Panentheism

Panentheism, derived from the Greek words pan (all), en (in) and theos (God) literally translates to "all-in-God". In the context of religious and philosophical classification, this term refers to the belief that God is the entirety of the universe, but also beyond it as well. Thus, the panentheistic God is an immanent force within all creation, and can often be seen as the animating force behind the universe. However, this God also maintains transcendent power over the universe. The term "panentheism" arose relatively recently, coined by German idealist philosopher Karl Christian Friedrich Krause (1781-1832), in the process of replacing scholarly notions of the transcendent God with a more participatory notion of the divine.

Panentheism as a Category of Religion

Related Terms

Panentheism is easily confounded with pantheism, a belief system which holds that the totality of God is infused in the universe. Unlike pantheism, panentheism does not mean that the universe is synonymous with God. Instead, it holds that there is more to God than the material universe. Under both classifications, God (G) is considered to be of the same ontological substrate as the universe. However, for the pantheist the universe is the whole of God, while for the panentheist it is only a part of God. Thus, in panentheism, God maintains a transcendent character, and furthermore is viewed as both the creator and the original source of universal morality. To summarize, in pantheism, G = W, while in panentheism, G > W. While many of the major faiths categorizeed as panentheistic could also be described as pantheistic, no explicitly pantheistic belief systems could also be considered panentheistic Pantheism simply cannot be described as panentheistic, since God could never transcend the scope of the natural universe.

Panentheism can also be confused with monism, which refers to the metaphysical and theological view that the totality of existence is derived from a single, uniform essence, principle, substance or energy. While panentheism does reduce the world to a single essence (the divine), this monistic essence is identified solely as divine and nothing else, while a monistic explanation is able to reduce all things to a non-spiritual principle. Further, by asserting that God is transcendent from the world as well as providing its constituent elements, panentheism can be simultaneously described as dualistic, as it conceive god as separate from the world, as well. In addition, panentheism is also pluralistic, as it attributes volition to to the various beings and events of the world, independent of God. Thus, equating panentheism with monism would represent an insufficient evaluation of the multifarious implications of pantheistic thought.

Implications and Debates

Pantheism is typically viewed as a theological and philosophical middle ground between theism and pantheism. For the theist, God and the world are separate, with God seen as completely transcendent. For the pantheist, in contrast, God is identified with the universe as a whole, and is seen as immanent within the world rather than transcending it. Panentheisms seems to reflect a philosophical urge to balance immanent and transcendent properties of the divine, preserving aspects of God's transcendent self-identity while also promoting a sense of intimacy between God and the universe.

Another implication of pantheism arise out of the panentheist God's dipolarity between immmanence and transcendence: the ability for humans to possess free will. In the process of equating human beings and everything else in nature with God, pantheism seems to dissolve the human freedom to choose within the notion that everything is a function of the universal oneness and its set of natural laws. This is typically not seen to be the case in panentheism, where God is seen as both cause and effect of the world. While God's knowledge includes all that there is to be known, including the future, all fate and events therein are not predestined. Instead, God's knowledge of the future is conceived of as a knowledge of possibilities; that is, God knows all the probable outcomes of what can happen. Thus, human beings have a considerable amount of freedom to choose, participating along with God in shaping the world.

Panentheistic concepts in Religion and Philosophy

Ancient Greek

Plato was one of the first Western philosophers to adequately deal with the philosophical quandaries caused by the immanent and transcendent aspects of God. Plato recognized an absolute and eternal God who existed without change and in perfection, a marked contrast to the ever-changing world of forms. Along with this God existed a world-soul, which contained the world and animated the various processes therein, existing as the most divine of the wordly things in a state of flux. Panentheists typically interpret these ideas to imply that Plato perceived a duality within the divine, thus uniting the absolute with the relative. The seperation of these categories into seperate deities seems to have dissatisified Plato in his later works, and, using the analogy of circular motion, he combined the notion of change on the periphery with the constancy of a fixed center in order to illustrate the action of one god in the processes of constancy and change. While one aspect of God toils immanently within the world of change, then, another remains constant and unwavering in a state of transcendence. Thus, Plato's later conception of God could be considered a prototype of panentheism.

Hinduism

Although the early Hinduism of the Vedas is largely considered to be polytheistic, ideas of panentheism can be identified within the text. One example involves the myth of Purusha, a cosmic man, in Rig Veda X, where this deity is sacrificed by the gods in order to supply from his body the material by which all things in the world arise. Thus, the ground of all things lies in this cosmic self, all of which participates in Purusha. While this can be interpreted as pantheistic, the fact that a larger body of gods committed the sacrifice of this cosmic man suggests that there is a higher divinity beyond the world. Further, this godly existence of Purusha seems to pre-exist the actual physical world, suggesting that the divinity of God is in some way a transcendent precursor to the world which He sustains. With this consideration, panentheistic themes can be identified in early Vedic Hinduism.

