking into consideration desire as a fundamental human factor is fatal. The desire to do justice must take into consideration in its entirety what is human, humane and humanizing.

David Hart wonders if Derrida has "uncritically succumbed to a Kantian rigorism that requires an absolute distinction of duty from desire" but suggests that it is difficult to explain why "the thought of the gift must be confined to so narrow a moral definition of gratuity or selflessness, purged of desire." Hart also wonders whether selflessness devoid of desire is so far from hate: "Would there not be something demonic in a love without

203

Nell Becker Sweeden, Book Review: Living the Hospitality of God by Lucien Richard. Internet (01/24/12/ 9:42 pm): http://www.bu.edu/cpt/resources/book-review/living-the-hospitality-of-god-bylucien-richard-omi/

106

enchantment, without a desire for the other, a longing to dwell with and be recognized by the other?"204 The researcher also senses something that is not in the natural flow of things, something that is not in accordance with our logic as human beings. As a gift of death, the praxis of alterity is a personalistic act and is supposed to be the best expression of the Self towards the other.
In trying to conceive a notion of measureless friendship (unconditional welcoming) as a basis for justice in the realm of politics, Derrida was actually trying to combine the Pauline notion of Christian fraternity with the Aristotelian notion of philia (friendship par excellence). Derrida rejects the exclusionary effects of unjust laws under our classical understanding of democracy and calls for a non-exclusionary notion equality based on justice among brothers and friends.205 The word "philia" has to do with brotherly love. We may recognize philia in another compound word: "Philadelphia" - the City of Brotherly Love. It speaks of the bonds of friendship that bind us together in community. 206Philia can be defined as "the reserve of human warmth, enthusiasm and generosity that nourishes and stimulates the fellowship at the heart of civic life. The lens of resilience is fundamental to Philia because it makes us re-examine our assumptions about how individuals and communities function and grow. It reminds us that we are not merely passive recipients in need of outside support and intervention, but have a built-in capacity to heal, adapt, transform and survive. It is worth noting that for Christians this notion of hospitality may be applied to the love of strangers (philoxenia) or neighbor and brotherly love (fraternal love): all embraced under the broader Christian term agape. On the otherhand, the Aristotelian notion of philia of the first kind (friendship based on virtue) is also a form of love. Thomas Jay Oord has argued that if philia is a type of love, it must be defined so as not to contradict love. Oord defines philia as an intentional response to promote well-being when cooperating with or befriending others. Oord adds that philia also gives humans authentic friendship.207 Lita Furby one of the leading psychologists today conducting further research on justice claims that a persons treatment of others is said to be just if it corresponds to some standard or criterion of what is morally right, which for Furby should be understood as a humanitarian standard in terms of consequence or outcomes (justice judgments). Furby further explains that the sum total of humanitarian standards corresponds to the prevailing conception of what a human being is or ought to be. The humanitarian standard has implications not only for what a person should not have to suffer but also for what is necessary to achieve positive
204

Peter J. Leithart, Derrida on Gift. Internet (08/10/11/ 2:15 pm): http://www.leithart.com/archives/002003.php 205 Geoffrey Bennington, Politics and Friendship: A Discussion with Jacques Derrida. Internet (1 December 1997):http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/pol+fr.html 206 What is Philosophy?:The Definition and Relevance of Philosophy. Internet (01/22/12/9:15 pm): http://www.angelfire.com/az/experiment/philintro.html 207 Craig A. Boyd, Introduction: Perspectives on Love and Agap in Visions of Agap: Problems and Possibilities in Human and Divine Love, Ashgate Publishing Company, USA, 2008, p. 9.

107

personhood.208 Richard Norman concurs that the concept of the fully human life coincides with the Platonic and Aristotelian concept of genuine happiness.209

If we go strictly by Derridas standards, his notion of alterity is supposed to be the best possible way of honoring or respecting the otherness of the other without expecting anything in return.210 Derrida has always suggested that it should be non-exclusionary; in other words, nobody is excluded, left-out or marginalized by this praxis or law or principle and that includes the atheists and the non-Christians. It also means that even the choice of the language to describe this alterity should not be discriminatory as to undermine a certain class. Derrida even rejects the notion of fraternity that excludes father and women, couples etc. When we say nobody is left out it implies a notion of alterity that dissolves the I and converts all living beings as singular-plural, which means belonging to a generic class of others yet each retains this distinct singularity as the other like no other (haceeity211 of Scotus) that must be treated with equal respect, in contrast to the double standards of carnivorous humans who ironically claim to champion the cause of animals. Bruns 2011 reading of Derrida emboldened this researcher to call it the communio perspective.212

208

Ronald Lee Cohen, Justice: Views from the Social Science. Internet ( 01/24/12/9:12 pm): http://books.google.com/books?id=ecR1WsSXWQMC&pg=PR11&lpg=PR11&dq=Lita+Furby,+justice 209 Plato & Aristotle: The Role of the Emotions in the Pursuit of Eudaimonia. Internet (01/24/12/9:15 pm): http://niallmarkey.hubpages.com/hub/Plato-Aristotle-The-Role-of-the-Emotions-in-the-Pursuit-ofEudaimonia 210 Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida 211 Haecceity in Duns Scotus, in Medieval Theories of Haecceity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). See Internet http://www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-haecceity/ 212 Internet (12/28/2011 11:09 pm): http://english.nd.edu/news/25962-newest-book-by-prof-gerald-bruns/

108

It is also a Derridean challenge that brings to the fore the anthropocentric bias (at the expense of animals) in the ancient concept of sacrificing animals (Cains gift) as an offering to appease the gods which was further brought to its extreme limits in the case of Abraham-Isaac (human sacrifice). Are we then going to treat the rest of the animal specie as humans? Is it wrong to kill all kinds of animals and insects? What then do the Christian Animal-Protection groups have to say about Peters dream in Acts 10: 9-17? Verse 12 describes all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air; does this include the dogs? Can we really be kind and hospitable to animals and then also eat animals for food? Do we make them sacred and untouchable when we make them our pets? Is there such a thing as animal hospitality? Will it make a donkey human if it were given the gift of language? (In Numbers 22:28, Balaam was spared by the angel because of the talking donkey). Legend has it that Francis practiced a kenotic love for all creatures which is somewhat similar to the communio and continuum perspective separately described by Bruns and Gablik.

