i
Unification Thought Dr. Sang Hun Lee
To the Reader: The book you now hold in your hands is the first full translation of Unification Thought from the original Korean to English. Translation of abstract thought from any tongue to another is at best difficult, and in this case faces the challenge of passage from an Oriental language to a Western one. We hope that by this work a path has been opened up, one not strewn with stumbling blocks (literary and otherwise) but one by which the spirit of our civilization, the mind of the reader, and the spirit of Unification Thought can unite in a fruitful new understanding. Initial capital letters are used for words and phrases describing organic parts of the structure of the Principle presented herein; otherwise we leaned toward the current style of avoiding capitalization. Italics are used for foreign words and phrases except in cases of frequency of appearance. Quotation marks, besides their familiar applications, enclose the first appearance of terms used in an unusual or technical way, and twice set off neologisms used to conform to the Korean as much as possible.
Contents Preface / xiii Part I - Fundamental Theory Ontology Introduction The Significance and History of Ontology The Meaning of Existence 1. Traditional Ideas of Existence 1. Objects of Ontological Study in Ancient Times 2. Medieval Concepts of Existence 3. Modern Concepts of Ontology 4. Current Concepts of Ontology 2. Ontology Based on the Unification Principle Section A - Basic View Section B - Concepts of Existence Section C - The Theory of the Original Image (Divine Image) 1. The Contents of the Original Image a. Divine Image b. Divine Character (Divinity) 2. The Structure of the Original Image a. The Formation of the Four Position Base Centering on Heart (i) Inner Quadruple Base (ii) Outer Quadruple Base (iii) The Inner Structure of the Hyung Sang (iv) The Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple Base, and the Developing (Dynamic) Quadruple Base
ii (v) The Inner Structure of the Logos (the Inner Developing Quadruple) b. The Chung-Boon-Hap Action or the Origin (Thesis) Division-Union (Synthesis) Action c. The Structural Unity of the Original Image Section D - The Being Image of Existing Beings 1. Individual Truth Body a. Universal Image (i) Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (ii) Positivity and Negativity (iii) Logos and the Harmony between Positivity and Negativity (iv) Subject and Object (v) Paired Elements and Opposition b. Individual Image (i) The Location of the Individual Image (ii) The Monostratic Nature of the Individual Image (iii) The Individualization of the Universal Image (iv) The Individualization of the Chung-Boon-Hap Process (v) The Individual Image, Idea and Concept (vi) The Universal and Individual (vii) The Individual Image and the Environment 2. The Connected Body a. The Connected Body and Dual Purposes b. The Connected Body and the Original Image Section E - The Yang Sang ("Status-Image") and the Position of the Existing Being 1. The Yang Sang of Existing Beings 2. Position of the Existing Being 3. The Various Types of Circular Movement, and Developing Movement (i) Types of Circular Movement (ii) Development and Spiral Movement (iii) Direction of Developing Movement 103 (iv) Purpose, Law, and Necessity in Development 105 Section F - Existing Form of Being 3. Critique of Major Traditional Viewpoints of Substance (i) Plato (427 - 347 B.C.) (ii) Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C.) (iii) Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274) (iv) Descartes (1596 - 1650) (v) George Wilhelm Hegel (1770 - 1831) (vi) Karl Marx (1818 - 1883) (vii) Oriental Philosophy -Sung-Ih Hak Part II - Partial Theories 1. Theory of the Original Human Nature Section A - Meaning and Necessity of the Theory of the Original Human Nature (i) Necessity of the Original Human Nature (ii) Original Nature and Fallen Nature Section B - The Original Nature a. The Original Nature and Essence b. The Original Nature and Existence Section C - The Original Human Nature Pursued by Existentialism 1. The Existentialists' Views on Existence and Man (i) Kierkegaard's "Individual" (ii) Nietzsche's Superman Thought (iii) Jaspers' Limit Situation
iii (iv) "Existence" of Heidegger (v) Subjectivity of Sartre (vi) Summary 2. The Critique of Each Existentialist Philosophy and View of Humanity (i) Critique of Kierkegaard (ii) Critique of Nietzsche (iii) Critique of Jaspers (iv) Critique of Heidegger (v) Critique of Sartre Section D - The Original Human Nature Viewed from the Unification Principle 1. Being with Divine Image a. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (Perfectness) b. Positivity and Negativity (multiplication and norm) c. Individual Image in God 2. Being in Position a. Being with Object Position b. Being with Subject Position-Dominion c. Being with an Intermediary Position 3. Being with Divine Image a. Being with Heart b. Being of Logos (Norm) c. Being with Creativity Section E - The Original Nature and Second Nature (i) The Difference between the Original Nature and the Second Nature (ii) The Communists' View of the Original Nature 2. Epistemology Section A - The Meaning of Epistemology and the Process of its Formation (i) The Origin of Epistemology (ii) Novum Organum of Francis Bacon Section B - Traditional Epistemology Viewed from the Contents of Cognition 1. Epistemology Emphasizing the Object Only a. From the Viewpoint of the Source of Cognition-Empiricism b. From the Viewpoint of What Is the Essence of Cognition-Realism 2. Epistemology Emphasizing the Subject Only a. From the Viewpoint of the Source of Cognition Rationalism b. From the Viewpoint of the Essence of Cognition Subjective Idealism Section C - Traditional Epistemology Viewed from the Cognition Method 1. The Transcendental Method of Kant (i) The Unification of Empiricism and Rationalism (ii) Matter and Form (iii) Ding an Sich ("Thing-in-Itself") (iv) Cognition Form 2. The Dialectical Method of Marx (i) The Theory of Reflection (ii) Sensitivity, Reason and Practice (iii) Absolute Truth and Relative Truth Section D - The Basis of Epistemology by the Unification Principle 1. Everything is the Object of Man's Pleasure 2. All Things are Objects of Man's Dominion (Control) 3. There is Give-and-Take Action Between the Subject and Object Section E - Unification Epistemology (Epistemology Based on the Give-and-Take Law) 1. Critique of Traditional Epistemologies (i) Why Subject and Object Exist
