Difference between revisions of "Pantheism" - New World Encyclopedia
Scott Dunbar (talk | contribs) (Removing unnecessary links) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Contracted}}{{Status}} | {{Contracted}}{{Status}} | ||
| − | '''Pantheism''' ([[Greek language|Greek]]: ''pan'' = all and ''Theos'' = God) literally | + | '''Pantheism''' ([[Greek language|Greek]]: ''pan'' = all and ''Theos'' = God) literally translates to mean "[[God]] is [[All]]" or similarly "All is God". The refers to the view in religion and philosophy that everything is subsumed within an all-encompassing [[immanent]] God. Pantheists, then, typically deny God's transcendence. Similarly, it can also refer to the belief that the [[universe]] (or [[nature]]), and God are equivalent. More detailed definitions tend to emphasize the idea that [[natural law]], [[existence]], and/or the [[universe]] (the [[Absolute Infinite|sum total]] of all that is, was, and shall be) is represented or personified in the [[Theology|theological]] principle of 'God'. |
| − | == | + | ==Pantheism as a Category of Religion== |
| − | |||
| − | + | Purportedly, the term "pantheist" was first used by [[Irish people|Irish]] [[writer]] [[John Toland]] in his [[1705]] work, ''[[Socinianism]] Truly Stated, by a pantheist''. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | However, the concept has been discussed as far back as the time of the philosophers of [[Ancient Greece]]. Some, such as [[Heraclitus]], debated whether the entire substance of the universe was a force of logic, of thought in constant state of transformation. | |
| + | |||
| + | Religious and philosophical scholarship typically distinguishes between two divergent groups of pantheists. First, there is [[Classical pantheism]], a form of theological determinism which asserts that God determines everything, including the choices made by humans. This view was upheld by the Greeks as well as modern thinkers such as Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677). which is expressed in the [[immanent]] God of [[Kabalistic]] [[Judaism]], [[Advaita Vedanta]] [[Hinduism]], and [[Monism]], generally viewing God in a personal manner. The other form is [[Naturalistic pantheism]], based on the relatively recent views of [[Baruch Spinoza]] and [[John Toland]], as well as contemporary influences. | ||
The vast majority of persons who can be identified as "pantheistic" are of the classical variety (such as [[Hinduism|Hindus]]), while most persons who self-identify as "pantheist" alone (rather than as members of another religion) are of the naturalistic variety. The division between the two "flavours" of pantheism is not entirely clear in all situations, and remains a source of some controversy in pantheist circles. Classical pantheists generally accept the religious doctrine that there is a spiritual basis to all reality, while naturalistic pantheists generally do not and thus see the world in scientific terms. | The vast majority of persons who can be identified as "pantheistic" are of the classical variety (such as [[Hinduism|Hindus]]), while most persons who self-identify as "pantheist" alone (rather than as members of another religion) are of the naturalistic variety. The division between the two "flavours" of pantheism is not entirely clear in all situations, and remains a source of some controversy in pantheist circles. Classical pantheists generally accept the religious doctrine that there is a spiritual basis to all reality, while naturalistic pantheists generally do not and thus see the world in scientific terms. | ||
| − | |||
An oft-cited feature of pantheism is that each individual human, being part of the universe or nature, is part of God. One issue discussed by pantheists is how, if this is so, humans can have free will. In answer, the following analogy is sometimes given (particularly by classical pantheists): "you are to God, as an [[individual]] [[blood]] [[cell (biology)|cell]] in your [[vein]] is to you." The analogy further maintains that while a cell may be aware of its own environs, and even has some choices ([[free will]]) between right and wrong (killing a [[bacterium]], becoming [[cancer|malignant]], or perhaps just doing nothing, among countless others) it likely has little conception of the greater being of which it is a part. Another way to understand this relationship is the [[Hindu]] concept of [[Jiva]], wherein the human [[soul]] is an aspect of God not yet having reached enlightenment ([[moksha]]), after which it becomes [[Atman]]. | An oft-cited feature of pantheism is that each individual human, being