This differance or field of tension is the reason why this researcher, in formulating the concept of Kenotic Hospitality, tried to approximate the Derridean ideals of alterity by providing for openness towards this incalculable alterity to allow boundless possibilities in the interpretation and praxis of kenotic justice. The researcher claims that kenotic hospitality is the best expression of alterity. This alterity is not grounded on philia/philoxenia alone, but on a non-exclusionary allembracing love subject to all even to the point of death. Alterity as the ethical praxis of kenotic hospitality is best conceived as love. To understand this love is to understand pain and sorrow. It presupposes sacrifice. This is so because in the act of love, giving up and sacrificing all personal considerations is the first step.213
Those motivated by the secret of sacrifice do not experience this sense of giving up and therefore need no other motive to help them overcome the natural human tendency to want to hold on. The sacrifice itself is the motivation and it is experienced as gain and not loss. They let go of their selves like a man takes off a heavy cloak when the sun comes out. They require no recognition and no benefit, perceived or otherwise to the collective. Of course such a benefit inevitably does occur but it is as a byproduct of their sacrifice and not the cause of it and often remains unrecognized by them. They are experiencing the bliss that is the jewel hidden in the heart of sacrifice and a taste of spiritual freedom not freedom for the self but freedom
213

Basant Kumar, Contemporary Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, India, 1999, p 84

109

from the illusion of self. They walk upon the way of sacrifice needing no encouragement to do so and grateful for the opportunity - opening door after door, each one leading to greater and greater annihilations of the very self that is journeying until nothing remains but bliss.214

Mother Theresa once said: I have found the paradox that if you love until it hurts, there can be no more hurt, only more love... As a motive, love is a paradox in the sense that the reason for the praxis of love is love itself. Love is its own motive (love for the sake of love). Love is more credible than sacrifice as a motive because to choose sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice borders on masochism. Under this concept of measureless alterity subject to all, love and sacrifice also goes together. I love, therefore I am!
In this life, we cannot do great things; we can only do small things with great love. There is more hunger for love and appreciation in this world than for bread. The poverty of being unwanted, forgotten, unloved, and uncared for is the greatest poverty which we must start to remedy in our homes. Love begins at home and it is not how much we do but how much love we put in that action (Mother Theresa).

How can we entertain strangers as guest in our houses when we do not have a home? Is the house a home? Heidegger once said that homelessness is the contemporary problem par excellence. Heidegger wants to draw our attention to a deeper malaise: the alienated sense that there is no safe place to dwell, that we no longer understand what it means to have a home. Hospitality, kindness to strangers, is only possible when one has a sense of home. Today, we often think of home as an utterly private enclosure against the world: every persons home is his/her castle. Home ought to be seen as a place where we can grow and develop and where we can invite others to do likewise. Until we return to a worthier understanding of home, we can not expect to live up to the virtue of hospitality.215

Bruce Lyon, The Secret of Sacrifice. Internet(11/16/11/ 10 am): http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~blyon/Articles/secretsacrifice.htm 215 Robert J. Wicks, Review: Living the Hospitality of God. Internet(01/22/12/9:45 pm):

214

110

What we need is to love without getting tired. Spread love everywhere. Let no one ever come to you without leaving happier (Mother Theresa). Alterity grounded on love creates beautiful memories. Beautiful memories like perfect joy also come as a promise of the Gift of Self. Creating beautiful memories through quality human relationships endures and could outlast us in the memory of those who will be left behind. Beautiful memories are made up of little but sincere acts of kindness, of concern, and of sensitivity/responsivity towards the feelings and the needs of others. It allows the Self to think of many positive ways to show kindness and concern for others. This is one of the true Selfs daily object and source of delight as it inter-acts/inter-relates with other human beings in-the-world, and this is the reason why the Self is to cultivate meaningful, productive, wholesome and enduring relationships that respect alterity. I relate, therefore I am.

From a Christian perspective, the practice of alterity would mean that the Self will first have to depose King I so that it would not anymore be the primacy of self will but Gods will. It is a response in life from Gods point of view. It is thinking less about the self and more about others. Paradoxically, this is where the demarcation of humility and love is blurred and the two concepts become inextricably related. Love as the basis of alterity in the praxis of Kenotic Hospitality does no violence to the other than the self: dilectio proximo malum non operator plenitutodo On the other hand, what others describe as the folly of self-sacrifice is never viewed as a loss by the Subject who is overwhelmed by this kenotic love; rather it is perceived as a positive tendency (a natural potential of the human soul) which has something to do with the growing-up process the pruning perspective. c. Kenotic Hospitality in a Nutshell It is suggested that the praxis of kenotic hospitality, under the proposed philosophy of growth, involves (1) openness, and (2) the twin self-emptying actions of kenosis as its main generative components (constitutive). The bulk of research material also confirms
http://www.amazon.com/Living-Hospitality-Robert-Spirituality Selections/product-reviews/0809139987

111

that perfect joy is the natural emotive/affective by-product of kenotic hospitality. Besides Francis, this is confirmed, among others, by Indian philosopher Basant Kumar when he categorically said that: The ideal of love is the state of perfect joy.216 Thus, the researcher postulates that as a philosophy of growth, the Way of Perfect Joy is the praxis of Kenotic Hospitality which, in turn, brings about perfect joy.
The psychologist Abraham Maslow also studied these experiences and called them peak experiences. Maslow said these times were the happiest moments as they experienced great awe, bliss, ecstasy with tremendous meaning in their lives during these experiences.

Kenotic Hospitality is broader than Derridas concept of unconditional welcoming: (1) the notion of alterity which kenotic hospitality embraces is not simply based on philia which implies the combined notion of friendship, brotherly love, and philoxenia. Under this proposed deconstruction-(re)construction of Derridas own version of hospitality, philia is subsumed or embraced under an all-embracing/non-exclusionary love as one of the suggested innovations under this project; (2) Moreover, the praxis of Kenotic Hospitality qua the Way of Perfect Joy does not only presuppose an openness to possibilities but also involves the more positive concept of Self-Pruning (detachment from worldly concerns and illusions) which is retrieved and re-introduced as the true love of self, the kenotic perspective that would eventually emancipate the Self from the Maya and allow the Subject to love the other in a selfless or rather excellent manner (Aristotle). Self-Pruning allows the subject to love the Self without the pejorative connotations from the west.

216

Basant Kumar, Contemporary India Philosophy, p. 84.

112

It has already been said that reading Derridas deconstruction was never meant to be a comforting experience. Perhaps, the best way now to dispel the feelings of discomfort by the Christian critiques of Derrida is to cite the following verse from the Christian bible: Greater love has no one than this: to lay down ones life for ones friends (John 15:13). This means that the Christians who practice fraternal love are the first people who are expected to understand kenotic hospitality precisely because this enhanced version involves welcoming the risks joyfully even if it would cost the giver his very life.
In response to Heidegger and Levinas' claim that giving one's life for the other is the purest demonstration of individuality, Derrida observed that what is given "is not some thing, but goodness itself, a giving goodness, the act of giving or the donation of the gift.