iv (ii) The Object Must Exist Outside 188 (iii) Is the "Thing-in-Itself" (Ding an Sich) Unknowable? 2. The Give-and-Take Relation between the Subject and Object and the Activity of Cognition 3. The Development of Cognition 4. The Ground and Method of Cognition a. Appraisal and Correspondence (i) Is the Mind a Tabula Rasa (Blank Tablet) by Nature? (ii) There Must Be An Appraisal of Correspondence (iii) Man Has the Prototypes of All Things Within Him (iv) The Prototypes Exist Deep in the Latent Consciousness (v) Cognition is the Unification of the Outside and Inside b. The Similarity of Content and Form c. Transcendence and Priority (i) The Priority of the Prototype (ii) The Development of the Prototype d. Spiritual Cognition 5. Summary and Conclusion 3. Axiology Section A -The Significance of Axiology Section B - The Theoretical Foundation of Axiology (i) Dual Being (ii) Dual Purposes (iii) Dual Desires Section C - The Kinds of Value (i) Truth, Goodness and Beauty (ii) Love (iii) Holiness Section D - The Essence of Value (i) The Essence of Value (ii) The Purpose of Creation (iii) The Give-and-Take Action of Relative Elements and Harmony Section E - The Decision of Actual Value and the Standard of Value (i) The Decision of Actual Value (ii) Subjective Action (iii) The Importance of the Subjective Conditions (iv) The Standard of Value (v) Relative Elements and Absolute Elements Section F - Present Day Life and Value (i) The View of Purpose and Value (ii) The Necessity of a New View of Value 4. Ethics Section A - The Necessity of Unification Ethics and its Origin in the Unification Principle a. The Necessity of Ethics b. The Basis of Ethics in the Unification Principle Section B - The Definition of Ethics Section C - Ethics and Morality Section D - Family Four Position Base and Ethics a. God's Ideal of Creation and the Family Four Position Base b. The Actualizing Process of Love c. The Principle of Order in Ethics d. Order and Equality Section E - Critique of the Traditional Theories of Goodness a. Critique of the Modem Viewpoints of Goodness
v (i) Bentham's Utilitarianism (ii) The Categorical Imperative of Kant b. Critique of the Current Viewpoints of Goodness (i) The Intuitionism of Moore (1873 - 1958) (ii) The Emotive Theory of Logical Positivism (iii) The Instrumentalism Theory of Pragmatism 5. Theory of History Section A - The View of History by the Unification Principle (i) The History of Sin (ii) The History of Re-creation and Restoration Section B - The Character of History According to the Unification Principle 1. Re-Creation by the Logos 2. The Goal and Direction of History (i) Hegel's View of History (ii) Marx's View of History (iii) Spengler's View of History (iv) Toynbee's View of History 3. The Laws of History Section C - The Laws of Re-Creation in History 1. The Laws of Creation 2. The Laws of Restoration Section D - The Unity, Individuality and Difference of Historical Development (i) The Unity of Historical Development (ii) The Individuality of Historical Development (iii) Differentiation of Historical Development Section E - The Laws of Historical Development and the Method of Studying History (i) The Basic Laws of History (ii) History and the Give and Take Law (G-T Laws) (iii) The Law of Will-Action (iv) The Historic View of the Struggle between Good and Evil (v) Development by the G-T Action or by Struggle? (vi) The Essence of Struggle Section F - The Pattern of Historical Development 1. From the Providential Viewpoint (i) The History of God's Words (ii) The Providence of Parallel Periods 2. From the Viewpoint of Religion and Politics (i) The Law of Dominion of the Center (ii) The Four Types of Society (iii) The Reasons for the Formation of the Four Societies 3. From the Viewpoint of Economy (i) Mutual Relationships of Religion, Politics and Economy (ii) The Developmental Steps of Economy (iii) The Inequality of the Development of Religion, Politics and Economy in the Period of the New Testament (iv) The Development Stages of the Economy in the New Testament Age Section G - History and Culture 1. The Central Providence and Peripheral Providence in Cultural History (i) The Central Providence of Cultural History (ii) Peripheral Providence 2. Sung Sang Culture and Hyung Sang Culture (i) Hebraism and Hellenism
vi (ii) The Sources of the Two Cultures (iii) The Termination of History is a Unified Culture
Preface For a long time, mankind has expected, by the progress of science, to realize a society of well-being filled with freedom, peace, and prosperity. Today, however, in spite of the arrival of an unprecedented scientific age when even manned spacecraft travel to the moon, threats to freedom and peace still remain as does poverty existing in the midst of abundance. Furthermore, incessant social chaos and international disputes still occur. If this situation is to continue, the future of mankind looks indeed gloomy. Today's regrettable reality is that many people are losing sight of the significance and direction of their lives due to the present overemphasis on science and technology. All the traditional authority systems and views -of value are collapsing, and the value standard by which we decide the direction of politics, economy, society, culture, and the like is becoming very faint. In the advanced nations, it is hard to maintain the status quo even by outer binding forces such as the constitution and laws, and an unreasonable way of thinking, that anybody can do anything he wants, is gradually prevailing. In many countries, social crimes are inevitably increasing under this absence of morality, and illegality and decadence rapidly spreading. Taking advantage of this confusion, communism, which is a pseudo-value system, is eroding the Free World both in public and in secret. Professing to be the best value standard, communism is instead giving rise to social confusion under the pretenses of pacifism and humanism. On the other hand, however, in the communist camps themselves peoples' human rights are infringed upon and human dignity is disregarded through methods of despotic terrorism. Hence, liberalism confronts communism throughout the world and there is no international dispute or war that is not interfered with directly or indirectly by the communists. Moreover, unrest still remains throughout the world, and we can foresee the possible outbreak of unexpected problems due to communist provocation. What is the best way to save mankind from such fear and crisis? What is the true way to protect freedom and establish peace? And who can undertake such a task? He must be a zealous intellectual who is deeply devoted to the accomplishment of human welfare and transcendent of national differences. It is certain that the future of