part of the universe or nature, is part of God. One issue discussed by pantheists is how, if this is so, humans can have free will. In answer, the following analogy is sometimes given (particularly by classical pantheists): "you are to God, as an [[individual]] [[blood]] [[cell (biology)|cell]] in your [[vein]] is to you." The analogy further maintains that while a cell may be aware of its own environs, and even has some choices ([[free will]]) between right and wrong (killing a [[bacterium]], becoming [[cancer|malignant]], or perhaps just doing nothing, among countless others) it likely has little conception of the greater being of which it is a part. Another way to understand this relationship is the [[Hindu]] concept of [[Jiva]], wherein the human [[soul]] is an aspect of God not yet having reached enlightenment ([[moksha]]), after which it becomes [[Atman]]. | ||
However, it should be noted that not all pantheists accept the idea of free will, with [[determinism]] being particularly widespread among naturalistic pantheists. Although individual interpretations of pantheism may suggest certain implications for the nature and existence of free will and/or determinism, pantheism itself does not include any requirement of belief either way. However, the issue is widely discussed, as it is in many other religions and philosophies. | However, it should be noted that not all pantheists accept the idea of free will, with [[determinism]] being particularly widespread among naturalistic pantheists. Although individual interpretations of pantheism may suggest certain implications for the nature and existence of free will and/or determinism, pantheism itself does not include any requirement of belief either way. However, the issue is widely discussed, as it is in many other religions and philosophies. | ||
| − | |||
Some critics argue that pantheism is little more than a redefinition of the word "God" to mean "[[existence]]" "[[life]]"or "[[reality]]". Many pantheists reply that even if this is so, such a shift in the way we think about these ideas can serve to create both a new and a potentially far more insightful conception of both existence and God. | Some critics argue that pantheism is little more than a redefinition of the word "God" to mean "[[existence]]" "[[life]]"or "[[reality]]". Many pantheists reply that even if this is so, such a shift in the way we think about these ideas can serve to create both a new and a potentially far more insightful conception of both existence and God. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 24: | ||
The viewpoints encompassed within the pantheistic community are necessarily diverse, but the central idea of the universe being an all-encompassing unity and the sanctity of both nature and its natural laws are found throughout. Some pantheists also posit a common purpose for nature and man, while others reject the idea of purpose and view existence as existing "for its own sake." | The viewpoints encompassed within the pantheistic community are necessarily diverse, but the central idea of the universe being an all-encompassing unity and the sanctity of both nature and its natural laws are found throughout. Some pantheists also posit a common purpose for nature and man, while others reject the idea of purpose and view existence as existing "for its own sake." | ||
| − | + | Pantheism should not be confused with some other closely related concepts. Pantheism has features in common with [[panentheism]], such as the idea that the universe is part of God. Technically, the two are separate, inasmuch as pantheism finds God synonymous with nature, and panentheism finds God to be greater than nature alone. Some find this distinction unhelpful, while others see it as a significant point of division. Many of the major faiths described as pantheistic could also be described as panentheistic, whereas naturalistic pantheism cannot (not seeing God as more than nature alone). For example, elements of both panentheism and pantheism are found in Hinduism. Certain interpretations of the [[Bhagavad Gita]] and [[Shri Rudram]] support this view. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Pantheism has features in common with [[panentheism]], such as the idea that the universe is part of God. Technically, the two are separate, inasmuch as pantheism finds God synonymous with nature, and panentheism finds God to be greater than nature alone. Some find this distinction unhelpful, while others see it as a significant point of division. Many of the major faiths described as pantheistic could also be described as panentheistic, whereas naturalistic pantheism cannot (not seeing God as more than nature alone). For example, elements of both panentheism and pantheism are found in Hinduism. Certain interpretations of the [[Bhagavad Gita]] and [[Shri Rudram]] support this view | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | In the [[20th century]] [[United States]], [[William Luther Pierce]], a [[white nationalist]] associated with the [[American Nazi Party]] and founder of the [[National Alliance]] also utilised the term "Cosmotheism". In his eyes (similar to [[H. G. Wells]]'), God would be the end result of [[eugenics]] and [[racial hygiene]] (See: [[Nazism]], [[Francis Galton]] and [[Theosophy]]). | + | While the term cosmotheism is rarely used, and is most often simply a synonym for Pantheism, this unusual philosophy has been used rather differently, but in all cases, the feeling was that God was something created by man, perhaps even an end state of [[human evolution]], through social planning, eugenics and other forms of genetic engineering. [[H. G. Wells]] subscribed to a form of Cosmotheism, which he called the "[[world brain]]" (from a book of essays by the same name he printed in [[1937]], one of which details the creation of a [[Library]]-[[encyclopedia]] hybrid), and detailed even more in his book [http://www.online-literature.com/wellshg/invisibleking/ ''God the Invisible King''] (in which he proscribes mankind to set up a [[socialism|socialist]] system, structuring itself on social and genetic statistics, education, and eugenics, idealy someday equating itself and possibly even merging with and conqeuring the [[Pantheism|Pantheist god]] itself. See: [[Omega Point]]) and there where also some sections of his great work ''[[Outline of History]]'', which reflected this belief and his finding it in the teachings of [[Jesus Christ]] and [[Siddhartha]]. His book ''Shape of Things to Come'' (and the [[1936]] film ''[[Things to Come]]'') also reflects this, in which mankind, surviving a Nuclear war and an extended [[feudalism|Feudal]] period, unites to form a collectivist [[Utopia]]. In modern [[Israel]], Cosmotheism was described by [[Mordekhay Nesiyahu]], one of the foremost ideologists of the [[Israeli Labor Movement]] and a lecturer in its college [[Beit Berl]]. He felt that God was something which did not exist before man, and was a secular entity which the rebuilding [[Jewish Temple in Jerusalem]] has an instrumental role in "invent[ing]" God. In the [[20th century]] [[United States]], [[William Luther Pierce]], a [[white nationalist]] associated with the [[American Nazi Party]] and founder of the [[National Alliance]] also utilised the term "Cosmotheism". In his eyes (similar to [[H. G. Wells]]'), God would be the end result of [[eugenics]] and [[racial hygiene]] (See: [[Nazism]], [[Francis Galton]] and [[Theosophy]]). [[Vladimir Vernadsky]]'s and [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]]'s "[[Noosphere]]" could be refferenced as a description of the Cosmotheist deity, as does [[Emile Durkheim]]'s [[Collective consciousness]] and [[Carl Jung]]'s [[collective unconscious]]. |
| − | + | Similarly, pantheism can easily be confused with monism. | |
| − | + | ==Examples of Pantheistic concepts in religion== | |
| − | === | + | ===Ancient Greek and Roman=== |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
===Hinduism=== | ===Hinduism=== | ||
In Hindu [[theology]] [[Moksha]] and achieving godness is [[the ultimate]], both [[transcendent]] and [[immanent]], the [[absolute infinite]] [[existence]], the sum total of all that ever is, was, or ever shall be. As the sun has rays of light which emanate from the same source, the same holds true for the multifaceted aspects of God emanating from Brahman, like many colors of the same prism. This concept of God is of one unity, with the individual personal Gods being aspects of the One; thus, different deities are seen by different adherents as particularly well suited to their worship. Pantheism and panentheism are key components of [[Advaita]] theology. | In Hindu [[theology]] [[Moksha]] and achieving godness is [[the ultimate]], both [[transcendent]] and [[immanent]], the [[absolute infinite]] [[existence]], the sum total of all that ever is, was, or ever shall be. As the sun has rays of light which emanate from the same source, the same holds true for the multifaceted aspects of God emanating from Brahman, like many colors of the same prism. This concept of God is of one unity, with the individual personal Gods being aspects of the One; thus, different deities are seen by different adherents as particularly well suited to their worship. Pantheism and panentheism are key components of [[Advaita]] theology. | ||
