| DOCTRINES AND DOGMAS |
|
| 3 MAJOR THEMES AND
MOTIFS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doctrines of creation are philosophical
and theological elaborations of the primal myth of creation within a religious
community. The term myth here refers to the imaginative expression in narrative
form of what is experienced or apprehended as basic reality (see also MYTH
AND MYTHOLOGY ). The term creation refers to the beginning of things,
whether by the will and act of a transcendent being, by emanation from some
ultimate source, or in any other way. (see also creation
myth) |
|
|
|
|
|
The myth of creation is the symbolic
narrative of the beginning of the world as understood by a particular community.
The later doctrines of creation are interpretations of this myth in light of the
subsequent history and needs of the community. Thus, for example, all theology
and speculation concerning creation in the Christian community are based on the
myth of creation in the biblical book of Genesis and of the new creation in
Jesus Christ. Doctrines of creation are based on the myth of creation, which
expresses and embodies all of the fertile possibilities for thinking about this
subject within a particular religious community. |
|
|
Myths are narratives that express the
basic valuations of a religious community. Myths of creation refer to the
process through which the world is centred and given a definite form within the
whole of reality. They also serve as a basis for the orientation of man in the
world. This centring and orientation specify man's place in the universe and the
regard he must have for other humans, nature, and the entire nonhuman world;
they set the stylistic tone that tends to determine all other gestures, actions,
and structures in the culture. The cosmogonic (origin of the world) myth is the
myth par excellence. In this sense,
the myth is akin to philosophy, but, unlike philosophy, it is constituted by a
system of symbols; and because it is the basis for any subsequent cultural
thought, it contains rational and nonrational forms. There is an order and
structure to the myth, but this order and structure is not to be confused with
rational, philosophical order and structure. The myth possesses its own
distinctive kind of order. |
|
|
Myths of creation have another
distinctive character in that they provide both the model for nonmythic
expression in the culture and the model for other cultural myths. In this sense,
one must distinguish between cosmogonic myths and myths of the origin of
cultural techniques and artifacts. Insofar as the cosmogonic myth tells the
story of the creation of the world, other myths that narrate the story of a
specific technique or the discovery of a particular area of cultural life take
their models from the stylistic structure of the cosmogonic myth. These latter
myths may be etiological (i.e., explaining
origins); but the cosmogonic myth is never simply etiological, for it deals with
the ultimate origin of all things. |
|
|
The cosmogonic myth thus has a pervasive
structure; its expression in the form of philosophical and theological thought
is only one dimension of its function as a model for cultural life. Though the
cosmogonic myth does not necessarily lead to ritual expression, ritual
is often the dramatic presentation of the myth. Such dramatization is performed
to emphasize the permanence and efficacy of the central themes of the myth,
which integrates and undergirds the structure of meaning and value in the
culture. The ritual dramatization of the myth is the beginning of liturgy, for
the religious community in its central liturgy attempts to re-create the time of
the beginning. |
|
|
From this ritual dramatization the
notion of time is established
within the religious community. To be sure, in most communities there is the
notion of a sacred and a profane time. The prestige of the cosmogonic myth
establishes sacred or real time. It is this time that is most efficacious for
the life of the community. Dramatization of sacred time enables the community to
participate in a time that has a different quality than ordinary time, which
tends to be neutral. All significant temporal events are spoken of in the
language of the cosmogonic myth, for only by referring them to this primordial
model will they have significance. |
|
|
In like manner, artistic expression in
archaic or "primitive" societies, often related to ritual
presentation, is modelled on the structure of the cosmogonic myth. The masks,
dances, and gestures are, in one way or another, aspects of the structure of the
cosmogonic myth. This meaning may also extend to the tools man uses in the
making of artistic designs and to the precise technique he employs in his craft.