mankind depends upon a man of this caliber. Now must be the time for all sincere and zealous liberalistic intellectuals to boldly undertake this historical task and make all possible mental efforts to establish the genuine freedom and peace of mankind. One of the necessary conditions of this time is the establishment of an ideological system which is able to meet the needs of the times. In such a situation, I am going to introduce a new system of thought. This is the thought of Mr. S. M. Moon who originally founded the Unification Principle in Korea. These Principles are now taught throughout the world. Because this thought is considered to be an answer to the times, I am going to introduce its outline in this book. This thought is theistic in standpoint; it assumes Creation by God and the action of Divine Providence in the process of human history. For that reason, this thought has found the ultimate cause of today's social chaos and international disputes to be at the beginning of history. It attempts to solve the various realistic problems in a new dimension. By recognizing the Fall of Man at the beginning of history, the action of the Divine Providence in the process of human history, and the partial responsibility of man, this thought is trying to approach the solution of today's problems. Since the thought is extensive and profound, it seems to include the essentials of various traditional philosophical and religious thoughts. However, I feel that it was a revelation of God that made the exposure of the thought possible. The thought originated with the founder of the Unification Principle, and is called the Unification Thought, in the sense that it contributes to the establishment of human welfare and a new human culture by the unification of various other thoughts. This booklet is a summary, arrangement and record of extensive contents. However, I can not but acknowledge that the method of expression is rather simple and un academic, since it was very hard work for me as I lack the capability to arrange and systematize the extraordinary contents. Therefore I ask for the reader's understanding. The contents of this book, which are based on the Unification Principle, the teachings of Mr. Moon, are classified into Ontology, the Theory of the Original Nature of Man, Epistemology, Axiology, Ethics, and the Theory of History. (It is rather regrettable that Logic, Pedagogy, and the Theory of Arts have not been
vii translated in time for this edition, but they will be published in the second edition.) Since Ontology is the most fundamental theory of the Unification Thought, it is dealt with in comparative detail. As for the other sections, the main contents were only briefly stated. I sincerely hope for the day in the near future, when a more scientific and systematic handling of the detailed contents is made. I wonder if I could have introduced Mr. Moon's thought exactly in this book owing to my poor power of expression. Accordingly, when there is something hard to understand or illogically presented, I am quite responsible for it. If there is something in this book found to be of value, I sincerely pray for it to be of good service by making a contribution to the fulfillment of true peace and everlasting welfare on earth, which is the cherished desire of all mankind. Seoul, Korea September 12th 1973 |Part I - Fundamental Theory Bibliography
Ontology Introduction The Significance And History Of Ontology The Meaning Of Existence Ontology is the study of existence, reality, or Being. As a field of philosophy, it may deal with the motivation, process and purpose of all existing beings, with the ultimate cause of existence, and with the attributes and original nature of substance itself. It is widely known that throughout the history of Western philosophy the primary philosophical questions have been ontological ones. The Greek philosophers, including those of Miletos, dealt with the question of the source of the universe and regarded the cosmic source as being different things such as water, air, soil, fire, number, idea or eidos. Such a list reveals the great variety of concepts of existence which have been presented. Chapter I - Traditional Ideas of Existence Throughout the development of history the concept of Being, which is the object of ontological study, has changed. That is to say, in the ancient, Medieval, modern, and current times, the objects which were dealt with in ontological study, and all the concepts of those beings, have differed. 1. Objects Of Ontological Study In Ancient Times In ancient time s there was no actual term ontology, but the main object of philosophical study was the ultimate cause of the universe or arche. This was considered by different philosophers to be many different things. For example, the ultimate cause was considered to be water by Thales, fire by Heraclitus, einai by Parmenides, number by Pythagoras, atom by Democritus, idea by Plato and eidos and hyle by Aristotle. 2. Medieval Concepts Of Existence In the Middle Ages as well, there was no term ontology, because Christian theology dominated all the spiritual aspects of man's life. However, Thomas Aquinas, the great Medieval theologian, after studying Aristotle's logic, combined it with theology and formed the scholastic philosophy. Thus during the Middle Ages, men rationally regarded God as the cosmic substance (ousia or esse), and all other things as finite beings created by God. Thomas Aquinas, in particular, demonstrated how to prove the existence of God rationally, and he clarified the relationship between the existence (esse) of God md-essence (essentia) of God. Thus, although the Middle Ages was a theological age, toward its close, philosophers began to deal with the ontology of God in the rational and logical Greek way, rather than in the intuitive and mystical way of Augustine. 3. Modern Concepts Of Ontology