| − | In [[Smartist]] tradition, which follows [[Advaita]] philosophy, Brahman is seen as the one God, with aspects of God emanating therefrom. With all Hindus, there is a strong belief in all paths, or true religions leading to One God. | + | In [[Smartist]] tradition, which follows [[Advaita]] philosophy, Brahman is seen as the one God, with aspects of God emanating therefrom. With all Hindus, there is a strong belief in all paths, or true religions leading to One God.Some of the Hindu aspects of God include [[Ganesa]], [[Devi]], [[Vishnu]], and [[Siva]]. Hindus who follow the [[Smarta]] tradition believe that these different aspects of God can bring worshippers closer to [[Moksha]], end of the [[reincarnation|cycle of rebirth]]. |
| − | + | [[Vedanta]], specifically, [[Advaita]], is a branch of [[Hindu philosophy]] which gives this matter a greater focus. Most Vedantic adherents are [[monism|monists]] or "non-[[dualists]]" (i.e. [[Advaita Vedanta]]), seeing multiple manifestations of the one God or source of being, a view which is often confused by non-Hindus as being [[polytheism|polytheistic]].Other subdivisions of Vedanta do not strictly hold this tenet. For example, [[Dvaita]] school of [[Madhva]] holds Brahman to be only [[Vishnu]]. In contrast, [[Arya Samaj]] believes in worshipping Brahman directly, without conceptualizing God through form such as [[Ishta-deva]] or using an [[icon]], the Hindu [[murti]] to focus. Arya Samaj only takes into consideration the formless Brahman while Advaita states that the formless Brahman ([[Nirguna Brahman]]) and the formful God [[Saguna Brahman]] are the same and hence worship of either is valid and equivalent. However, Advaita agrees with Arya Samaj that the Ultimate Reality is attributeless, in contrast to the theistic schools of [[Ramanuja]], who also stressed panentheism, and [[Madhva]], an advocate of [[duality]]. | |
| − | + | According to [[Ayyavazhi theology]], [[Ekam]] is supreme to all: the God beyond human consciousness. Though, through the concept of Ekam, [[Ayyavazhi]] states the Ultimate Oneness, there are some quotes in [[Vinchai to Vaikundar|Vinchai]] in [[Akilam nine]] which indicate pantheism. In [[Akilam seven]] a new term ''''Ekan'''' (One who appears as Ekam) was used to refer to God. In this expression, the ''[[Akilam]]'' lays the groundwork for viewing Ayyavazhi as a panthestic faith. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | ===Taoism=== | |
| + | The concept of the Tao is one of the best examples of a truly pantheistic belief. The Tao, in its totality, represents the central unifying metaphysical and naturalistic principle pervaiding the entire universe. | ||
===Judaism=== | ===Judaism=== | ||
| Line 76: | Line 52: | ||
===Christian=== | ===Christian=== | ||
| − | From the tiny groups such as [[Process theology]] and [[Creation Spirituality]], up to the [[Liberal Catholic Church]], and as far back into history as the [[Brethren of the Free Spirit]] and many [[gnostic]]s, the idea has had currency within some segments of [[Christianity]] for some time. | + | From the tiny groups such as [[Process theology]] and [[Creation Spirituality]], up to the [[Liberal Catholic Church]], and as far back into history as the [[Brethren of the Free Spirit]] and many [[gnostic]]s, the idea has had currency within some segments of [[Christianity]] for some time. Many [[Unitarian Universalism|Unitarian Universalists]] consider themselves pantheists. The Gnostic Illuminists of the [[Thomasine Church]] proclaim that they follow a more [[naturalistic pantheism]] or even a “scientific pantheism.” In their interpretations of [[Hymn of the Pearl]] they find a 2000 year old allegory of what has been termed by theoretical physicists as [[M-theory]] (sometimes also called U-theory). |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | The Gnostic Illuminists of the [[Thomasine Church]] proclaim that they follow a more [[naturalistic pantheism]] or even a “scientific pantheism.” In their interpretations of [[Hymn of the Pearl]] they find a 2000 year old allegory of what has been termed by theoretical physicists as [[M-theory]] (sometimes also called U-theory). | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | ==Significance of Pantheism== | |
| − | + | ==References== | |
| − | : | + | * Garvey, A.E. “Pantheism (introductory)” ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics''. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 609-613. |