A hallmark of deconstructive analysis is differance. Using differance effectively as the medium to create undecidability, Derrida has in effect challenged his readers to solve the puzzles of life, to reflect and enlarge our consciousness to find out for ourselves the best possible ethical path from the heap of ideas, from a pile of possibilities not-evenyet-conceived. Derrida experimented on the notion of philia as a fraternity of friends exacting justice among themselves as an expression of hospitality; Derrida simply stretched the boundless possibilities that challenge the Christian understanding of love. He tries to put it to the test to find out how far man would, under extreme pressure, be willing to go (remember the case of Abraham?): are we now ready to open our doors in the middle of the night to a complete stranger who could be a potential criminal?
In Philippians 1:20-24, Pauls goal was to glorify God in his body, whether this was by life or by death. For Paul to live is to live out the life of Christ but he also has this desire to depart and be with Christ which for him is better by far because to die is gain. Paul believes that he fought the good fight: I have completed the race, and I have remained faithful (2 Tim 4:7).

113

On the eve of his death, St Francis after breaking bread and blessing his brothers said: "I have done my part, may Christ teach you to do yours."217
Francis found true joy in having done what pleases the Lord. In the face of insults, injuries and offense, Francis finds joy having responded the Gospel way for the love of the crucified Christ. For him it is personal victory in his quest for perfection towards Christ for the greater glory of God. He knew what hunger means and what it meant to own nothing. Being poor himself, Francis learned how to give generously the best part in him for the love of God and neighbor. Francis was a simple but tireless man who with trust and confidence in the love of the Lord joyfully and humbly devoted himself entirely in the perfection of the Gospel Life in his thoughts, in his words and in his deeds.

Francis gave his best effort; he ran the race and welcomed the extra mile with the marks of the passion on his body: the stigmata.218 For him death is the gateway to heaven
Let us be assured, hospitality is definitely a human characteristic but we need go further, and also think of hospitality toward death. Love begets love. The challenge responds to a challenge; a gift of death for a gift of death. In the fixity of our mourning, we have perhaps forgotten this movement of invitation which is hospitality, and sacrificed a little of our humanity to the desire to know.219

Kenotic Hospitality is our own funeral service towards our dying self (towardsdeath). This is the proposed mourning if the Self truly knows how to love and respect itself and others.
In Tolkiens tale, what we learn about Aragorn and Arwen is less dependent upon their psychological interaction and personalities and far more dependent upon what they epitomize. They serve Tolkien's idea about the gift of death. This is why, to me, Tolkien never shows us how Aragorn prepares Arwen for his and her death, why he skips over any incidents which would, through their participation, unfold their character, why we are never given Arwen's inner thoughts after Aragorn dies or while she sojourns in Cerin Amroth. We don't get petty details; we get an intense focus on one particular topic between them: this stark portrayal of stoic hope on the portal to nothingness and forgetting: our physical existence is a shadow. 220

Under this metaphysics, the True Self mourns to inherit wisdom from the paradoxes in life. Finally, mourning could also be the Franciscan legacy of dual honoring (mutual

St. Francis of Assisi. Internet (01/22/12/9:51 pm): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06221a.htm Marion Habig, The Franciscan Book of Saints, Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago,1959, p. 219 Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality: Anne Dufourmantelle invites Jacques Derrida to Respond, pp.140, 144,146, 154. 220 The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen Internet (01/22/12/9:51 pm): http://forum.barrowdowns.com/archive/index.php?t-12435.html
218

217

114

respect) that we intimately give and receive as brothers in the generic sense (symmetry/mutuality), without expecting any material reward (asymmetry). It also reminds us that we are not in any position to condemn strange articulations in the search for justice. Justice without judgment (without bias, conditions, limitations, hesitations, doubts, or fears), as a gesture of unconditional welcoming by the dying self, demands genuine love and friendship, and will always involve risks, pain, and sacrifice. Kenotic Hospitality, as the supreme human expression of love and justice, is thus proposed as the outstanding feature of the excellent life (from the West) that approximates the moksha (from the East) and brings about perfect joy (Franciscan). This kenotic love is alterity stretched to its very limits to the point of weakness so that in our weakened state, we should turn our attention to the other than our selves to give what remains in us and is really ours to give in order to experience the beautiful and the sublime in human existence and thus sustain that sense of self-satisfaction and fulfillment even unto death. I function (Aristotle); therefore I am. I self-deconstruct/reconstruct, therefore I am becoming kenosis. d. Prologue: The Way of Perfect Joy is the practice of Kenotic Hospitality - the enhanced notion of Derridas unconditional welcoming. On the otherhand, it was an abiding love that animated and transformed the Derridean praxis of unconditional welcoming into Kenotic Hospitality which, in turn, brings about perfect joy.

115

Love is the spring from which it [Kenotic Hospitality] flows, a far greater virtue [than the sense of responsibility] which can rightly be identified as basic in our nature as humans, something which could also be considered not only a part of our rational nature but also an undeniable part of our natural appetite the human soul functions to seek it without need of external prodding or encouragement just to do so. Hence, it becomes possible for humans to cultivate it with a passion. By passion, the researcher means wholehearted devotion as a rational appetite. This must be so because it is fundamental in the rational man; it is also a basic desire. Happiness [Perfect Joy] is simply the desirable emotive consequence of this originary desire which leads to inner peace (transposed from the discussion under Sub-title B.c: The Human Factor, page 85 this Chapter).

Love is the motivating drive that comes from a kenotic perspective which in turn guides our thoughts and actions in response to what matters most in life. Thus it is suggested that if we know what really matters most in life then we will also know how to respond to our strangers. As a corollary: to know what matters most in life, it would not be enough just to pay attention to the self; one must also pay attention to others.
For it is love that allows us to understand what matters most in life; it is the same kenotic love that enable us to give cheerfully - to endure the pain and suffering with joy; and (from a Christian perspective) it is the love of strangers that brings us vis-avis the human faces of God (Matthew 25:40).

On the otherhand, Perfect Joy is the joy of the righteous one:

There is no joy without love, but its righteousness always proceeds from our willingness to personally endure pain and suffering even to the point of death, all in the name of love. Hence, it is joy perfected by loves righteousness.