viii Coming into modern times, the concept of existence came to have chiefly epistemological contents. That is to say, existence itself was dealt with as the object of epistemology. The Medieval superhuman and supernatural view of the world was discarded, and a world view was established which originated in the Renaissance and which was based on natural science and centered on reason. In the formation of this modern thought or philosophy, the new methods of philosophical cognition played the most fundamental role. The methods of cognition of scholastic philosophy such as the deductive and probable methods developed by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas were rejected, and both the inductive and rational methods were asserted. The inductive method, based on experimentation and observation, developed into empiricism in England; while the rational method, aiming for mathematically "clear and distinct" understanding developed into rationalism on the continent. Accordingly, epistemology came to be the main part of modern philosophy with "existence" or "being" considered most significant as objects of cognition. Thus, each philosopher's view of existence varied according to his view of epistemology. Locke considered cognitive objects as objective things; Berkeley thought that beings were perceived ideas (esse est percipi); Descartes regarded both mind and matter as final cause; Leibnitz saw monade as the cosmic substance, while Hegel thought that reason (Absolute Geist) was the final cause (Substanz). 4. Current Concepts Of Ontology Modern rationalism and the ideas of the Enlightenment reached their climax in the German idealism of Kant and Hegel. German idealists were convinced of the harmonious order of the real world, and they emphasized human dignity and freedom. However, in our own times, as the defects of capitalism came to light, social unrest spread, and as natural science developed to a high degree, the influence of idealism lessened. To fill the gap that idealism left, contemporary philosophies appeared such as Marxist philosophy, which rationalized the theory of violent social revolution; existentialism, which objected to the leveling of human beings by the development of science, and dealt with the essential human self as solitary; logical positivism which analytically treated only logic as part of philosophy and transferred most of what had previously been dealt with in philosophy to the different branches of science, and pragmatism which claimed that the standard of truth should be whether or not a thing is useful in daily life. Because of these philosophies, the view of beings of final cause (ouisa) changed in comparison to the views of the medieval and modern times. Karl Marx and his followers thought that matter alone was existence or the final cause. Within existentialism, Karl Jaspers dealt with the natural world (Welt) as objective beings, with human beings as "I-beings" (Ichsein) and with transcendental being (Transzendenz) as "Itself-being" (Ansichsein). Martin Heidegger saw the essential self (true being) as "being" (existing modality, Sein) and real or actual man as the present actual being (Dasein); while he called the average human being, common man (Mann). Logical positivists reject problems concerning beings or final cause because to them, these problems have no real meaning in philosophy, but rather belong to the realm of metaphysics. Pragmatism also rejects the problems of essential nature because they are transcendental. The pragmatists' view of God is that one can recognize the existence of God if using that concept gives one some practical effect of moral or emotional satisfaction. It seems good to introduce here the concept of "beings" in phenomenology, which is another contemporary philosophy. Husserl's phenomenology analytically describes the structure of the phenomenon of pure consciousness (Reine Bewussein). In Husserl's phenomenology, we have to exclude all preconceived ideas about the concept of recognition, and have to deal with the object itself as real fact. We have to use the method of phenomenological epoche. In this case Sache Selbst (things themselves) become the object of epoche. This Sache Selbst is dealt with as the concept of being by Husserl.
Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 1) Section A - Basic View
ix The Principle of Creation of the Unification Principle is philosophical in nature and deals with ontological questions. Ontology based on the Unification Principle is the philosophical explanation of the existence of man. Let me introduce the parts of the Unification Principle that deal with ontology. (1) Just as the work of an artist is a visible manifestation of its maker's invisible nature, every creation is a "substantial object" of the invisible deity of God, the creator. (Divine Principle, p. 20.) This part of the Principle, along with several other parts, describes God's creation and makes it clear that the created world is the substantial object of God. (2) How can we know the characteristics of God, who is an invisible being? We can know them by observing the world of His creation. (Ibid., p. 20) All things exist through a reciprocal relationship between the dual essentialities of positivity and negativity. We must also know the reciprocal relationship between another pair of dual essentialities, which is even more fundamental than that of positivity and negativity. Anything in existence has both an external form [Hyung Sang] and an internal character [Sung Sang]. 'Me external form [Hyung Sang] is visible and reflects the internal character [Sung Sang] , which is invisible. Though the internal character [Sung Sang] cannot be seen, it assumes a certain form, so that the external form [Hyung Sung] resembles the internal character [Sung Sang] as its visible form. "Internal character" [Sung Sang] and "external form" [Hyung Sang] refer to the two characters which are the two relative aspects of the same existence. In this relationship, the external form [Hyung Sang] may also be called a "second internal character," [Sung Sang] so together we call them "dual characteristics" or "dual essentialities." (Ibid., pp. 21-22) As Paul indicated, when we examine the factors which all creation have in common, we finally come to understand that God is the First Cause of the world of creation, and He exists as the absolute subject, having characteristics both of essential character [Original Sung Sang] and essential form [Original Hyung Sang]. (Ibid., p. 24) This part of the Principle clarifies that God is a harmonious being with two polarities (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity). Then what is the relationship between these two attributes? The Principle explains it as follows: What is the relationship between the dual characteristics of character and form and the dual characteristics of positivity and negativity? Fundamentally, God's essential character and His essential form assume a reciprocal relationship with His ,.essential positivity" and "essential negativity." Therefore, God's essential positivity and essential negativity are the attributes of His essential character and essential form. (Ibid, p. 24) In other words, positivity and negativity are the attributes of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Accordingly, there are