| + | * Geden, A.S. “Pantheism (Hindu)” ''Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics''. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 617-620. | ||
| + | * Hartsthorne, Charles. "Pantheism and Panentheism" ''Encyclopedia of Religion'', Mercia Eliade, ed. New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987. 165-171. | ||
| + | * Levine, Michael P. ''Pantheism: A non-theistic concept of deity''. London: Routledge. 1994. | ||
| + | * Thilly, Frank. “Pantheism (Greek and Roman)” Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 613-617. | ||
| − | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Revision as of 18:57, 5 May 2006
Pantheism (Greek: pan = all and Theos = God) literally translates to mean "God is All" or similarly "All is God". The refers to the view in religion and philosophy that everything is subsumed within an all-encompassing immanent God. Pantheists, then, typically deny God's transcendence. Similarly, it can also refer to the belief that the universe (or nature), and God are equivalent. More detailed definitions tend to emphasize the idea that natural law, existence, and/or the universe (the sum total of all that is, was, and shall be) is represented or personified in the theological principle of 'God'.
Pantheism as a Category of Religion
Purportedly, the term "pantheist" was first used by Irish writer John Toland in his 1705 work, Socinianism Truly Stated, by a pantheist.
However, the concept has been discussed as far back as the time of the philosophers of Ancient Greece. Some, such as Heraclitus, debated whether the entire substance of the universe was a force of logic, of thought in constant state of transformation.
Religious and philosophical scholarship typically distinguishes between two divergent groups of pantheists. First, there is Classical pantheism, a form of theological determinism which asserts that God determines everything, including the choices made by humans. This view was upheld by the Greeks as well as modern thinkers such as Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677). which is expressed in the immanent God of Kabalistic Judaism, Advaita Vedanta Hinduism, and Monism, generally viewing God in a personal manner. The other form is Naturalistic pantheism, based on the relatively recent views of Baruch Spinoza and John Toland, as well as contemporary influences.
The vast majority of persons who can be identified as "pantheistic" are of the classical variety (such as Hindus), while most persons who self-identify as "pantheist" alone (rather than as members of another religion) are of the naturalistic variety. The division between the two "flavours" of pantheism is not entirely clear in all situations, and remains a source of some controversy in pantheist circles. Classical pantheists generally accept the religious doctrine that there is a spiritual basis to all reality, while naturalistic pantheists generally do not and thus see the world in scientific terms.
An oft-cited feature of pantheism is that each individual human, being part of the universe or nature, is part of God. One issue discussed by pantheists is how, if this is so, humans can have free will. In answer, the following analogy is sometimes given (particularly by classical pantheists): "you are to God, as an individual blood cell in your vein is to you." The analogy further maintains that while a cell may be aware of its own environs, and even has some choices (free will) between right and wrong (killing a bacterium, becoming malignant, or perhaps just doing nothing, among countless others) it likely has little conception of the greater being of which it is a part. Another way to understand this relationship is the Hindu concept of Jiva, wherein the human soul is an aspect of God not yet having reached enlightenment (moksha), after which it becomes Atman.
However, it should be noted that not all pantheists accept the idea of free will, with determinism being particularly widespread among naturalistic pantheists. Although individual interpretations of pantheism may suggest certain implications for the nature and existence of free will and/or determinism, pantheism itself does not include any requirement of belief either way. However, the issue is widely discussed, as it is in many other religions and philosophies.
Some critics argue that pantheism is little more than a redefinition of the word "God" to mean "existence" "life"or "reality". Many pantheists reply that even if this is so, such a shift in the way we think about these ideas can serve to create both a new and a potentially far more insightful conception of both existence and God.
