25
good, and just; but humans have assumed some to be unjust and others to be just." In Fr. 7, πάντα were related to human grasping. Now Heraclitus speaks not only from the human but also from the divine reference to πάντα. Everything is beautiful, good, and just for god. Only humans make a distinction between the just and the unjust. The genuine and true view on πάντα and ἕν is the divine; the human is ingenuine and deficient. In Fr. 29, we see a similar double relatedness of πάντα and ἕν. There it was the noble minded who preferred the radiance of glory rather than all else, whereas the many indulged themselves in transient things and did not aspire to everlasting glory. Here it is the divine and the human aspects that are placed in opposition.
Fr. 108 names σοφόν as that which is set apart from everything: σοφόν ἐστι πάντων κεχωρισμένον.11 Here σοφόν is not only a determination of ἕν as in Fr. 41, but as ἕν it is that which is set apart from πάντα. σοφόν is that which holds itself separated from πάντα, while still encompassing them. Thus, πάντα are thought from the separation of ἕν.
HEIDEGGER: κεχωρισμένον [set apart] is the most difficult question with Heraclitus. Karl Jaspers says about this word of Heraclitus: "Here the thought of transcendence as absolutely other is reached, and indeed in full awareness of the uniqueness of this thought." (Du grossen Philosophen, Bd. I, S. 634).12 This interpretation of κεχωρισμένον as transcendence entirely misses the point.
FINK: Again, Fr. 114 provides another reference to τὰ πάντα: ξὺν νόῳ λέγοντας ἰσχυρίζεσθαι χρὴ τῷ ξυνῷ πάντων, ὅκωσπερ νόμῳ πόλις καὶ πολὺ ἰσχυροτέρως. τρέφονται γὰρ πάντες οἱ ἀνθρώπειοι νόμοι ὑπὸ ἑνὸς τοῦ θείου. We can skip over the last sentence for our present consideration. Diets translates: "If one wants to talk with understanding, one must strengthen himself with what is common to all, like a city with the law, and even more strongly." Here also, πάντα are viewed from a specific human behavior. It cannot be decided at first glance whether only the χοινόν [public realm] of the city is meant by what is common to everything, or whether it does not also refer to πάντα. In the latter case, the fundamental relatedness of ἕν and πάντα would reflect itself in the human domain. As the one who wants to talk with understanding must make himself strong with what is common to everything, so must the judicious one make himself strong in a deeper sense with the ἕν, which is in company with πάντα.
HEIDEGGER: After ξυνόν [common] we must put a big question mark, just as we do after κεχωρισμένον. The question mark, however, means that we must set aside all familiar ideas and ask and reflect. ξυνόν is a separate, complex problem, because here ξὺν νόῳ [with mind] comes into play.
FINK: Now we have examined in which respect τὰ πάντα are mentioned in a series of fragments. We have still given no interpretation,