(see also primitive
religion) |
|
|
Mention has been made above of the fact
that the cosmogonic myth situates mankind in a place, in space. This centring is
at once symbolic and empirical: symbolic because through symbols it defines the
spatiality of human beings in ontological terms (of being) and empirical because
it orients them in a definite landscape. Indeed, the names given to the flora
and fauna and to the topography are a part of the orientation of humans in a
space. The subsequent development of language within a human community is an
extension of the language of the cosmogonic myth. |
|
|
The initial ordering of the world
through the cosmogonic myth serves as the primordial structure of culture and
the articulation of the embryonic forms and styles of cultural life out of which
various and differing forms of culture emerge. The recollection and celebration
of the myth enable the religious community to think of and participate in the
fundamentally real time, space, and mode of orientation that enables them to
define their cultural life in a specific manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
The world as a structure of meaning and
value has not appeared in the same manner to all human civilizations. There are,
therefore, almost as many cosmogonic myths as there are human cultures. Until
quite recently, the classification of these myths on an evolutionary scale, from
the most archaic cultures to contemporary Western cultures (i.e.,
from the assumedly simplest to the most complex) was the most dominant mode
of ordering these myths. Recent 20th-century scholars, however, have begun to
look at the various types of myths in terms of the structures that they reveal
rather than considering them on an evolutionary scale that extends from the
so-called simple to the complex, for, in a sense, there are no simple myths
regarding the beginning of the world. The beginning of the world is
simultaneously the beginning of the human condition, and it is impossible to
speak of this beginning as if it were simple. |
|
|
|
|
|
The 19th-century scholars who took an
evolutionary survey of human culture and religion (e.g., Sir James George
Frazer and Edward Burnett
Tylor) held that the notion of the creation of the world by a supreme
being occurred only in the highest stage of cultural development. (see also monotheism,
Providence) |
|
|
Andrew
Lang, a Scottish folklorist, challenged this
conception of the development of religious ideas, for he found in the writings
of anthropologists, ethnologists, and travellers evidence of a belief in a
supreme being or high god among cultures that had been classified as the most
primitive. This position was taken up and elaborated by an Austrian
priest-anthropologist, Wilhelm Matthäus
Schmidt, who reversed the evolutionary theory, holding that there was a
primordial notion of a supreme being, a kind of original intellectual and
religious conception of a single creator god, that degenerated in subsequent
cultural stages. Though Schmidt's theories of cultural historical stages and
diffusion and an original primordial revelation have for the most part been
discredited and abandoned, the existence of a belief in a supreme being among
primitive peoples (a notion discovered by Andrew Lang) has been proven and
attested to over and over again by investigators of numerous cultures. This
belief has been found among the cultures of Africa, the Ainu of the northern
Japanese islands, Amerindians, south central Australians, the Fuegians of South
America, and in almost all parts of the globe. |
|
|
Though the precise nature and
characteristics of the supreme creator deity may differ from culture to culture,
a specific and pervasive structure of this type of deity can be discerned. The
following characteristics tend to be common: (1) he is all wise and all
powerful. The world comes into being because of his wisdom, and he is able to
actualize the world because of his power. (2) The deity exists alone prior to
the creation of the world. There is no being or thing prior to his existence. No
explanation can therefore be given of his existence, before which one confronts
the ultimate mystery. (3) The mode of creation is conscious, deliberate, and
orderly. This again is an aspect of the creator's wisdom and power. The creation
comes about because the deity seems to have a definite plan in mind and does not
create on a trial-and-error basis. In Genesis, for example, particular parts of
the world are created seriatim; in an Egyptian myth, Kheper, the creator deity,
says, "I planned in my heart," and in a Maori
myth the creator deity proceeds from inactivity to increasing stages of
activity. (4) The creation of the world is simultaneously an expression of the
freedom and purpose of the deity. His mode of creation defines the pattern and
purpose of all aspects of the creation, though the deity is not bound by his
creation. His relationship to the created order after the creation is again an
aspect of his freedom. (5) In several creation myths of this type, the creator
deity removes himself from the world after it has been created. After the
creation the deity goes away and only appears again when a catastrophe threatens
the created order. (6) The supreme creator deity is often a sky
god, and the deity in this form is an instance of the religious valuation
of the symbolism of the sky. |
|
|
In creation myths of the above type, the
creation itself or the intent of the creator deity is to create a perfect world,
paradise. Before the end of
the creative act or sometime soon after the end of creation, the created order
or the intent of the creator deity is thwarted by some fault of one of the
creatures. There is thus a rupture in the creation myth. In some myths this
rupture is the cause of the departure of the deity from creation. |
|
|
An African myth from the Dogon
peoples of West Africa illustrates this point. In this myth the creator deity
first creates an egg. Within the egg are two pairs of twins, each pair
consisting of one male and one female. These twins are supposed to mature within
the egg, becoming at maturation androgynous (both male and female) beings, the
perfect creatures to inhabit the earth. One of the twins breaks from the egg
before maturation because he wishes to dominate the creation. In so doing he
carries a part of the egg with him, and from this he creates an imperfect world.