Perhaps the most significant debate within the pantheistic community is about the nature of God. Classical pantheism believes in a personal, conscious, and omniscient God, and sees this God as uniting all true religions. Naturalistic pantheism believes in an unconscious, non-sentient universe, which, while being holy and beautiful, is seen as being a God in a non-traditional and impersonal sense.
Cosmotheism, a small but controversial racialist group which considers itself a form of pantheism, has an evolutionary interpretation of God, seeing him to be impersonal, but not taking a clear stance as to his sentience. “Cosmotheism”, like the terms “pantheism”, “monotheism”, and “polytheism”, was not used in antiquity. The term seems to have been coined by Lamoignon de Malesherbes in 1782 with regard to Pliny the Elder; various scholars have used it since then, but to refer to different sorts of religious belief.
The viewpoints encompassed within the pantheistic community are necessarily diverse, but the central idea of the universe being an all-encompassing unity and the sanctity of both nature and its natural laws are found throughout. Some pantheists also posit a common purpose for nature and man, while others reject the idea of purpose and view existence as existing "for its own sake."
Pantheism should not be confused with some other closely related concepts. Pantheism has features in common with panentheism, such as the idea that the universe is part of God. Technically, the two are separate, inasmuch as pantheism finds God synonymous with nature, and panentheism finds God to be greater than nature alone. Some find this distinction unhelpful, while others see it as a significant point of division. Many of the major faiths described as pantheistic could also be described as panentheistic, whereas naturalistic pantheism cannot (not seeing God as more than nature alone). For example, elements of both panentheism and pantheism are found in Hinduism. Certain interpretations of the Bhagavad Gita and Shri Rudram support this view.
While the term cosmotheism is rarely used, and is most often simply a synonym for Pantheism, this unusual philosophy has been used rather differently, but in all cases, the feeling was that God was something created by man, perhaps even an end state of human evolution, through social planning, eugenics and other forms of genetic engineering. H. G. Wells subscribed to a form of Cosmotheism, which he called the "world brain" (from a book of essays by the same name he printed in 1937, one of which details the creation of a Library-encyclopedia hybrid), and detailed even more in his book God the Invisible King (in which he proscribes mankind to set up a socialist system, structuring itself on social and genetic statistics, education, and eugenics, idealy someday equating itself and possibly even merging with and conqeuring the Pantheist god itself. See: Omega Point) and there where also some sections of his great work Outline of History, which reflected this belief and his finding it in the teachings of Jesus Christ and Siddhartha. His book Shape of Things to Come (and the 1936 film Things to Come) also reflects this, in which mankind, surviving a Nuclear war and an extended Feudal period, unites to form a collectivist Utopia. In modern Israel, Cosmotheism was described by Mordekhay Nesiyahu, one of the foremost ideologists of the Israeli Labor Movement and a lecturer in its college Beit Berl. He felt that God was something which did not exist before man, and was a secular entity which the rebuilding Jewish Temple in Jerusalem has an instrumental role in "invent[ing]" God. In the 20th century United States, William Luther Pierce, a white nationalist associated with the American Nazi Party and founder of the National Alliance also utilised the term "Cosmotheism". In his eyes (similar to H. G. Wells'), God would be the end result of eugenics and racial hygiene (See: Nazism, Francis Galton and Theosophy). Vladimir Vernadsky's and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's "Noosphere" could be refferenced as a description of the Cosmotheist deity, as does Emile Durkheim's Collective consciousness and Carl Jung's collective unconscious.
Similarly, pantheism can easily be confused with monism.
Examples of Pantheistic concepts in religion
Ancient Greek and Roman
Hinduism
In Hindu theology Moksha and achieving godness is the ultimate, both transcendent and immanent, the absolute infinite existence, the sum total of all that ever is, was, or ever shall be. As the sun has rays of light which emanate from the same source, the same holds true for the multifaceted aspects of God emanating from Brahman, like many colors of the same prism. This concept of God is of one unity, with the individual personal Gods being aspects of the One; thus, different deities are seen by different adherents as particularly well suited to their worship. Pantheism and panentheism are key components of Advaita theology.