The East-West survey in search for an alternative to responsibility led to the doorstep of kenosis. The researcher eventually found out that, as a way of life, kenosis inevitably leads to perfect joy which is unmistakably Franciscan. For Franciscesco di Bernardone, the life of a Friar Minor is tied to the kenosis of Christ which is a life of poverty and humble service subject to all (ethic of sacrifice under Phil 2:7). For Francis, perfect joy comes only by enduring pain and suffering for the love and glory of Christ.

116

Kenosis as a life of renunciation and self-giving love is definitely a hallmark of a Franciscan life and could enhance Derridas concept of unconditional welcoming under a philosophy of growth which privileges the human factor and confronts the reality of pain, suffering and death in response to the fundamental question in life. Kenosis offers operative principles to guide our thoughts and actions; it has the potentials for subjective becoming - towards self-actualization. This radical self-emptying perspective of poverty-lowering and alterity (which are also embraced in the oriental notion of detachment and sacrifice) speaks of a wide range of Gospel virtues which also carries with it the messianic promise of inner peace and joy. The kenotic perspective (subjectivity) illuminates the other wise morbid and absurd, obscure and senseless rattle about a kind of hospitality to death.221 The Franciscan notion of kenosis makes Derridas gift of death (unconditional hospitality) sensible as the practice of non-exclusionary alterity subject to all even to the point of death. The concept of sacrifice that is found in an enduring love is the authentic expression of Kenotic Hospitality. This love is the boundless expression of alterity. From a Christian perspective, the Way of Perfect Joy allows the praxis of kenotic hospitality out of love for God and neighbor for the greater glory of a Trinitarian God. As a result, the supreme mandate of love becomes the motivating force that enhances Derridas concept of unconditional welcoming.
221

Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Of Hospitality/Anne Dufuormantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond, pp. 144-146.

117

From a non-Christian perspective and for the purpose of this philosophical discipline, the secularized view of love is appropriated to allow the Subject to perceive this enduring principle from a non-theological perspective; thus, as an objective value, kenotic hospitality becomes a non-exclusionary concept by which every Christian and non-Christian including atheists can relate to. As a philosophy of growth, the Way of Perfect Joy opens up boundless possibilities in the praxis of kenotic hospitality for self and for others the measureless expression of kenotic justice. Kenotic Hospitality confirms the personalistic truth that man becomes fully himself (as a unique human person) to the extent that he gives himself as a free gift to others (The Gift of Self).222 As an expression of justice and righteousness, Kenotic Hospitality is broader than Derridas concept of unconditional welcoming in the sense that it does not only involve a stretched ethical understanding of alterity but also includes an ethics of the self, both of which constitute the eudaimonia (the fulfilling existence). Kenotic Hospitality, as a way of life, is thus suggested as the eudaimonia. As a gift of self, this Franciscan derivative is a personal gift of death which allows the subject to welcome life and death without regrets. It makes life worth living and dying for. It is under this enhanced understanding that unconditional welcoming becomes a risk that is willingly and joyfully assumed without need of further encouragement.

222

John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Borzoi Book, New York, 1994, pp. 202, 209

118

Kenotic Hospitality offers the incalculable promise of the Gift of Perfect Joy. The promise is incalculable precisely because it is a Self-Taste (a singular subjectivity of the promise which has infinite possibilities, as to form and content, and into the future). The promise of Perfect Joy overcomes Derridas dread of the unknown the dread of losing oneself completely without assurance of recompense.223 The promise of perfect joy provides the assurance to overcome our doubts and our fears, and makes the pains and difficulties in life more bearable. Under this kenotic perspective, man need not fear and tremble anymore responsibility (duty) becomes superfluous as a motivating factor (with love, there is no more sense of compulsion) as to freely embrace unconditional welcoming as a means of doing justice for the stranger. Kenotic Hospitality is self-deconstruction is justice. CHAPTER V TOWARDS NEW FRONTIERS IN DECONSTRUCTION
Philosophy is an intellectually demanding discipline. Only those who are willing to learn and only those who are willing to develop their rational faculties will persevere. The knowledge that truly inspires genuine growth is one that is the product of our reflective skills. Trying to decipher and to understand the complex realities in life was never meant to be easy!

C. Synopsis What began as a deconstruction of the Derridas stranger in relation to hospitality eventually lead to the Way of Perfect Joy as a philosophy of growth. The researcher

223

Scott David Foutz, Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death. Internet (01/14/12/7:38 pm): http://www.quodlibet.net/gift.shtml

119

argues that one cannot understand the kind of hospitality that the stranger really deserves unless one deals with his own stranger from within. Reconfiguring the original HostGuest framework entails the development of the Metaphysics of the Self to show that the task of re-interpretation begins in our consciousness. This involves contemplation. Every step along the way became a step in deconstruction. Under this Metaphysical approach, the Guest-Within represents the stranger. Instead of taming the Stranger-Within like a beast, the Host maintains his power to host by befriending the Raw Other, whom the host engages in a partnership to brave and comprehend the perils-of-the world (the illusions) in order to understand through Self-Deconstruction, their shared destiny (Derridean notion of negotiating). To justify the envisioned long journey ahead, the Self consults and embraces Platos Delphic and Care dicta as the twin ethical driving-force that would propel the Self to launch an inquiry and examine Derridas Hospitality in relation to the Stranger, through introspection cum mediation. Life is not only about the self; it is also about the other. To pay attention to ourselves means we also have to pay attention to what is other than the self if the Self is to truly understand. This was also possible because of the moratorium or negotiated truce entered between the Host and the Guest from within. On the Wings of Kardia describes the taxing survey of western and eastern thoughts on happiness in an effort to find the path that leads to perfect joy. The path to understand perfect joy is also a path of growth riveted with deconstruction. The synthesis of the insights gained from the survey bloomed into a philosophy of growth (maturity)

120

which involves two-fold movements: (1) openness, and (2) the twin self-emptying actions: (Self-Pruning and Non-Exclusionary Alterity Subject to All). In the end, the researcher proposes that Kenotic Hospitality is the enhanced notion of Derridas unconditional welcoming. The student further suggests that Kenotic Hospitality, which is an ethics of sacrifice based on an abiding love, leads to perfect joy. D. Philosophical Significance and Practical Implications
Socrates himself left us a footnote to wisdom: Socrates claims that the meaning of Apollos oracle is that humans cannot possess wisdom. Real wisdom was the property of God alone. But even if humans can never attain wisdom, Socrates does not believe that the quest for wisdom is pointless. In fact pursuing the unobtainable goal of wisdom is the most beneficial thing that a human could be doing. Rather than pursuing money, fame, and political power, humans would be most benefitted by leading the examined life.224

