阿冈本：难忘者 02

阿冈本：难忘者 02

What does all of this have to do with Paul? For Paul, the redemption of what has been is the place of an exigency for the messianic. This place does not involve a point of view from which we could see a world in which redemption had taken place. The coming of the Messiah means that all things, even the subjects who contemplate it, are caught up in the as not, called and revoked at one and the same time. No subject could watch it or act as if at a given point.

所有这一切跟保罗有什么关系？对于保罗，所曾经发生过的事件的救赎，就是弥赛亚的迫切性的位置。这个位置并没有牵涉到观点，我们能够看待世界的观点。在这个世界里，救赎曾经发生过。弥赛亚的来临意味着，所有的事情，即使是沉思它的主体，都被套陷于这个“尚未”这个“尚未”当下被召唤，又同时被撤回。没有一位主体能够好像在某个特定时刻观看它，或行动。

The messianic vocation dislocates and, above all, nullifies the entire subject. This is the meaning of Galatians 2:20, “It is no longer I that live (zo ouketi ego), but the Messiah living in me.” He lives in him precisely as the “no longer I,” that dead body of sin we bear within ourselves which is given life through the spirit in the Messiah (Rom. 8:II).

这个弥赛亚的使命让整个主体迷失位置，尤其重要地，让主体化为空无。这就是加拉新人的“2：20”的意义：「不再是我活着，而是我身上的弥赛亚活着。」弥赛亚活在他的身上，确实是作为这位“不再存在的我”。我们在我们自身内部，承载那个原罪的行尸走肉。这个行尸走肉被赋予生命，凭借弥赛亚的精神（罗马书信 8：II）。

The whole of creation was subjected to caducity (mataiotes), the futility of what is lost and decays, but this is why it groans as it awaits redemption (Rom. 8:20-22).

整个的创世纪都隶属于脱蜕，丧失与腐败之物的徒劳，但是这就是为什么它等待救赎时，它会哀鸣。（罗马书信 8：20-22）

The thing in the spirit to correspond with this creature’s continuously lost lament is not a well-formed discourse able to calculate and register loss, but “unspeakable groanings” (stenagmois alaletois) (Rom. 8:26). This is why the one who upholds faith in what is lost cannot believe in any identity or worldly klesis. The as not is by no means a fiction in the sense intended by Vaihinger or Forberg.

在圣灵上的这个物象，跟这个动物的继续丧失的哀鸣对应，并不是一个形式完美的的辞说，并不是一个能够估算与铭记丧失，而是估算“无以言喻的哀鸣”的辞说。（罗马书信 8：26）。这就是为什么支持信仰丧失之物的这个人，无法信仰任何的认同或世俗的“召唤救赎”。这个“尚未”决非是幻想，瓦希尼或佛博格意图的那种意义。

It has nothing to do with an ideal. The assimilation to what has been lost and forgotten is absolute: “We are made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things” (I Cor. 4:13). Pauline klesis is a theory of the interrelation between the messianic and the subject, a theory that settles its differences once and for all with presumed identities and ensuing properties. In this sense, that which is not (ta me onta) is stronger than that which is.

它跟一种理想并没有任何关系。被同化到已经丧失与忘记的东西，这种同化是绝对的：「我们天生就是世界的污秽之物，万物的被遗弃之物。」（哥林全书 3：13）。圣保罗的“召唤救赎”的理论介于弥赛亚与主体之间的相互的关系。这个理论一劳永逸地解决它的差异，跟假定的认同与随后的属性的差异。从这个意义而言，尚未存在的东西，比起存在的东西，更加强烈。

Karl Barth’s thesis that there is no place for the as if in the messianic except when “hope is the Aufhebung of the as if” and that “we now truly see … that which we nevertheless do not see” (Barth, 298), is substantially correct, even if it lags behind Pauline exigency.