The creator deity, seeing what he has done, sacrifices the other twin to
establish a balance in the world. The creation is sustained by this sacrifice,
and it is now ambiguous, instead of the perfect world intended by the god. (see
also cosmic egg) |
|
|
This myth not only shows how a rupture
takes place within the myth itself but also points out the fact that the
characteristics of the supreme creator deity noted above seldom exist apart from
other mythological contexts. The widespread symbols of dualism (the divine
twins), the cosmic egg, and sacrifice are basic themes in the structure of this
African creation myth. In myths of this kind, however, prominence must always be
given to the might of a powerful creator sky deity under whose aegis the created
order comes into being. |
|
|
|
|
|
In contrast to the creation by a supreme
sky deity, there is another type of creation myth in which the creation seems to
emerge through its own inner power from under the earth. In this genre of myth,
the created order emerges gradually in continuous stages. It is similar to a
birth or metamorphosis of the world from its embryonic state to maturity. The
symbolism of the earth or a part of the earth as a repository of all potential
form is prominent in this type of myth. In some myths of this type (e.g.,
the Navajo myth of
emergence), the movement from a lower stage to a higher one is initiated by some
fault of the people who live under the earth, but these faults are only the
parallels of an automatic upper movement in the earth itself. (see also Earth mother) |
|
|
Just as the supreme-creator-deity myth
forms a homology to the sky, the emergence myth forms a homology to the earth
and to the childbearing woman. In many cases the emergence of the created order
is analogous to the growth of a child in the womb and its emission at birth.
This symbolism is made clear in a Zuni myth that states, |
|
|
Anon is the nethermost world, the seed
of men and creatures took form and increased; even as in eggs in warm places
speedily appear . . . Everywhere were unfinished creatures, crawling like
reptiles one over another, one spitting on another or doing other indecencies .
. . until many among them escaped, growing wiser and more manlike. |
|
|
The underworlds prior to the created
order appear chaotic; the beings inhabiting these places seem without form or
stability, or they commit immoral acts. The seeming chaos is moving toward a
definite form of order, however, an order latent in the very forms themselves
rather than from an imposition of order from the outside. (see also chaos and order) |
|
|
From another perspective the emergence
myth is homologous to the seed. When the homologue of the seed is referred to,
the meaning of fertility and
death are at once introduced. The seed must die before it can be reborn and
actualize its potentiality. This symbolism is dramatically presented in a wide
range of funerary rites: one is buried in the earth in hope of a renewal from
the earth, or the earth is the repository of the ancestors from whom the new
generation emerges. In every case, emergence myths demonstrate the latent
potency immanent in the earth as a repository of all life forms. (see also death rite) |
|
|
|
|
|
Closely related to the above type of
myth is the myth that states that the world is created as the progeny of a
primordial mother and father. The mother and father are symbols of earth and
sky, respectively. In myths of this kind, the world parents generally appear at
a late stage of the creation process; chaos in some way exists before the coming
into being of the world parents. In the Babylonian
myth Enuma
elishit is stated, |
|
|
When on high the heaven had not been
named |
|
|
Firm ground below had not been called
by name, |
|
|
Naught but primordial Apsu, their
begetter, |
|
|
(And) Mummu-Tiamat, she who bore them
all, |
|
|
Their waters comingling as a single
body; |
|
|
The Maori make the same point when they
state that the world parents emerge out of po.