In Smartist tradition, which follows Advaita philosophy, Brahman is seen as the one God, with aspects of God emanating therefrom. With all Hindus, there is a strong belief in all paths, or true religions leading to One God.Some of the Hindu aspects of God include Ganesa, Devi, Vishnu, and Siva. Hindus who follow the Smarta tradition believe that these different aspects of God can bring worshippers closer to Moksha, end of the cycle of rebirth.
Vedanta, specifically, Advaita, is a branch of Hindu philosophy which gives this matter a greater focus. Most Vedantic adherents are monists or "non-dualists" (i.e. Advaita Vedanta), seeing multiple manifestations of the one God or source of being, a view which is often confused by non-Hindus as being polytheistic.Other subdivisions of Vedanta do not strictly hold this tenet. For example, Dvaita school of Madhva holds Brahman to be only Vishnu. In contrast, Arya Samaj believes in worshipping Brahman directly, without conceptualizing God through form such as Ishta-deva or using an icon, the Hindu murti to focus. Arya Samaj only takes into consideration the formless Brahman while Advaita states that the formless Brahman (Nirguna Brahman) and the formful God Saguna Brahman are the same and hence worship of either is valid and equivalent. However, Advaita agrees with Arya Samaj that the Ultimate Reality is attributeless, in contrast to the theistic schools of Ramanuja, who also stressed panentheism, and Madhva, an advocate of duality.
According to Ayyavazhi theology, Ekam is supreme to all: the God beyond human consciousness. Though, through the concept of Ekam, Ayyavazhi states the Ultimate Oneness, there are some quotes in Vinchai in Akilam nine which indicate pantheism. In Akilam seven a new term 'Ekan' (One who appears as Ekam) was used to refer to God. In this expression, the Akilam lays the groundwork for viewing Ayyavazhi as a panthestic faith.
Taoism
The concept of the Tao is one of the best examples of a truly pantheistic belief. The Tao, in its totality, represents the central unifying metaphysical and naturalistic principle pervaiding the entire universe.
Judaism
The radically immanent sense of the divine in Jewish mystical Kabbalah is said to have inspired Spinoza's formulation of pantheism. Additionally, the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidism, had a mystical sense of the divine that could be described as panentheism.
Christian
From the tiny groups such as Process theology and Creation Spirituality, up to the Liberal Catholic Church, and as far back into history as the Brethren of the Free Spirit and many gnostics, the idea has had currency within some segments of Christianity for some time. Many Unitarian Universalists consider themselves pantheists. The Gnostic Illuminists of the Thomasine Church proclaim that they follow a more naturalistic pantheism or even a “scientific pantheism.” In their interpretations of Hymn of the Pearl they find a 2000 year old allegory of what has been termed by theoretical physicists as M-theory (sometimes also called U-theory).
Significance of Pantheism
ReferencesISBN links support NWE through referral fees
- Garvey, A.E. “Pantheism (introductory)” Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 609-613.
- Geden, A.S. “Pantheism (Hindu)” Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 617-620.
- Hartsthorne, Charles. "Pantheism and Panentheism" Encyclopedia of Religion, Mercia Eliade, ed. New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1987. 165-171.
- Levine, Michael P. Pantheism: A non-theistic concept of deity. London: Routledge. 1994.
- Thilly, Frank. “Pantheism (Greek and Roman)” Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. James Hastings, ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1910. 613-617.
See also
- Acosmism
- Collective unconscious
- Cosmology
- Cosmotheism
- Deism
- Emergence
- Hinduism
- Holism
- Kabbalah
- List of Pantheists
- Mordekhay Nesiyahu
- Naturalistic spirituality
- Oneness
- Pandeism
- Panentheism
- Ranters
- Tao
- Theism
- Theopanism
- Universal Pantheist Society
- World Pantheist Movement
External links
- Pantheistic Quotes
- Universal Pantheist Society Home Page
- World Pantheist Movement
- Pantheist Association for Nature
- Pantheist Awareness Network
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry
- Thomasine Church
Credits
New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:
The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:
Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.