卡尔 巴斯的主题：在弥赛亚里，这个“好像”没有存在的空间，除了当「希望就是这个”好像“的”废除与实现“，「我们现在确实看见、、、我们仍然没有看见的东西」（巴斯 298）。巴斯的这个主题实质上是正确的，即使它落后于圣保罗的迫性。

Just as Kafka intuited in his extraordinary parable on parables (“Von den Gleichnissen”), the messianic is the simultaneous abolition and realization of the as if and the subject wishing to indefinitely maintain himself in similitude (in the as if), while contemplating his ruin, simply loses the wager. He who upholds himself in the messianic vocation no longer knows the as if he no longer has similitudes at his disposal. He knows that in messianic time the saved world coincides with the world that is irretrievably lost, and that, to use Bonhoeffer’s words, he must now really live in a world without God. This means that he may not disguise this world’s being-without-God in any way.

如同卡夫卡在他的特殊的探索寓言的寓言里直觉地感受到，弥赛亚就是这个“好像“的既是废除，又是实现。以及主体一方面希望不明确地维持他自己在”好像“的类同里，另一方面，又希望沉思他的毁灭时，仅是丧失赌注。支持他自己在弥赛亚的召唤救赎的人，不再知道这个”好像“。他不再有这个”好像“的类同之物听由他的使用。他知道，在弥赛亚的时间，被救赎的世界跟无法取回的丧失的世界不谋而合。用彭霍夫的话语说，他现在必须确实生活在没有上帝的世界。这意味着，他可能没有用任何方式伪装这个世界的”上帝并不存在）。

The saving God is the God who abandons him, and the fact of representations (the fact of the as if) cannot pretend to save the appearance of salvation. The messianic subject does not contemplate the world as though it were saved. In Benjamin’s words, he contemplates salvation only to the extent that he loses himself in what cannot be saved; this is how difficult it is to dwell in the calling.

这位救赎的上帝就是放弃他的这位上帝。再现表象的事实（这个“好像”的事实），无法伪装要拯救救赎的表象。弥赛亚的主体并没有沉思这个世界，好像它被拯救。用班杰明的话语，他沉思救赎，仅止于他丧失他自己的程度，在无法被救赎的东西。这是为何如此困难要驻居在这个使命里。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

阿冈本：难忘者

阿冈本：难忘者

Giorgio Agamben-The Unforgettable
The following essay is taken from Agamben’s commentary “The Time That Remains” on the Pauline text “Letter to the Romans”

吉奥吉阿 阿冈本：难忘者
以下这篇论文摘自阿冈本的评论「剩余的时间」：探讨圣保罗的“罗马书信”
The Unforgettable
难忘者
I imagine Benjamin had something like this in mind when, referring to the life of the idiot, he spoke of the exigency to remain unforgettable. This does not simply mean that something forgotten should now reappear in our memory and be remembered.

我想像班杰明心目中构想某件像这样的东西。当他提到白痴的生命，他谈论到始终保持难以忘记的迫切性。这并不仅意味着，某件被忘记的东西现在应该重新出现在我们的记忆，而且应该被记住。

Exigency does not properly concern that which has not been remembered; it concerns that which remains unforgettable. It refers to all in individual or collective life that is forgotten with each instant and to the infinite mass that will be forgotten by both.

迫切性并没有恰如其分地关注不曾被记忆的东西。迫切性关注的是始终难以被忘记的东西。它提到个人与集体的生活中一切具有每个瞬间但是被忘记的东西。它提到个人与集体生活中的这个永恒的质量。

Despite the efforts of historians, scribes, and all sorts of archivists, the quantity of what is irretrievably lost in the history of society and in the history of individuals is infinitely greater than what can be stored in the archives of memory.

尽管历史学家，书写铭记与各种的档案的努力，无法回复地丧失于社会的历史与个人的历史的东西，比起能够被储存于记忆的档案的东西，数量大到无限。
In every instant, the measure of forgetting and ruin, the ontological squandering that we bear within ourselves far exceeds the piety of our memories and consciences.