positive aspects to Sung Sang (brightness, gladness, manliness, etc.) and negative aspects to Sung Sang (melancholy, sadness, or womanliness, etc.), and there are both positive forms (convex parts of the body) and negative forms (concave parts of the body) in the Hyung Sang. [Note: Since God is not physical, He does not actually contain masculine and feminine nor convex and concave parts but rather, God is the substance which is the First Cause of positive and negative phenomena, and this constitutes God's positivity and negativity.] (3) We have learned so far that each and every creation is God's substantial object which is the manifested form of the invisible essentialities of God. Every substantial object is called an "individual truth incarnation." [Individual Truth Body]. Man, being the substantial object of God who was created in His image, is called the "individual truth incarnation in image" [Image Individual Truth Body]. Since all creation, other than man, is the symbolic object of God created in His indirect image, it is called the "symbolic individual truth incarnation" [Symbolic Individual Truth Body]. (Ibid., p. 25)
x The substantial subject and object pair then enter into another give and take action by forming a reciprocal relationship, through Universal Prime Energy. By forming one unit they become an object to God. In this manner, God, as the origin, is divided into two separated substances, after which these two again unite to form one body. We call this process "origin-division-union action." (Ibid., p. 31) This means that the creation exists by give-and-take, and when we consider this in relation to time, the give-and-take action appears as the action of "Origin-Division-Union." God contains within Himself dual essentialities which exist forever. Through Universal Prime Energy, these two form a mutual or reciprocal relationship which develops into an eternal give and take action. (Ibid., p. 28) Each and every creation enters into give and take action between the dual essentialities that form an individual self by forming a reciprocal relationship through Universal Prime Energy. Through the force of give and take action, the dual essentialities produce a reciprocal base, which in turn produces a foundation of existence in an individual self; then upon this foundation, the individual self can stand as God's object and receive all the power necessary for its own existence. (Ibid., pp. 28-29) This indicates the constant action of give-and-take through the stages of Origin-Division-Union (Synthesis) within God and within all creation, which thus resembles God. Section B - Concepts of Existence As shown in the previously introduced Unification Principle, even if we include the things made by human beings, there is nothing in the universe which was not created by God. The material for the things man creates and man's creativity itself originate from God. Therefore in a broad sense even manufactured goods can be regarded as part of God's creation. In the ontology of Unification Thought there are two kinds of beings. One kind of being includes all the.things which exist in the universe, and the other kind of being is that which allows all things to exist. The former kind of being is called "existing being" and the latter kind of being is called the "Original Being." In addition to these two, Unification Thought also deals with beings in the narrow sense. Accordingly, there are the three following kinds of concepts of beings in Unification Thought: 1. Original Being 2. Existing Being 3. being (In the narrow sense, it means a specific realm or character, or the fact to exist e.g. animal being and social being.)
Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 2) Section C - The Theory of the Original Image (Divine Image) I will now explain about the ontology of the Original Being (God). The reason the Original Being must be dealt with in ontology is that all existing beings are patterned after the Original Being. Accordingly, the attributes of the Original Being should first be clarified in relation to their contents and structure. The Original Being's attributes are God's polarity and His other natures, which together are referred to in the terms of Unification Thought as "Original Image" or "Divine Image." Divine Image in the narrow sense means polarity and "Individual Imaged," while God's other attributes are called "Divinity." 1. The Contents Of The Original Image
xi Original Image means the attributes of the Original Being. These attributes are the 91 the attributes and modalities of all individual beings. According to the interpretation of Unification Thought, the Original Image has both content and structure. Here the "content" means each of the natures composing the attributes, and the "structure" refers to the mutual relationships among the natures. By the Principle of Creation, the Original Image can be explained as having the polarity of Sung Sang (Original Sung Sang) and Hyung Sang (Original Hyung Sang), the polarity of positivity and negativity, Individual Images, and Heart, Logos, and creativity. More precisely, within the Original Image, the Divine Image consists of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, and Individual Images, while the Divinity consists of Heart, Logos, and Creativity. a. Divine Image In the first place, the Sung Sang of the Divine Image is the internal attribute of the Original Being, that is the cause of the invisible part of all things (human spiritual body, the mind of animals, life of plants, activeness of inorganic material, etc.). Accordingly, it means the mind of the Original Being and implies the function of intellect, emotion and will. God's will is the subject to the human mind, is also the subject of human intellect, emotion and volition [will]." (Ibid., p. 67) Here intellect refers to the function of recognition including sensibility, understanding, and reason; emotion refers to the function of feeling, such as feeling joy, anger, etc., but it is different from Heart; and will refers to the function of intention and the impulse to realize the purpose of Heart. The mind of God (Sung Sang) contains another level of polarity inside itself. In other words, another level of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang exists within the Original Sung Sang itself. This inner level of Sung Sang is called "Inner Sung Sang", and this inner level of Hyung Sang is called "Inner Hyung Sang." Therefore, actually the above mentioned intellect, emotion and will do not belong to the whole Sung Sang, but only to the Inner Sung Sang of mind, and there is another