I: While that which bean itself toward us has already borne our counterbearing into the gift it bean for us.

J: Thus you call bearing or gesture: the gathering which originarily unites within itself what we bear to it and what it bean to us.

I: However, with this formulation we still run the risk that we understand the gathering as a subsequent union ...

J: ... instead of experiencing that all bearing, in giving and encounter, springs tint and only from the gathering.

I: If we were to succeed in thinking of gesture in this sense, where would you then look for the essence of that gesture which you showed me?

J: In a beholding that is itself invisible, and that, so gathered, bean itself to encounter emptiness in such a way that in and through it the mountains appear.

I: That emptiness then is the same as nothingness, that essential being which we attempt to add in our thinking, as the other, to all that is present and absent.

J: Surely. For this reason we in Japan understood at once your lecture "What is Metaphysics?" when it became available to us in 1930 through a translation which a Japanese student, then attending your lectures, had ventured. -We marvel to this day how the Europeans could lapse into interpreting as nihilistic the nothingness of which you speak in that lecture. To us, emptiness is the loftiest name for what you mean to say with the word "Being" ...

I: ... in a thinking attempt whose first steps are unavoidable even to this day. It did, however, become the occasion for very great confusion, a confusion grounded in the matter itself and linked with the use of the name "Being." For this name belongs, after all, to the patrimony of the language of metaphysics, while I put that word into a title