Po for the Maori means the basic matter and the method by which creation
comes about. There is thus some form of reality before the appearance of the
world parents. |
|
|
Even though the world parents are
depicted and described as in sexual embrace, no activity is taking place. They
appear as quiescent and inert. The chthonic (underworld) structure of the earth
as latent potentiality tends to dominate the union. The parents are often
unaware that they have offspring, and thus a kind of indifference regarding the
union is expressed. The union of male and female in sexual embrace is another
symbol of completeness and totality. As in the African myth from the Dogon
referred to above, sexual union is a sign of androgyny
(being both male and female) and androgyny, in turn, a sign of perfection. The
indifference of the world parents is thus not simply a sign of ignorance but
equally of the silence of perfection. The world parents in the Babylonian and
Maori myths do not wish to be disturbed by their offspring. As over against the
parents, the offspring are signs of actuality, fragmentation, specificity; they
define concrete realities. (see also chthonic
deity) |
|
|
The separation of the world parents is
again a rupture within the myth. This separation is caused by offspring who wish
either to have more space or to have light, for they are situated between the
bodies of the parents. In some myths the separation is caused by a woman who
lifts her pestle so high in grinding grain that it strikes the sky, causing the
sky to recede into the background, thus providing room for the activities of
mankind. In both cases an antagonistic motive must be attributed to the agents
of separation. In the Babylonian and Maori versions of this myth, actual warfare
takes place as a result of the separation. |
|
|
Over against the primordial union of the
world parents, there is the desire for knowledge and a different orientation in
space. After the separation, lesser deities related to solar symbolism take
precedence in the creation. The sun and light must be seen in these myths as
representing the desire for a humanizing and cultural knowledge as over against
the passive and inert forms of the union of the parent deities. From the point
of separation, the mythic narrative of the world-parent myths states how
different forms of cultural knowledge are brought to man by the offspring, the
agents of separation. The separation of the world parents is the sign of a new
cosmic order, an order dedicated to the techniques, crafts, and knowledge of
culture. |
|
|
|
|
|
In the Dogon myth referred to above, the
creation deity begins the act of creation by placing two embryonic sets of twins
in an egg. In each set of twins is a male and female; during the maturation
process they are together thus forming androgynous beings. In a Tahitian myth,
the creator deity himself lives alone in a shell. After breaking out of the
shell, he creates his counterpart, and together they undertake the work of
creation. |
|
|
A Japanese creation narrative likens the
primordial chaos to an egg containing the germs of creation. In the Hindu
tradition the creation of the world is symbolized in the Chandogya
Upanisad by the breaking of an egg,
and the universe is referred to as an egg in other sources. The Buddhists speak
of the transcending of ordinary existence, the realization of a new mode of
being, as breaking the shell of the egg. Similar references to creation through
the symbol of the egg are found in the Orphic texts of the Greeks and in Chinese
myths. (see also Japanese religion, Hinduism,
Buddhism, Chinese
mythology) |
|
|
The egg is a symbol of the totality from
which all creation comes. It is like a womb containing the seeds of creation.
Within the egg are the possibilities of a perfect creation (i.e.,
the creation of androgynous beings). The egg, in addition to being the
beginning of life, is equally a symbol of procreation, rebirth, and new life. In
a version of the Dogon, one of the twins returns to the egg in order to
resuscitate the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
Two elements are important in myths of
this type. There is, first, the theme of the cosmogonic water representing the
undifferentiated waters that are present before the earth has been created.
Secondly, there is an animal
who plunges into the water to secure a portion of earth. The importance of the
animal is that the creature agent is a prehuman species. This version of the
myth is probably the oldest version of this genre. This basic structure of the
earth-diver myth has been modified in central Europe in myths that relate the
story of the primordial waters, God, and the devil.
In these versions of the earth-diver myth, the devil appears as God's companion
in the creation of the world. The devil becomes the diver sent by God to bring
earth from the bottom of the waters. In most versions of this myth, God does not
appear to be omniscient or omnipotent, often depending on the knowledge of the
devil for certain details regarding the creative act--details that he learns
through tricks he plays upon the devil. (see also demon) |
|
|
In still different versions of this
myth, the relationship between God and the devil moves from companionship to
antagonism; they become adversaries, though they remain as co-creators of the
world. The fact that the devil has had a part in the creation of the world is
one way of explaining the origin and persistence of evil in the world. (see also
evil,
problem of) |
|
|
Mircea
Eliade, a noted 20th-century historian of religions,
has pointed to another theme in certain Romanian versions of this myth. After
God has instructed the devil to dive to the bottom of the waters and bring up
the earth, the devil obeys, diving several times before he is able to bring up
and hold on to a small portion of earth. After the creation of the world from
this small portion of earth, God sinks into a profound sleep. This sleep is a
sign of mental exhaustion, for only the devil and a bee know the solution to
certain details of the creation, and God must, with the help of the bee, trick
the devil into giving him this vital information. God's sleep, according to
Eliade, is a sign of his passivity and disinterest in the world after it has
been created, and it harks back to certain archaic myths in which the supreme
deity retires from the world after its creation, becoming disinterested and
passive in the relationship to his work. |
|
|
|
|
|
Some of the major types of creation
myths have been presented above. It is from myths of this sort and their
dominant themes that theological and philosophical speculation have been
developed in the various religious communities throughout the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In several myths it is stated that the
primordial stuff of creation was some form of undifferentiated matter (e.g.,
water, chaos, a monster, or an egg). It is from this undifferentiated matter
that the world evolves or is made. In the case of the egg and monster symbols,
there seems to be a notion of a definite original form, but the egg is
undifferentiated; for its form is vague and embryonic, and the monster
figure--containing all of the forms of chaos in a terrible way--expresses the
theme that chaos is not only passive (as is water) but resists creation.