part of the mind, the Inner Hyung Sang, consists of idea (concept) and principle (law). According to the Principle of Creation though the internal character cannot be seen, it assumes a certain form, so that the external form resembles the internal character as its visible form. (Ibid., p. 22) In this relationship, the external form may also be called all second internal character," so together we call them "dual characteristics," or "dual essentialities." (Ibid., p. 22) This means that there are elements of another Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang) within the Sung Sang of the Original Image. Next, Hyung Sang (Original Hyun Sang) is the external attribute of the Original Being, the cause of the visible aspect of all things (human flesh body, animal's body, physical structure of plants, substantial part of inorganic matter, etc.). Accordingly, this Hyung Sang consists of matter and the ',"Universal Prime Force." The Original Being has the Universal Prime Force in itself as the unifying force, and this Universal Prime Force and matter form the Original Hyung Sang. Thus Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are complementary, but Sung Sang is always in the subject position, whereas Hyung Sang is in the object position; that is, the internal Sung Sang is subject, and the external Hyung Sang is its object. Positivity and negativity are also attributes of the Origin being which has Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. So, strictly speaking they are the direct attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Thus, Sung Sang has two kinds of aspects: the positive aspect and the negative aspect. The positive aspects of man's Sung Sang or mind are aspects such as activity, brightness, delight, inventiveness, etc., and the negative aspects are those such as passivity, melancholy, sadness, agony, etc. There are also positive aspects of man's Hyung Sang or flesh body such as the nose, forehead, elbow, etc. (protruding and convex parts) and negative ones such as the nostril, ear hole, lap, etc. (sunken or concave parts). These kinds of aspects can also be seen within the animal, vegetable and mineral kingdoms as well as among human beings. This is due to the fact that both the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of the Original
xii Being have positivity and negativity within themselves. In the reciprocal relationship between positivity and negativity, positivity is the subject and negativity is the object. Besides these attributes, there is another in the Divine Image of God. This is the attribute of God which includes the Individual Images, the fundamental prototypes of each individual being of the creation. In other words, all the existing beings, including human beings, have the general aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity, and each creature also has a specific aspect of individuality which reflects the Individual Image within the Original Being. According to Unification Thought, each face, head, etc. is different from every other because each creature takes after one of the countless Individual Images in the Original Image. These three aspects, then, are the attributes ,of the Original Being; and as they have a kind of image (aspect), we call them together the "Divine Image." The polarities of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, are called the "Universal Image" because of their universality throughout the whole creation, and they are distinguished from the Individual Images. [Note: For more convenient repetition of terms, the Universal Image of the Original Image is to be called "Original Universal Image", and the Individual Image of the Original Image is to be called "Original Individual Image."] b. Divine Character (Divinity) Besides the Divine Image (narrow sense) the Original Being has several specific qualities which are Heart, Logias and Creativity. Of these, Heart is the essence of the personality aspect of the Original Being; therefore Heart is the most fundamental attribute of the Original Being. God is generally called omniscient and omnipotent, but in the Unification Principle these are regarded as secondary and posterior in importance, while Heart is regarded as the most fundamental and proper characteristic of God. Some philosophers regard God as the absolute mind or as reason, but these too are secondary, judging from the Unification Principle. Of all the attributes of the Original Being, Heart is the most fundamental and essential, and causes all the other attributes to interact. The Word (Logos) and creation appear, due to Heart, for Heart has purpose within itself and direction to realize that purpose. Because one of the essential natures of Heart is joy, and since it is impossible for joy to maintain itself without an object, this Heart necessarily has purpose and direction. Heart is also the starting point of love, because another essence of Heart is emotional "combinability." Love originates from this "combinability." Thus Heart is the essential attribute of the personality aspect of the Original Being. It is because the center of give-and-take action is Heart (Purpose) that the Unification Principle indicates that the action of give-and-take in the creation occurs centering on God. Now let me explain about the Logos. According to the Gospel of John, Chapter 1, verse 1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." The Divine Principle indicates that the universe was created by the Word, and "It is written (John 1:1) that Logos is in the objective position to God." (Divine Principle, "Christology," p. 215) This Word means the Logos or natural law. To put it concretely, Logos is the combination of reason and law (principles), which in the Unification Principle is called the "Polarity of Logos." In the meantime, since God, as the subject of Logos, contains dual essentialities within Himself, Logos, as His object, should also contain dual essentialities. (Ibid., p. 215) Namely, Logos has the polarities of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity. Then what are the concrete contents of the polarity of the Logos? Its Sung Sang is reason and its Hyung Sang is law (principles). The unified body created through the action of give-and-take between the Sung Sang (Inner Sung Sang) and the Hyung Sang (Inner Hyung Sang) is Logos. In the creation of the universe, the Logos performs give-and-take action with the material element (Original Hyung Sang), centering on Heart, and reveals both positive and negative aspects. This fact means that the Logos itself has both positivity and negativity.