在每个瞬间，忘记与废墟的幅度，我们在自身之内承受的本体的挥霍，远远超过我们的记忆与良心的忠诚。

But the shapeless chaos of the forgotten is neither inert nor ineffective. To the contrary, it is at work within us with a force equal to that of the mass of conscious memories, but in a different way. Forgetting has a force and a way of operating that cannot be measured in the same terms as those of conscious memory, nor can it be accumulated like knowledge. Its persistence determines the status of all knowledge and understanding. The exigency of the lost does not entail being remembered and commemorated; rather, it entails remaining in us and with us as forgotten, and in this way and only in this way, remaining unforgettable.

但我，被忘记之物的没有形状的混沌，既不是惰性，也不是没有效果。相反地，它在我们内部运作，具有的力量跟意识的记忆的质量的力量相等。但是用不同的方式。忘记拥有无法被测量的力量与运作的方式，用的术语跟意识的记忆的那些术语并不相同。它也无法像知识那样被累积。它的坚持决定所有的知识与理解的地位。这个丧失之物的迫切性并没有涵盖被记忆与被纪念。相反地，它涵盖始终保持在我们内部，跟我们同在，作为被忘记之物。以这种方式，仅有以这种方式，它始终保持难以被忘记。

From this stems the inadequacy in trying to restore to memory what is forgotten by inscribing it in the archives and monuments of history, or in trying to construct another tradition and history, of the oppressed and the defeated. While their history may be written with different tools than that of the dominant classes, it will never substantially differ from it. In trying to work against this confusion, one should remember that the tradition of the unforgettable is not exactly a tradition.

这种不足够就是从这里起源，当我们尝试将被忘记的东西恢复给记忆，凭借将它铭记在历史的档案与纪念碑里，或是当我们尝试建构另外一个传统与历史，被压迫与被击败者的传统与历史。虽然对于他们的记忆可以用不同的工具被书写，跟主流的阶级的历史被书写的工具不同。它在实质上跟它不会永久不同。当我们尝试违背这个混淆来运作，我们应该记住：难以忘记之物的传统并不确实就是一个传统。

It is what marks traditions with either the seal of infamy or glory, sometimes both. That which makes each history historical and each tradition transmissible is the unforgettable nucleus that both bear within themselves at their core.

这就是用来标示传统的东西，用污蔑或推崇的封印，有时两种并行。让每个历史成为历史的东西，让每个传统成为可传承的东西，就是这个难忘之物的核心。每个历史与每个传统，都在它们的中央，承载这个难以忘记之物的核心。

The alternatives at this juncture are therefore not to forget or remember, to be unaware or become conscious, but rather, the determining factor is the capacity to remain faithful to that which having perpetually been forgotten, must remain unforgettable. It demands [esigel to remain with us and be possible for us in some manner. To respond to this exigency is the only historical responsibility I feel capable of assuming fully.

在这个时刻的替代选择因此并不是要忘记或记忆，并不是不知道或意识到。相反地，而是决定的因素在于要有能力保持忠诚，对于曾经永久被忘记的东西保持忠诚，要有能够保持始终难以忘记。它要求始终跟我们同在，它要求以某方式，对于我们是可能的。回应这个迫切性就是唯一的历史的责任，我感觉我能够完全担负得起的唯一的历史的责任。

If, however, we refuse to respond, and if, on both the collective and individual levels, we forgo each and every relation to the mass of the forgotten that accompanies us like a silent golem, then it will reappear with- in us in a destructive and perverse way, in the form Freud called the return of the repressed, that is, as the return of the impossible as such.

可是，假如我们拒绝回应。假如在集体与个人的层次，我们捨弃坚持跟被忘记之物的质量的每个关系，他们伴随我们，就像沉默的魅影。那么，它将会重新出现—在我们内部重新出现，用毁灭与倒错的方式，用弗洛伊德所谓的被压抑之物的回转。换句话是，作为是不可能之物充当自身的回转。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com