Later on, with the development of the concept of Brahman in the Upanishads, panentheistic notions began to arise more frequnetly among notable Hindu thinkers. The term Brahman refers to the supreme cosmic spirit which is regarded to be eternal, genderless, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. Although it is commonly described as subsuming all being including the human soul (or atman), Brahman is also described as the embodiment of non-being, as well. While such a description is more than somewhat nebulous, it could be interpreted to mean that Brahman also transcends the physical universe and represents a realm inconceivable to humanity, beyond the physical realm of "being". Thus, interpreted in this fashion, the conception of Brahman becomes decidedly panentheistic. A contrasting view of divinity is propounded in the Bhagavad Gita, easily the most popular religious poem in the Hindu tradition. Here, the personal, and ultimately loving elements of God are unravelled for the reader as the divine Lord Krishna pilots young warrior Arjuna's chariot into battle. Panentheism seems evident within this formulation of God, as well, evident in various lines of the poem such as Krishna's delineation of his heavenly power: "I continually support the entire universe by a very small fraction of My divine power." (Chapter 10, v. 42) This seems to suggest that God (Krishna) contains the universe in which he is currently present and more, a definite variation of panentheism.

Many Hindu thinkers including non-dualistic Vedantists such as Shankara conceived of God in a highly pantheistic fashion, considering Brahman to be the only true reality in the universe, otherwise known as acosmism. Ramanuja, a prominent southerner of the priestly cast, disagreed fervently with such a dismissal of the physical world. As a substitute for this notion, he etched out the idea of world cycles. This divided Brahman into both a manifest and unmanifest state. In Brahman's unmanifest state, Brahman corporeal form was seen to be no more than darkness. During this state, Brahman decrees that he must possess a worldly body, and so begins the manifest state, where all things of the world represent the various parts of Brahman's body. This marks an advance beyond Shankara's pantheism, as Brahman adopts both an immanent quality (in his manifest state which forms the world), and also a transcendent quality (in his unmanifest state). The only qualification to this form of panentheism is that while it is Brahman's will to support the choices made by human beings, Brahman also possesses the power to prohibit choices which displease him.

Judaism

When Hasidic Orthodox Judaism first developed as a movement, its theology was somewhat panentheistic. Early Hasidic texts seem to uphold the claim that God permeates all physical objects including living beings. For example, they typically held a belief that God was embodied in the power creating all natural forces. However, this belief was typically interpreted by Hassidim in a non-panentheistic way, as Hasidic rabbis typically concluded that within the physical universe, God was only the animating force and nothing else. Many Jewish traditionalists in opposition to the Hasidic movement viewed these writings literally, and considered this seemingly panentheistic understanding of God as an abberation to their religious faith. Although rejected by Orthodoxy, panentheistic descriptions of God have become more and more common in the Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist branches of Judaism today.

Christianity

While for the most part mainstream Christianity is monotheist, there are some branches which view this one god in ways that could be described as panentheistic. The Eastern Orthodox Church, for example, has a doctrine which they refer to panentheism which is used to describe personal activity, or hypostasis, in the world. For the Orthodox, God is not a detached creator (as in deism), nor is he the "magician" who occassionally shows up to perform miracles, as in classical theism. Instead, God's presence is considered necessary not only for the initial creation, but also for the continued existence of every aspect of that creation. God's energies maintain all things, even if those beings have explicitly rejected Him, as withdrawal of His presence would usurp the totality of existence. By this token, the entirety of creation is sanctified, and thus evil is denied as a property of creation. This conception bears resemblance to the panentheism in the convential sense, but must be considered distinct since it maintains an ontological cleavage between God and creation as is standard in Christianity. The world is embedded in God's will but not his essence (ousia). Creation, then, is not "part of" God as it would typically be in other panentheist systems, and the Godhead is still distinct from creation. However, God is "within" all creation on a relational and personal level rather than an ontological one. Thus the Orthodox parsing of the word is "pan-entheism", stressing God's indwelling in all things rather than "panen-theism", which stresses the idea that all things are part of God yet God is more than the sum of all things.