The philosophical significance of this study primarily lies in the attempt itself to reconfigure the original Host-Guest framework to be transmogrified into a radical Metaphysics of the Self which paved the way for the Deconstruction of the Self. The eastwest synthesis based on the human factor allowed the researcher to break away from certain traditional approaches in western metaphysic and to radically adopt an eclectic non-traditional reading of kenosis from the perspective of human growth and as a more humane and humanizing response to the fundamental question. It is also a hermeneutic reading that involves a double movement from the religious to the secular from the philosophical to the non-philosophical - a philosophical reading of religious terms (deconstruction) - to bring out a non-religious (neutral and universal) understanding of
224

Hope May, On Socrates (Wadsworth Philosophers Series), pp. 39, 44-45, 46

121

enduring principles (the objective values) - the underlying truths behind Kenotic Hospitality as a perspective and as a praxis that would hopefully contribute to the flourishing of human civilization. The proposed Way of Perfect Joy as a Philosophy of Growth does not only privilege the human factor (to understand better the early Greek notion of virtue as the natural function of the human soul in relation to desire, to the telos and the eudaimonia the epistemo-psycho-ontological aspect) but also confronts the reality of pain, suffering and death (ethical realism). Unmediated by a philosophy of growth, mans interpretation of what matters most in life could be distorted by immature ideologies possessing hedonistic tendencies, producing unwanted results. It rejects the contemporary western notions of self-interestedness and the ego (in particular, that of Levinas) and retrieves Aristotles categories of self-love in harmony with the oriental view of the True Self and the Not-Self while at the same time adopting Socratic eudaimonism and Zhuangzis Wu-wei, to enhance Gabliks continuum (cosmic) perspective of reality together with the contributions of Kierkegaard, Hegel, Heidegger, Vattimo, and Bruns to contemporary philosophy. As a creature of deconstruction, Kardia was a response to Western Philosophys extremely surgical approach in taxonomy which only gave birth to weird philosophies about life leading to more confusion and absurdities in their practical application, and thus only undermined mans ability to integrate the triadic components (mind-will-

122

emotions) into one harmonious operation. Too much emphasis on their distinguishing features has disregarded the more important question (how they are inter-connected and how they could be made to coordinate according to mans nature- according to his natural functions and potentials as an authentic being) how they could be harnessed to enhance being-becoming. Pruning is also introduced as an ethical concept to justify the positive psychological view of sacrifice as gain instead of loss. It is also hoped that as a shared response to the contemporary world, the raw materials that are found in the radical concept of Kenotic Hospitality (qua kenotic justice) would be useful in the further enrichment of ongoing studies in Franciscanism.
Love does not need philosophy to justify itself. The language of philosophy is simply availed to expose their paradoxes in the human condition. It does not rely on words to be understood. It is the universal language which need not be reduced to words precisely because the concept primarily denotes action. It could stand alone. Unlike oral and written language, love transcends all cultural barriers over time and space, because it penetrates the heart and minds of people of every nation, of every race, sex, creed or ideology (whatever the religious or political persuasions or callings they may have). All of us, young or old, are capable of recognizing and perceiving this feeling. This capacity is an inherent part of our very nature as human beings. As if in a dysfunctional state of denial, philosophy simply looked the other way around.

The only paradox is how to deconstruct, to interpret and transpose this boundless love in the world of politics in terms of the global economy and perhaps in terms of political ecumenism or the ecumenical continuum based on that notion of alterity par excellence to achieve the desired non-exclusionary unity, equality and justice. The notion of sacrifice based on love reminds this seminarian of the prophetic argument of Caiaphas based on expedience (John 11:47-54). On the otherhand, Kin of Ata by Dorothy Bryant also makes the researcher dream again of the early Christian

123

community where no member goes hungry because each one literally helps feed each other, carrying each others burdens/cross (which is also symbolized by the love miracle vis-a-vis feeding the multitude). Each one helps build the other in the praxis of what they believed was the eudaimonia (the fulfilling life). They were practicing Kenotic Hospitality. In the same vein, the natives of this archipelago were once in the habit of showing hospitality at the slightest excuse. These Indios who obviously had a good life, were often observed merrymaking by their Colonizers and were later accused of being indolent as a ruse to make them their slaves instead. The happy-go-lucky natives always share the food and wine they had with their guests; the parasite invaders simply reversed the order so that now they ate only the best from the bounties of the land which they have shamelessly coveted for themselves and eventually violated the dignity and common wealth of the people. The animals, the fruits and vegetables were in abundance but they only get what they need and never thought of storage the way manufacturers today do. They never knew what greed means until these profit-oriented foreigners came to introduce strange ideas that would later deprive them of the life they knew. In hindsight, the possibilities in the praxis of kenotic hospitality are limitless, but few dare to thread and press the possible limits of our potentials because it calls the self towards death until nothing is left not even ones identity all in the name of sacrifice based on this abiding love. What is left is just the trace, the spirit, and at the end of the day, we ask ourselves: was it really worth it? How will I still know when I am already

124

dead? Zhuangzis skull might as well retort: How did you know that you will never personally know the truth beyond death? As a seminarian trained in the Franciscan traditions, what matters most in life is to become the person God wants me to be. Just like Francis, my assurance lies in staying close to the Beloved Son in whom the Father is most pleased. Our belief in Christ as the Messiah is the rock (the cornerstone) of our faith. At the end of the day, we are not Muslims, Jews, Christians, Catholics or otherwise (from the Abrahamic tradition); we are not even Buddhist, Hindus or Animists (from the Brahmanic faith); not even atheists.
Let none of us be deceived by what is proper in a name. For at the end of the day, we all stand naked and unbound before the scale of loves righteousness that is inscribed within each one of us. Our nakedness will make us see what we have become; but our freedom will test the limits of our goodness in response to the frailties of our condition. Righteous love is not blind; rather, it will make us see what matters most as clear as the light of day.

What is then in a name when it will only serve to widen the gap and create more fractures in life? Where is that genuine non-exclusionary alterity and communio? (The singular-plural I) And who, for the sake of the love that many people preached, is willing to make the first move to give up and sacrifice this name? Is this aporia or simply difficult? Love needs no prodding because it is self-emptying until everything is given up for others. With significance, this treatise could be used as the building block to a philosophy of sacrifice and dying in public service (the enhanced patriotism) based on the political ethics of Kenotic Hospitality that does not only renounce the traditional way of doing

125

politics but also rejects a culture of corruption and incompetence in public service (ethical housekeeping). The concept of self-deconstruction could also be an open challenge to explore the possibilities of applying Kenotic Hospitality to enhance the local Bayanihan Spirit at the barangay level by re-inventing Damayan Lagi as a communal ethics of care based on love. Justice does not necessarily involve love; but Love always includes justice.