Although creation results as a modification of the primordial matter, however,
it is this matter that determines and sets the limits to the extension of the
world in space and time. Thus, in communities in which myths of this type find
their expression, there are periods of mythical-ritual renewal at certain
cyclical periods in which the world returns to its original chaos to rise again
out of this initial state. (see also chaos and order) |
|
|
When it is stated that the supreme being
created the world and that there was no primordial matter prior to his being,
then the determination of the world is in the mind and will of the deity. This
leads to distinctive conclusions regarding the destiny of the world and man. The
end (and meaning) of the world is thus not determined by the primordial matter
but by the deity who created the world. It is he alone who determines the
preservation, maintenance, and end of the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
In emergence myths there seems to be an
easy movement from one stage of creation to the next, but, as has been shown in
the Navajo myth, at each subterranean level there is some type of antagonism
among the developing embryonic creatures. This is one of the reasons for the
separation of the creatures and the movement to another level. Though the
emergence myths portray the mildest form of this antagonism, it is still present
in myths of this sort. |
|
|
In the world-parent myths there is
antagonism between the offspring and the parents. This is a conflict between
generations, expressing the desire of the children to determine their own place
and orientation in existence against the passivity of the parents. |
|
|
A dualism and antagonism is found again
in the cosmic-egg myths, especially in the myths in which the egg contains
twins. One twin wishes to take credit for the creation of the world alone,
interrupting the harmonious growth within the egg before maturation. The faulty
creation by this evil twin accounts for the ambiguous nature of the world and
the origin of evil. |
|
|
This observation applies equally to the
dualistic structure in some versions of the earth-diver myths. The devil moves
in the various versions of this myth from the companion to the antagonist of
God, possessing the power to challenge the deity. |
|
|
|
|
|
In many cosmogonic myths, the narrative
relates the story of the sacrifice and dismemberment of a primordial being. The
world is then established from the body of this being. In the myth Enuma
elishthe god Marduk,
after defeating Tiamat, the primeval mother, divides the body into two parts,
one part forming the heavens, the other, the earth. In a West African myth, one
of the twins from the cosmic egg must be sacrificed to bring about a habitable
world. In the Norse Prose Edda,
the cosmos is formed from the body of the dismembered great Ymir, and, in
the Indian Rgveda, the cosmos
is a result of the sacrifice of man. (see also Mesopotamian
mythology, Hinduism) |
|
|
In these motifs of sacrifice, something
similar to the qualification of the undifferentiated matter of creation is
suggested, for, just as the primal stuff of creation must be differentiated
before the world appears, the sacrifice of primordial beings is a destruction of
the primal totality for the sake of a specific creation. |
|
|
When the victim of the sacrifice is a
primal monster, the emphasis is on the stabilization of the creation through the
death of the monster. The monster symbolizes the strangeness and awesomeness
occurring when a new land or space is occupied. The "monster" of the
place is the undifferentiated character of the space and must be immobilized
before the new space can be established. |
|
|
In a myth from Ceram
(Molucca Islands), a beautiful girl, Hainuwele,
has grown up out of a coconut plant. After providing the community with their
necessities and luxuries, she is killed and her body cut into several pieces,
which are then thrown over the island. From each part of her body a coconut tree
grows. It is only after the death of Hainuwele that mankind becomes sexual; that
is, the murder of Hainuwele enables mankind to have some determination in the
process of bringing new life into the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
Myths and poetic renderings in legends,
sagas, and poetry express the basic cultural insights into some of the elements
involved in the human consciousness about creation. Theological, philosophical,
and scientific theory are types of rationalizations of these basic insights in