xiii There is another aspect of Divinity called "Creativity." It was because of this Creativity that the Original Being could create all the existing beings. The fact that man, as a created existing being, has the abilities of invention, discovery, manufacture, and initiative means that he was given these abilities by God. God created man so that man could reach his perfection only by accomplishing his portion of responsibility. (Ibid., p. 55) Creativity can be considered as nothing more than the ability to produce a new thing, and in this sense every creature has creativity. Take for example, the procreative power of animals and plants. However, man's Creativity is quite different from the autonomous fertility of plants and instinctive procreation of animals, because the God-like Creativity which God gave to man is a rational ability of Creativity, centered on Heart. Because he has a physical body, man of course possesses instinctive creativity as well as God's Creativity, but his ability to produce goods, originate new plans or projects comes from God's Creativity. 2. The Structure Of The Original Image What is the structure of the Original Image? As mentioned before, the various elements of the Original Image are not separate, but rather are closely connected with each other in a certain order, and they are in a definite structural relationship. [Note: Here structure does not have the same meaning as if we were talking about the structure of a machine which is composed of parts (such as a watch). God is unique and transcendent and outside of space and time. Therefore, although God's attributes are many, they form one unity and are always present. God is not a composite. This may be compared to a wound up film whose attributes (people, events, and other things) form a unity (unified body) in the wound up film, and transcend time and space. When the film is shown on the screen, however, the persons and events develop within the order of time and space. The attributes of the Original Being are not like the parts of a composite. However, we can not but express those attributes in an analytical method just to though we were analyzing a composite, because all the words with which we have to explain the attributes of the Original Being, have been formed in history in order to express the phenomena occurring in time and space in the composite world.] a. The Formation of the Four Position Base Centering on Heart In a word, the structure of the Original Image is a quadruple system. As mentioned above, the Sung Sang and the Hyung Sang of the Original Image (Divine Image in the broad sense form a union through the harmonious action of give-and-take. The attributes of the Original Image (God) interact with one another. The action of give-and-take necessarily requires a center, and the center of the action within the Original Image is Heart. Thus four factors called Heart, Sung Sang, Hyung Sang, and Union form four positions and have a definite order. Namely they make a structure composed of these four positions, the "Four Position Base" (Quadruple Base). [Note: The concept of the Four Position Base in the Unification Principle is explained concisely in the following: "When, according to O-D-U [OriginDivision-Union] action, the origin is divided into two substantial objects, they assume the roles of subject and object respectively, and finally unite into one body. Thus three objective positions are fulfilled. Since these three objective positions are centered on the origin, four respective positions are formed altogether. This creates "the four position foundation" [Four Position Base]. (Ibid., p. 32) The Quadruple Base means the base composed of one origin [thesis], two divided substantial objects [division] , and one union [synthesis]. The origin here means God, or more concretely, God's Heart and Purpose; the two divided substantial objects are the Sung Sang (subject) and Hyung Sang (object); and the union means the union or new life. Figure 1 illustrates this.] In the action of give-and-take, Sung Sang is always subject and Hyung Sang is object. Sung Sang is mind, and Hyung Sang is both matter and Universal Prime Energy. To put it more concretely, mind, which contains ideas and principles, means the functions of intellect, emotion and will. In other words, mind consists of definite functions, ideas and principles (laws).
xiv
Fig. I Quadruple Base (Outer) (i) Inner Quadruple Base As already mentioned, there is another level of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Sung Sang (Original Sung Sang) itself. These are the functions of intellect, emotion and will (Sung Sang parts), and ideas, concepts and principles (Hyung Sang parts). Accordingly, intellect, emotion and will are the subject part of the mind, while ideas, concepts and principles are the object part of the mind. For example, we always experience that there are both thinking and thought parts in the human mind. The mind always thinks of something such as past experiences, ideas, concepts, or future plans. This is due to the fact that these two elements exist in the mind of the Original Being itself. Here these two elements are referred to as the Inner Sung Sang and the Inner Hyung Sang. Since Sung Sang and Hyung Sang perform the action of give-and take, this Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang perform the action of give-and-take centering on Heart and form the union which is the Quadruple Base composed of four parts appears (See Fig. 2). This is called the "Inner Quadruple Base." (ii) Outer Quadruple Base Figure 1 shows that the Inner Quadruple Base formed within the Original Sung Sang (subject element) itself, does, as the subject factor, form another Quadruple Base through its action of give-and-take with the Original Hyung Sang (object element). We call this larger Quadruple Base the "Outer Quadruple Base." It is therefore possible for us to understand that there are two kinds of Quadruple Bases Inner and Outer Quadruples in the structure of the Original Image.
Fig. 2 Inner Quadruple Base
xv Here, I will explain about the Hyung Sang of the Original Being. Hyung Sang (Original Hyung Sang) is regarded as the ultimate cause of the material aspect of all the existing beings. According to the Principle of Creation, all creatures (man, animals, plants, molecules, atoms, etc.) even though their dimensions are different, consist of an invisible Sung Sang part equivalent to mind, and a visible Hyung Sang part equivalent to body (matter). This ultimate being must be the First Cause of all beings, containing the absolute and subjective character and form. This First Cause of our existing world we call God. We call God's subjective character and form His "essential character" and "essential form." (Ibid., pp. 23-24) This Hyung Sang of the beings means matter or material and can be thought of as equivalent to the philosophical term "hyle." Shape and structure are, of course, contained in the Hyung Sang. But here this Hyung Sang is ontologically regarded as the hyle, for from ancient times, the concepts of hyle and eidos have been the main objects (problems) of philosophy. However, there is no way to clarify the true character of hyle philosophically. We can only look forward to further scientific research. The current view is that it is a certain energy which exists in both particle and wave form. The Unification Principle does not clarify whether the energy of the force in the Original Being is the same energy as that which is analyzed in physics as having the properties of particles or waves. However, the Principle does say that the force is the basic power which causes all creatures to exist. It is called the Universal Prime Force. Even without Einstein's energy formula, E=mc2, we can perceive that power acts in every existing being. This self-existing absolute Universal Prime Force is the very force of the Original Being (God). Which element of the quadruple of the Original Image this force belongs to is a moot question. As a matter of course, it should belong to the Hyung Sang, because the Universal Prime Force can be regarded as force which is not yet determined. Of course, it should be argued that the Universal Prime Force which causes creatures to exist should have a direction, and for that reason the Universal Prime Force could be looked upon as determined. But, as mentioned before, (looking at it analytically for more convenient understanding) the Universal Prime Force, which has direction, was originally undetermined; but through the action of give-and-take with the Sung Sang element, centered on purpose, it became a union having direction (iii) The Inner Structure of the Hyung Sang Now, let me give a more concrete explanation of the Hyung Sang. I feel it necessary to distinguish between the viewpoint of the Unification Principle and the traditional concept of matter. The traditional concept viewed matter as undetermined, pure matter. But though such a view of matter may seem presumptive, actually such matter can not exist. The Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Being are not completely disparate. In other words, mind and matter are not essentially disparate, but rather have common elements in the world of ultimate cause. Their difference in the Original Being is not one of nature, but one of concentration, since God is the God of oneness. We can judge this from the fact that mind is conscious of matter, and matter is responsive to mind. For example, nerves and muscles which are matter are moved by mind. Therefore, the Divine Principle regards Hyung Sang as the second Sung Sang, and says that: This indicates that materials have certain elements through which they can respond to man's intellect, emotion, and will. Such elements form the internal character of matter, so that every creation is able to respond to human intellect, emotion, and will, though the degree of response may vary. (Ibid., pp. 37-38) Even if the hyle (Hyung Sang) of the Original Image is something which exists both as a particle and wave, it can not be just a pure particle nor just a pure wave, but it is sure to have direction and law. Direction and law are a kind of Sung Sang. Therefore hyle itself is a union. Analyzing it for convenience, hyle is the union formed through the interaction of its own Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, centering on a definite purpose. Figure 3 illustrates the inner structure of the Hyung Sang (Original Hyung Sang).