BIBLIOGRAPHY A. Primary Sources: Derrida, Jacques, The Animal That Therefore I Am, Marie-Louise (ed.) and David Mallet (trans.), Fordham University Press, New York, 2008. , The Gift of Death and Literature in Secret, David Wills (trans.), the University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2008. , The Politics of Friendship, George Collins (trans.), Verso, New York, 2005. ,Of Hospitality: Anne Dufourmantelle invites Jacques Derrida to Respond, Rachel Bowlby (trans.), Stanford University Press, California, 2001. , Limited Inc. (inc. Afterword), Samuel Weber (trans.), Northwestern University Press, Illinois, 1998.

126

, Monolingualism of the Other or Prosthesis of Origin, Patrick Mensah (trans.), Stanford University Press, California, 1998. , Adieu to Emmanuel Levinas, Pascale-Anne Brault and Michael Naas (trans.), Stanford University Press, California, 1997. , John D Caputo (edit.), Deconstruction in Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida, Routledge, Chapman and Hall, Inc., New York, 1997. , On The Name, David Wood, John P. Leavey and Ian McLeod (trans.), Thomas Dutoit (ed.), Stanford University Press, California, 1995. , Of Grammatology, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (trans.), Johns Hopkins University Press, USA, 1994. , "Biodegradables: Seven Diary Fragments," trans. Peggy Kamuf, Critical Inquiry,Vol.15, no. 4 (Summer 1989) , Memoires: For Paul de Man (The Wellek Library Lectures), Lindsay, Culler, Cadava, & Kamuf (trans.), Columbia University Press, NY, 1989. , Fors: The Anglish Words of Nicolas Abraham and Maria Torok, Johnson (trans.), University of Minnesota Press, 1986. , Deconstruction and the Other, Interview with Richard Kearney, in Kearney (ed.), Dialogues with Contemporary Continental Thinkers, Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1984. , Writing and Difference, Alan Bass (trans.), University of Chicago Press, USA, 1980. B. Secondary Sources: BOOKS Bayda, Ezra, Beyond Happiness: The Zen Way to True Contentment, Shambhala Publication, Inc., Massachusetts, 2010. Boyd, Craig, Introduction: Perspectives on Love and Agap in Visions of Agap: Problems and Possibilities in Human and Divine Love, Ashgate Publishing Company, USA, 2008.

127

Bruns, Gerald L.,Derridas Cat (Whom Am I?)Research in Phenomenology, Vol. 38, Issue, 2008. Bruns, Gerald L.,On Ceasing to be Human, Stanford University Press, California, 2011. Calarco, Matthew and Atterton, Peter (eds.), The Continental Ethics Reader, Routledge, New York, 2003. Collins, Jeff and Mayblin, Bill, Introducing Derrida, Totem Books, USA, 1997. Cortesi, David, Secular Wholeness: A Skeptic's Paths to a Richer Life, Trafford Publishing, USA, 2001. Duncan, Diane Moira, The Pre-Text of Ethics: On Derrida and Levinas, Peter Lang Publishing Inc., New York, 2001. Eliade, Mircea (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Religion (Volume 6), Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1987. Frankl,Viktor E., Mans Search for Meaning, Beacon Press, USA, 2006. Gablik, Suzi, The Reenchantment of Art, Thames and Hudson Inc., USA, 1991. Habig, Marion (ed.), St. Francis of Assisi, Writings and Early Biograpies: English Omnibus of the Sources for the Life of St. Francis, Franciscans Herald Press, Chicago, USA, 1973. Hannay, Alastair (trans.) Sren Kierkegaard: Papers and Journals (A Selection), Penguin Books, England, 1996. Hulbert, James (trans.), Living On in Harold Bloom et al., Deconstruction and Criticism, Seabury Press, New York, 1979. John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Borzoi Book, New York, 1994, pp. 202, 209. Kearney, Richard and Dooley, Mark (ed.), Questioning Ethics: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy, Hospitality, Justice and Responsibility, Routledge: London and New York, 1999.

128

Kumar, Basant, Contemporary Indian Philosophy, MotilalBanarsidass Publishers, India, 1999. Kunze, Donald,The Missing Guest: The Twisted Topology of Hospitality in Eating Architecture by Jamie Horwitz, Paulette Singley (eds.), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, 2004. Lluch, Alex and Eckmann, Helen , Finding Ways to Be Happy in Simple Principles to Feel Better & Live Longer, WS Publishing Group, California, 2008. Luper-Foy, Steven and Brown, Curtis, The Moral Life, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, USA, 1992. Maung, Hane Htut, Consciousness: An Enquiry into the Metaphysics of the Self, Lulu Press, USA, 2006. May, Hope, On Socrates (Wadsworth Philosophers Series), Wadsworth Publishing, UK, 1999. Montiglio, Silvia, From Villain to Hero: Odysseus in Ancient Thought, University of Michigan, USA, 2001. Mouffe, Chantal (ed.), Deconstruction and Pragmatism, Routledge, New York, 1996. Purtill, Richard L., Reason to Believe: Why Faith Makes Sense, Eerdmans Publishing Co., USA, 1974. Richard, Lucien, Living the Hospitality of God, Paulist Press, New Jersey, 2000. Riessen, Rene van,Hermeneutics of Kenosis: The Road of Dispossession in Man as a Place of God: Levinas' Hermeneutics of Kenosis, Springer Publisher, Netherlands, 2007. Taylor, Mark, Deconstruction in Context, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986, pp. 400,401,404. Warburton, Nigel, Philosophy: Basic Readings, Routledge, USA, 2005.

129

Waters, Lindsay and Godzich, Wlad (eds.), Reading De Man Reading, University of Minnesota Press, USA, 1989. West, Christopher, Theology of the Body Explained: A Commentary on John Paul II's Gospel of the Body, Ascension Press, USA, 2004. Ziglar, Zig, A Goals Program is a Must in Over the Top, The Zig Ziglar Corporation, 1994.