Other, less mainstream sects of Christianity abide by panentheistic doctrines. Process Theology, a contemporary variation of creation theology, is based in mathemetician Alfred North Whitehead's panentheistic process philosophy. This philosophical is based on the assertion that God has two natures, primordial and abstract. Within these natures is contained the complete history of the world as well as all possible futures. Thus, any given moment, an entity can be said to be contained within god, and as such it can be claimed that god is present within that entity. For Process theologians interpret this to mean that God contains the universe, yet is not identical with it. This God is immanent within human lives, providing a power of persuasion over human will rather than explicit force. Thus, humans still have free will rather than being at the mercy of God's coercion. Furthermore, because God contains a universe which is in a constant state of flux, God Himself is also considered to be changeable, affected by the actions that take place in the universe over the course of time. However, the abstract elements of God, such as benevolence, wisdom, and so forth remain constant. Thus, God is a function of the universe He contains and is immanent within, however, the abstract elements he maintains represent his transcendent elements. Hence, process theology is essentially pantheistic.

Sikhism

Although Sikhism is conventionally described as monotheistic, some aspects of its theology can be considered panentheistic. Sikhs believe in one transcendent creator who exists independently of the world. However, this God also manifests Himself on worldly plane, solely preserving the whole of existence. Thus, the Sikh conception of God spans both absolute and relative realms, much like a panentheistic notion of deity. Famous figures throughout the history of Sikhism have also espoused similar notions, including none other than Guru Nanak himself, the founder of Sikhism. In one story, it is said the Nanak travelled to Mecca with hopes of establishing dialouge with the Muslim people. Stopping to rest, he laid down and put his feet upward, accidentally pointing them towards the Ka'ba. He was promptly chastized by a local Muslim, who saw such a gesture as an insult. To this vituperative, legend has it that Nanak simply replied by providing some variation of the phrase "In what direction should I point my feet so they will not face God?" Such a story bolsters the Sikh notion of God's ubiquity in the physical world, which in concert with his trascendence furthers the notion that Sikh theology as somewhat panentheistic.

Significance of Panentheism

For some, panentheism allows for the resolution of some philosophical difficulties inherent in the closely related doctrine of pantheism. For example, some claim that pantheisms conception of a completely immanent god mitigates the sense of power attributed to a God conceived as more transcendentally. In panentheism, God is always present in the immanent world, however, God also possesses all the transcedence of traditional theist conceptions of God. Thus, not only does panentheism address these philosophical issues, but also, as mentioned above, bridges the gap between theism and pantheism. Further, panentheists feel that their philosophical outlook affirms the freedom of humanity in a way that neither theism or pantheism do. While theism denies that the world as a part of God's being and pantheism can be interpreted as denying the existence of individual choice apart from God, panentheists believe their viewpoint provides an all-encompassing and fully perfected God, while affirming the reality of individuals and their ability to choose freely within God. Despite the fact panentheism bridges the philosophical gap between theism and pantheism, it has still not been explicitly espoused by a large amount of major religious groups, instead persisting in small sects or else personal philsophies. This is perhaps due to panentheism's highly abstract nature. However, elements of panentheism arise in virtually every religious system, from tribal animism to Sikhism, whenever a given deity is described as both wholly powerful but also deeply imbued in worldy existence. With that said, it should be noted that a panentheism is gaining momentum among contemporary theologians and philosophers of religion, serving as a means for reconciling difficulties with other beliefs concerning the nature of God.

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Anderson, C. Alan and Whitehouse, Deborah G. New Thought: A Practical American Spirituality. New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1995.
• Brierly, Michael. "Naming a Quiet Revolution: The Panentheistic Turn in Modern Theology." In In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being: Panentheistic Reflections on God's presence in a Scientific World. Philip Clayton and Arthur Peacocke, eds. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2004, 1-18.
• Clayton, Philip and Peacocke, Arthur, eds. In Whom We Live and Move and Have Our Being: Panentheistic Reflections on God's presence in a Scientific World. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2004.
• Gregersen, Neils H. "Three Varieties of Panentheism." Clayton and Peacocke, eds., 19-36.
• Nesteruk, Alexei V. "The Universe as Hypostatic Inherence in the Logos of God: Panentheism in the Eastern Orthodox Perspective." Clayton and Peacocke, eds., 169-183.
• Rohi, Rajinder Kaur. Semitic and Sikh Monotheism: A Comparative Study. Patiala, India: Punjabi University Publication Bureau, 1999.
• "Systems of Religious and Spiritual Belief." The New Encyclopedia Britannica: Volume 26 Macropaedia. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2002. 530-577.

See Also

Acosmism

Pantheism

Monism