Benjamin’s concept of origin describes emergence from becoming, not causal genesis.

Evidence

The origin of the idea was to be found wherever, under the eye of philosophical contemplation, the idea was able to break loose from the innermost sphere of reality. `Origin [Ursprung], although an entirely historical category, has, nevertheless, nothing to do with genesis [Entstehung]. The term origin is not intended to describe the process by which the existent came into being, but rather to describe that which emerges from the process of becoming and disappearance.’ — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 357

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes Ursprung from Entstehung — a precise conceptual distinction worth keeping for reference.
• XREF: Connects to Benjamin’s later ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’ and to Adorno’s negative dialectics, where origin as non-linear emergence recurs. — connects to: Time is not the container of becoming but is itself the becoming — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 257; Benjamin’s machines lead to a theory of aura, not of causality — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 163

Broader Connections

• Time is not the container of becoming but is itself the becoming #expands (0.80) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 257
• Benjamin’s machines lead to a theory of aura, not of causality #expands (0.75) — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 163