ARTICLES/JOURNALS Binetti, Maria J., Kierkegaard's Ethical Stage in Hegel's Logical Categories: Actual Possibility, Reality and Necessity, in Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, Vol 3, No 2-3 (2007). Branch, Lori The Desert in the Desert: Faith and the Aporias of Law and Knowledge in Derrida and The Sayings of the Desert Fathers. Journal of the American Academy of Religion December 2003, Vol. 71, No. 4. Kates, Joshua, The Voice that Keeps Reading: Evans Strategies of Deconstruction, in Philosophy Today, Vol. 37, No. 3, 1993. Mansfield, Nick --- "Derrida and the Culture Debate: Autoimmunity, Law and Decision," [2006] MqLawJl 7; (2006) 6 Maquarie Law Journal 97. Townshend, Jules, Derrida's deconstruction of Marx(ism) in Contemporary Politics, Vol. 10, no. 2, 2004. Zlomislic, Marko, Derridas Turn to Franciscan Philosophy, Vol: 2 Issue: 2 , Kritike : An Online Journal of Philosophy, 2008. ELECTRONIC Chapter 17: Evolutionary Metaphysics in Shattering the Sacred Myths.Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.evolutionarymetaphysics.net/metaphysics.html Chapter 5: Shattering the Sacred Mythsin Ancient Greek Philosophy. Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.evolutionarymetaphysics.net/ancient_greek_philosophy.html

130

Achieving Happiness: More Advice from Plato.Internet (01/15/12/ 2:09 pm): http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ethics-everyone/201009/achievinghappiness-more-advice-plato Affirmez la survie: Deconstructive Strategy. Internet (10/11/11/ 4:00 pm): http://derridaworks.blogspot.com/2007/08/deconstructive-strategy.html Amouoghli, Babak, Cache (Hidden): A Tale of Hospitality and Hostility. Internet(12/10/11/ 1:43 pm): http://www.philosophynow.org/issue84/Cache_Hidden Ancient Landmarks: Plato and Aristotle. Internet (01/16/12/9:25 am): http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/ancientlandmar ks/PlatoAndAristotle.html Aristotles Psychology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Internet (12/26/11/8:30 pm): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-psychology/ Beck, Sanderson, Ethics of Hindu Philosophy. Internet (01/06/12/9:43 pm): http://san.beck.org/EC11-Hindu.html#1 Being Present with Inner Awareness. Internet (01/17/12/11:41 am): http://www.women-at-heart.com/being-present.html Bennington, Geoffrey, Politics and Friendship: A Discussion with Jacques Derrida. Internet (1 December 1997): http://hydra.humanities.uci.edu/derrida/pol+fr.html Biasiotto, Judd and Dorsey, Tommy, In Pursuit Of Happiness. Internet (01/19/12/10:26 am): http://www.dorseywright.com/internal/index_pursuitofhappiness_int.htm Caputo, John, Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). Internet (11/19/11/ 11: 10 am): http://www.crosscurrents.org/caputo200506.htm Cohen , Ronald Lee, Justice: Views from the Social Science. Internet ( 01/24/12/9:12 pm): http://books.google.com/books?id=ecR1WsSXWQMC&pg=PR11&lpg=PR11 &dq=Lita+Furby,+justice

131

Conway, Timothy, Mahatma Gandhi and the Principles ofSatyagraha/Truth-Force andAhimsa/Nonviolence: Mahatma Gandhi, Life and Teachings. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.enlightenedspirituality.org/Mahatma_Gandhi.html Defining Happiness, Joy & Bliss - 3 Different Energies. Internet (01/15/12/ 3:29 pm): http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=3624 Definition of prune. Internet (01/02/12 8:33 pm): http://www.websters-onlinedistionary.ordg/defintions/prune? Dike, Mustafa, PeraPerasPoros: Longings for Spaces of Hospitality. Internet(12/12/11/2:14 pm):http://www.uvm.edu/~jwaldron/Theory,%20Culture%20and%20Society/ 12dikec.pdf Do You Believe in the Animal?,Boria Sax Review of Jacques Derrida: The Animal That Therefore I Am.Internet (12/19/11/ 10:28 am): http://www.hnet.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=14720 Dy, Manuel, CHAPTER XIX: ZHUANG ZI'S PERFECT JOY:An Answer to the Contemporary Predicament? Internet (10/29/11/1:20 pm):http://www.crvp.org/book/Series03/III-11/chapter_xix.htm Edwards, Ian, Derrida's (Ir)religion: A Theology (of Diffrance). Internet (11/25/11/1:00pm):http://www.janushead.org/6-1/Edwards.pdf

132

Engaging and Understanding Difference and Otherness: Yong and Williams. Internet (12/12/11/2:56 pm): http://prodigal.typepad.com/prodigal_kiwi/2011/06/engaging-andunderstanding-difference-and-otherness-yong-and-williams.html Ethical Dilemmas in Postmodernism. Internet (12/26/11/7:17pm): http://www.articlesbase.com/college-and-university-articles/ethicaldilemmas-in-postmodernism-2259341.html Extensive Definition of Kenosis. Internet (12/27/11/12:00 pm): http://kenosis.askdefine.com/ For the Love of Words: A [Guest] Sabbath Meditation on Hospitality. Internet (12/10/11/ 1:43 pm): http://schmexas.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/for-thelove-of-words-a-guest-sabbath-meditation-on-hospitality/ Foutz, Scott David, Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death. Internet (01/14/12/7:38 pm): http://www.quodlibet.net/gift.shtml Gazzolo, Anne Marie, The Measure ofLove. Internet (01/14/12/9:08 pm): http://momentsofgracelotr.com/The-Measure-of-Love.htm Gill, N.S., Odysseus the Stranger: The Worlds of Homer and Odysseus. Internet (12/10/11/ 2:00 pm): http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/homerodyssey/a/OdysseusStrange.htmhttp: //ancienthistory.about.com/od/homerodyssey/a/OdysseusStrange.htm Goldman, Peter, Christian Mystery and Responsibility, Gnosticism in Derrida'sThe Gift of Death. Internet (12/26/11/7:20 pm): http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0401/pg_DERR.htm Grimstad, Paul,The Idea of the Future of Deconstruction. Internet (10/11/11/10 am): http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewArticle/10/9 Haecceity in Duns Scotus, in Medieval Theories of Haecceity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). http://www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-haecceity/

133

Happiness Equates with Fun? Internet (01/19/12/10:14 am): http://www.tk76recycle.com/show_news.asp?id=39 Hauser, Larry, A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind. Internet (01/15/12/ 4:56 pm): http://www.wutsamada.com/phlmind/pleapain.htm Hindu Dharma-Veda. Internet (01/15/12/ 4:29 pm): http://veda.wikidot.com/hinduism Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3616709/Thequest-for-happiness-down.html Internet (12/28/2011 11:09 pm): http://english.nd.edu/news/25962-newest-book-by-profgerald-bruns/ Jacques Derrida (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Internet (08/12/11/4:00 am): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/derrida/ Jacques Derrida. Internet (08/11/11/2:00 am): http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida Jones, Tobias , Open-door Policy. Internet (12/10/11/ 1:00 pm): http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/13/tobias-jones-lifeordinary-hospitality. Kenosis. Internet (01/19/12/3:00 pm): http://www.kenosisspiritkeepers.org/ Kenosis: The Only Way to Be Human. Internet (12/28/11/2:00 pm): http://frted.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/kenosis-the-only-way-to-be-human/ Know Yourself - Essential Life Skills. Internet (12/26/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.essentiallifeskills.net/knowyourself.html Leithart, Peter J., Derrida on Gift. Internet (08/10/11/ 2: 15 pm): http://www.leithart.com/archives/002003.php Lessons in Happiness from Hollywood. Internet (01/19/12/10:18 am):http://www.simpletoremember.com/jewish/blog/lessons-in-happinessfrom-hollywood/

