Teacher: Say rather, to keeping awake for releasement.
Scholar: Why not, to the awakening?
Teacher: Because on our own we do not awaken releasement in ourselves.
Scientist: Thus releasement is effected from somewhere else.
Teacher: Not effected, but let in.
Scholar: To be sure I don't know yet what the word releasement means; but I seem to presage that releasement awakens when our nature is let-in so as to have dealings with that which is not a willing.
Scientist: You speak without letup of a letting-be and give the impression that what is meant is a kind of passivity. All the same, I think I understand that it is in no way a matter of weakly allowing things to slide and drift along.
Scholar: Perhaps a higher acting is concealed in releasement than is found in all the actions within the world and in the machinations of all mankind . . .
Teacher: . . . which higher acting is yet no activity.
Scientist: Then releasement lies—if we may use the word lie—beyond the distinction between activity and passivity . . .
Scholar: . . . because releasement does not belong to the domain of the will.
Scientist: The transition from willing into releasement is what seems difficult to me.
Teacher: And all the more, since the nature of releasement is still hidden.
Scholar: Especially so because even releasement can still be thought of as within the domain of will, as is the case with old masters of thought such as Meister Eckhart.