terms of the particular culture and historical periods of the cultures in
question. (see also theology) |
|
|
The attempt to integrate the meanings of
primordiality, dualisms and antagonisms, sacrifices, and ruptures and to meet
demands of some kind of logical order and, at the same time, keep alive the
meaning of these structures as religious realities, objects of worship, and a
charter for the moral life, has led to the development of doctrines. |
|
|
In "primitive" and archaic
societies, the correct ritual enactment of mythical symbols ensures the order of
the world. These rituals usually take place at propitious moments (e.g.,
at the birth of a child, marriage, the founding of a new habitation, the
erection of a house or temple, the beginning of a new year). In each case, the
seemingly practical activities imitate the mythic structure of the first
beginning. |
|
|
Theological and philosophical
speculations and controversies centre within and between religious communities
over the issues of the primordial nature of reality, dualisms, the process of
creation, and the nature of time and space. A doctrine of creation must contain
or suggest the manner in which all cultural meanings, both empirical and
abstract, constitute an integral totality. Speculations that are based on the
initial insights of a mythical theme explicate some principle in the myth as a
basis for generalization and logical form on which all elements and themes may
be ordered. |
|
|
|
|
|
Doctrinal positions may be modelled
around any or all of the themes of the cosmogonic myth. If the emphasis falls
upon creation by a high god through his thought, word, or other mode, the
problem of the otherness and difference between creator and creature becomes a
source of theological discussion and philosophical speculations. In Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam,
the classical locus of this issue is found. All of these religions have
theological traditions that raise this problem. Related to this issue is the transcendence
and arbitrary action of the creator deity. Because he is prior to the world and
its creatures, the question arises whether there are modes of creaturely
knowledge or apprehension that are capable of knowing him; of whether he is
subjected to the same categories of being as his creatures; of whether his time
and space are the same time and space of his creation. |
|
|
To some extent, the a priori nature of
this type of deity creates an apparent dualism between the creator and the world
and creatures. This dualism is mediated in various forms in the traditions. In
Judaism it is mediated through nature and the covenant Yahweh has with his
people; in Christianity through the mediatorship of his son, Jesus Christ; and
in Islam through the sacred word of the Qur`an by the prophet Muhammad.
Even within these traditions, however, the transcendent nature of the deity and
his mediatorship through some other being or principle does not settle the
doctrinal issue, for different cultural-historical periods of these traditions
offer a variety of theological speculation concerning the nature and meaning of
the deity, the world, and the mediator. The traditions offer a structure through
which such speculation is ordered and clarified. |
|
|
|
|
|
The theme of emergence is related to
theological and philosophical notions of emanations from a single principle and
the idea of the transmutation of being. Ideas of this kind are found in
"primitive" religion (Dogon, Polynesian), in Taoism, and in the
Pre-Socratic philosophers Thales and Anaximander. |
|
|
In one version of the Dogon myth,
creation proceeds from a small seed. Within the seed spontaneous movements
begin. These movements, which burst from the shell of the seed and make
contributions in space, create all forms of beings and the universe. Similarly,
in the Polynesian myth Ta-aroa
develops the world out of himself and the shell in which he lived. |
|
|
A pervasive theme in Chinese thought is
that of a universe in a perpetual flux. This flux follows a fixed and
predictable pattern either of eternal oscillation between two apparently opposed
poles or of a cyclical movement in a close orbit. The oscillation pattern is
expressed by the Yin-Yang
doctrine of Taoism. In the
five element doctrine, a cyclical movement is correlated with the five elements,
earth, wood, metal, fire, and water; these in turn form an equivalence with the
third month of summer and with spring, autumn, summer, and winter, respectively.