134

Lyon, Bruce, The Secret of Sacrifice. Internet(11/16/11/ 10 am): http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~blyon/Articles/secretsacrifice.htm Martin , L. H., Michel Foucault, Technologies of the Self. Internet (12/23/11/ 11:20 pm): http://www.foucault.info/documents/foucault.technologiesOfSelf.en.html Meier, Levi, Ancient Secrets: Using the Stories of the Bible to Improve Our Everyday Lives. Internet (01/15/12/ 5:04 pm): http://books.google.com.ph Mickelsen, Carl, Hegel Glossary. Internet (12/23/11/11:25pm): http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/texts/Hegel%20Glossary.htm Ogren, Brian, Aristotles Rhetoric and the Cognition of Being: Human Emotions and the Rational-Irrational Dialectic. Internet (http://www.ul.ie/~philos/vol8/aristotle.html On the End of Postmodernism and the Rise of Realism. Internet (01/02/12/ 1:51 pm): http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Postmodernism.htm Opderbeck, David, Lonergan on the Desire to Know,Through a Glass Darkly.Internet (09/28/11): http://www.tgdarkly.com/blog/?p=2288 Oyeleke,Victory, Does Pleasure Equate to Happiness? Internet (10/11/11/2:00 pm): http://www.tribune.com.ng/sun/sunday-zest/3159-does-pleasure-equate-tohappiness Paradox of Hedonism .Internet ( 01/19/12/11:49 am): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_hedonism Pepa, Ruel F., Nurturing the Imagination of Resistance: Some Important Views from Contemporary Philosophers. Internet (11/12/11/2:00 pm): http://www.philosophos.com/philosophy_article_85.html Perfect Joy. Internet (01/15/12/ 12:42 pm): http://www.archden.org/index.cfm/ID/2980 Philia. Internet (12/27/11/12:30 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philia

135

Philosophy of the Mind. Internet (12/26/11/3:34 pm): http://www.en.com/wiki/Philosophy_of_the_Mind/ Plato & Aristotle: The Role of the Emotions in the Pursuit of Eudaimonia. Internet (01/24/12/9:15 pm): http://niallmarkey.hubpages.com/hub/Plato-AristotleThe-Role-of-the-Emotions-in-the-Pursuit-of-Eudaimonia Plato and Aristotle.Internet (01/15/12/ 1:19 pm): http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/ancient landmarks/PlatoAndAristotle.html Project MUSE Tolkien Studies Love: The Gift of Death. Internet (01/15/12/ 11:43am): http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/tolkien_studies/v002/2.1greenwood.ht ml Pruning. Internet (01/02/12 8:33 pm): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruning Reynolds, Jack, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity. Internet(11/25/11/12:30pm): http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24867-merleau-pontyand-derrida-intertwining-embodiment-and-alterity/ Reynolds, Jack, Possible and Impossible, Self and Other, and the Reversibility of Merleau-Ponty and Derrida. Internet (01/16/12/11:20 am): http://philpapers.org/rec/REYPAI Saint Francis of Assisi. Internet (01/16/12/10:37 am): http://wahiduddin.net/saint_francis_of_assisi.htm San Diego,Jennylene, The Stoic and the Epicurean Philosophy on the Good Life. Internet(01/15/12/ 1:03 pm): http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/uc_bakaoukas4d1.htm SEIRENES - Theoi Greek Mythology. Internet (01/19/12/3:04 pm): http://www.theoi.com/Pontios/Seirenes.html

136

St. Francis of Assisi. Internet (01/22/12/9:51 pm): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06221a.htm Sweeden, Nell Becker, Book Review: Living the Hospitality of God by Lucien Richard. (01/24/12/ 9:42 pm): http://www.bu.edu/cpt/resources/book-review/livingthe-hospitality-of-god-by-lucien-richard-omi/ The Heroes of Middle-Earth. Internet (01/16/12/11:05 am): http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-01-029-f The Material Aspect of Humanity Heart and Mind. Internet (01/06/12/9:57 pm): http://helpmewithbiblestudy.org/7Humans/EssenceHeartMind.aspx The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen.Internet (01/22/12/9:51 pm): http://forum.barrowdowns.com/archive/index.php?t-12435.html The Value of Hospitality. Internet (12/13/11/9:30 am): http://www1.union.edu/wareht/gkcultur/guide/8/web1.html Wang, Shirley S., Is Happiness Overrated?: Study Finds Physical Benefits to Some (Not All) Good Feelings. Internet(01/19/12/2:02 pm): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870489360457620047154537 9388.html What is Philosophy?:The Definition and Relevance of Philosophy. Internet (01/22/12/9:15 pm): http://www.angelfire.com/az/experiment/philintro.html Wicks, Robert J., Review: Living the Hospitality of God. Internet(01/22/12/9:45 pm): http://www.amazon.com/Living-Hospitality-Robert-Spirituality Selections/product-reviews/0809139987

137

Work Without Dread: Metaphysics of Happiness.Internet (01/15/12/ 3:09 pm): http://workwithoutdread.blogspot.com/2007/10/metaphysics-ofhappiness.html Zabala, Santiago (ed.), Weakening Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Gianni Vattimo. Internet (01/15/12/ 2:00 pm): http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/23057-weakeningphilosophy-essays-in-honour-of-gianni-vattimo/ Zhuangzi -Pursuit of Happiness. Internet (12/22/11/ 2:34 pm): http://www.pursuitof-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/zhuangzi/

DICTIONARY Runes, Dictionary of Philosophy, Citadel Press, NY, 2001, p. 40.

OTHERS Cabintoy, Being Brother-Brother-Being, Unpublished Thesis, OLAS, Quezon City, SY2010-2011. Frederick Casidsid, Self-Discovery Module, Unpublished Recolletos School of Theology, Quezon City, 2011. Orlando Gamata, Module on Discernment, Unpublished, Recolletos School of Theology, Quezon City, 2011.

138