23
the same for all beings." By beings, he evidently understands living beings. We wish, however, to translate ἁπάντων: for the entirety of πάντα.
HEIDEGGER: τὸν αὐτὸν ἁπάντων stands only in Clement of Alexandria, and is missing in Plutarch and Simplicius. Karl Reinhardt strikes it. I would like to mention him once again, because I would like to refer to his essay, "Heraklits Lehre vom Feuer" (first published in Hermes 77, 1942, pp. 1-27), which is especially important in methodological respects.8 It was just thirty years ago, in the period during which I held the three lectures on the origin of the work of art, that I spoke at length with Karl Reinhardt, in his garret, about Heraclitus. At the time, he told me of his plan to write a commentary on Heraclitus with an orientation toward tradition and history. Had he realized his plan, we would be much aided today. Reinhardt had also shown in the aforementioned essay that πῦρ φρόνιμον [sagacious fire], standing in the context of Fr. 64, is genuine and on that account is to be looked at as a fragment of Heraclitus. What the discovery of new Heraclitus fragments implies, he indicated thus: "An unpleasant outcome results. It is not impossible that with Clement and the Church Fathers a few unknown words of Heraclitus flood about, as though in a great river, which we will never succeed in catching unless we were referred to them from another source. To recognize an important word as important is not always easy." Karl Reinhardt is still with us. {GA 15: 44}
FINK: In Fr. 30, the reference of πάντα and κόσμος is thought. We leave open what κόσμος means with Heraclitus. Let us look once again at Fr. 41 which has already occupied us: ἓν τὸ σοφόν, ἐπίστασθαι γνώμην, ὁτέη ἐκυϐέρνησε πάντα διὰ πάντων.9 Here σοφόν is added to ἕν. We have already looked for the relatedness of ἕν and πάντα in the fragments. We must ask whether σοφόν is only a property of ἕν as unifying unity, or whether it is not precisely the essence of ἕν.
HEIDEGGER: Then we could put a colon between ἕν and σοφόν. ἕν: σοφόν.
FINK: σοφόν, as the essence of the unifying ἕν, grasps ἕν in its complete fullness of sense. If ἕν up till now appears to us to withdraw, we have in Fr. 41 the first more accurate characterization as a kind of ἕνωσις [unification], although this concept is laden with Neoplatonic meaning.
HEIDEGGER: ἕν runs through all of metaphysics; and dialectic is also not to be thought without ἕν.
FINK: In Fr. 53, to which we have already alluded in connection with Fr. 80, πάντα gets placed in relationship to πόλεμος. The fragment has the following word order: Πόλεμος πάντων μὲν πατήρ ἐστι, πάντων δὲ βασιλεύς, καὶ τοὺς μὲν θεοὺς ἔδειξε τοὺς δὲ ἀνθρώπους, τοὺς μὲν δούλους ἐποίησε τοὺς δὲ ̀ἐλευθέρους. Diels translates: "War is the father and king of all things. He established some as gods and the others as humans; some he made slaves and the others free." The reference of
8. "Heraclitus' Teaching on Fire." untranslated. (Tr.)
9. Diels' translation has the following word order: "The wise is one thing only. to understand the thoughts which steer everything through everything."