These parallelisms then form equivalences with the five directions, and they in
turn with the five primary colors. Ancient Chinese thinkers never discuss an
initial conscious act of creation. The cyclical movement itself produced the
empirical and abstract form of the cosmos. The oscillation between the Yin and
the Yang forms a correlation in all phenomena extending to the realms of time,
space, number, and ethics. |
|
|
Thales
thought that the fundamental principle of cosmos was water. The earth floated on
water; water was the natural cause of all things. Anaximander
taught that there was an eternal undestructible something out of which
everything arises and everything returns. In other words, the fundamental
substratum of the world could not be an element of the world. The importance of
Anaximander was in his use of the term arche
("beginning" or "rule") to refer to a principle unlike
any other principle or element in the world to explain the cause of all other
things in the universe. |
|
|
|
|
|
Dualistic conceptions of creation come
to the fore in the theme of earth-diver myths, in which there is an antagonism
between the co-creators of the universe. This conception is present again in
myths of divine twins and in Zoroastrianism
where the Ormazd and Ahriman
represent the creative and destructive principles in creation. In some sense
this is not an ontological dualism for the first creative act of Ormazd was the
limitation of time and thus the limitation of the power of Ahriman to carry out
his destruction. Doctrines of this kind are related to the origin of evil in the
world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alongside the various myths and
doctrines regarding creation, there are equally skeptic positions concerning the
unknowability of creation. This critique is present in several religious and
philosophical traditions. It may be correlated with the mythical meaning of deus
otiosusthe deity
who retires from the world after his creation, or with the mythic theme from
some earth-diver myths that emphasize the physical and intellectual fatigue of
the deity after creation. In the first case, the removal of the deity from
creation leaves no access to his plan or will; in the other case, because of the
fatigue of the deity who has exhausted all of his knowledge in creation, there
is thus nothing for man to learn from him. |
|
|
In the Indian tradition the Rigveda, an
ancient sacred text, expresses skepticism in this manner: (see also Indian philosophy) |
|
|
He, the first origin of this creation,
whether he formed it |
|
|
all or did not form it, |
|
|
Whose eye controls this world in
highest heaven, he verily |
|
|
knows it, or perhaps he knows not. |
|
|
The Buddha declared certain cosmological
and metaphysical questions unanswerable. His refusal to answer questions of this
kind gave rise to the "silence of the Buddha" as a philosophical style
in Buddhism. They included
such questions as: whether the world is eternal or not or both; whether the
world is finite (in space) or infinite or both or neither. |
|
|
In the Chinese tradition Kuo
Hsiang (died AD 312) questioned the origin of the basic oscillation of
the Taoist movement. For Hsiang there is no such thing as Non-Being for Being is
the only reality. Being could not have evolved from Non-Being nor can it revert
to Non-Being. As Kuo Hsiang put it, |
|
|
I venture to ask whether the Creator is
or is not? If He is not, how can He create things? If He is, then (being one of
these things), He is incapable of creating the mass of bodily forms. . . . The
creating of things has no Lord; everything creates itself. Everything produces
itself and does not depend on anything else. This is the normal way of the
universe. |
|
|
Skepticism
of this same kind is expressed by Parmenides,
a Pre-Socratic, and in the modern tradition of Western philosophy from Immanuel
Kant's Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1st ed. 1781; Eng. trans., Critique
of Pure Reason1929)
to Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus(1922).
Skepticism of this kind about the nature of the cosmic order and especially
about the ultimate origin of the universe places limitations on the possibility
of the rational consciousness to authentically ask these questions. In some
instances theologians have agreed and held to a notion of revelation as a
response to these unanswerable questions. In other cases, the questions
themselves have been labelled nonsensical. |
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Hartshorne and William Reese,
20th-century U.S. philosophers, have attempted to clarify and criticize all
possible rational reflections concerning the relationship of deity to the
universe. They state two opposed positions. The first is that of classical theism
in which there is the admission of plurality, potentiality, becoming, as a
secondary form of existence outside of God. The other position, that of
classical pantheism, says that though God includes all within himself, he cannot
be complex or mutable, for such categories only express human ignorance and
illusion. They attempt to overcome this dilemma by combining these contrary
poles into a dipolar conception of the meaning of deity. Because classical
theism is primarily a Western approach to the problem and classical pantheism an
Eastern approach, the dipolar conception is at the same time a synthesis of
Western and Eastern thought. In addition to this, these philosophers set forth a
method of analyzing all conceptions of deity and world according to basic
religious and rational categories. As metaphysicians they go far in refuting the
skepticism regarding rational knowledge of the relationship between the deity
and the universe. ( C.H.Lo.) |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