xvi Since this structure is also an inner one, it may be regarded as a kind of inner quadruple base. However, this name is apt to be confused with the Inner Quadruple Base mentioned before, and because it is not essential in order to explain about the existence of being, the inner structure of the Hyung Sang is not called an inner quadruple base. If a name is needed, it may be called the quadruple within the Hyung Sung.
Fig. 3 Inner Structure of the Hyung Sang
(iv) The Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple Base, and the Developing (Dynamic) Quadruple Base Now I touch upon the identity-maintenance and the development of the form of the Original Image's structure. The structure of the Original Image has both the tendency to sustain its self-identity and also to develop to a higher stage. In other words, the Original Being both remains as the union of its attributes, and also creates new beings. The creativity of God means that on one hand God maintains His self-existence, and on the other hand that He creates new things. Dealing with this in view of the structure of the Original Image, there are two kinds of Quadruple Bases, an unchanging, "Identity-Maintaining Base" and a changing, "Developing Quadruple Base." Taking for example a family, when a man and woman become husband and wife, their conjugal unity lasts throughout their lives. That is, the Quadruple Base composed of the four elements -- purpose, man, woman, and conjugal union (purpose, subject, object, and union) is unchangeable and maintains its self-identity throughout their lives. At the same time, the married couple produces children who are quite different from their parents and who form new generations. Accordingly, the quadruple composed of these elements -- purpose, man, woman, and children (purpose, subject, object, and multiplied body) is developmental and dynamic. The reason that both aspects are present in all the Quadruple Bases in the creation is that both aspects exist in the structure of the Original Being. To put it concretely, in the structure of the Original Image, there is both an identity-maintaining, unchanging, static Quadruple Base, and a developing, changing, dynamic one. The former is the Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple Base and the latter is the Developing (Dynamic) Quadruple Base. Then what is the concrete function of these Quadruple Bases? Let me put it this way. In the first place, the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple, whether an Inner or Outer Quadruple of the Original Image, maintains the unity. The Inner Quadruple maintains the Sung Sang (Original Sung Sang) itself through give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang and the Inner Hyung Sang, and the quadruple formed by the union of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang through the give-and-take action is the Outer Quadruple. (See Fig. 1) God contains within Himself dual essentialities which exist forever. Through Universal Prime Energy, these two form a mutual or reciprocal relationship which develops into an eternal give and take action. The energy produced through this process is the force of give and take action. Through this force, God's dual
xvii essentialities establish a reciprocal base. Ibis results in the "foundation of existence" upon which God, Himself, exists forever. (Ibid., p. 28) This refers to the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple. Because the Original Image has this identitymaintaining aspect, every creation always tends to maintain a definite shape and character. In the second place, let me touch on the Developing Quadruple. The Principle of Creation reads, When, through Universal Prime Energy, the dual essentialities of God enter into give and take action by forming a reciprocal relationship, the force of give and take action causes multiplication. This action causes the dual essentialities to separate into two substantial objects centered upon God. (Ibid., p. 31) This means that, through this interaction, God's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, His attributes, create all beings, His objects. When the two aspects (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang) of the Original Image perform the give-and-take action, they form not only the union, but in the same action they also form the multiplied bodies. They give rise to multiplication even though they are performing the same action. In other words, in the latter, the action is not identity-maintaining and conserving, but generating; not completing but developing; not stabilizing but transferring; not remaining but changing. This kind of quadruple is called the Developing Dynamic Quadruple Base. (See Figure 4)
Fig. 4 Developing Quadruple Base (Outer)
Then why did different results come from the same structural elements of the quadruple? Because Heart, the center of the interaction, has purpose. Since the Original Being is self-existing, it is inevitable that it acts to sustain itself. For this reason, the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple, centering on Heart alone, came into existence. This phase is the stage wherein Heart does not yet pursue purpose. Yet, since Heart is God's fundamental attribute and Heart must pursue its goal in order to realize its purpose, this purpose factor acts upon the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple which then becomes developmental and dynamic, bringing about new beings. The Divine Principle indicates that the give-and-take action occurs centering on Heart as follows: Seen from this aspect, the universe is the substantial manifestation of the invisible God, occurring through the give and take action between His essential character and form, centered on the purpose of creation. (Ibid., p. 40) This developing and dynamic base is actually the Outer Quadruple, or the "Outer Developing Quadruple." However, not only the Outer Quadruple but also the Inner Quadruple is developing. Therefore, the Outer Developing Quadruple is formed, based on the "Inner Developing Quadruple."
xviii (v) The Inner Structure of the Logos (the Inner Developing Quadruple) What is the Inner Developing Quadruple? This is the quadruple which forms the inner structure of the Logos namely the quadruple which gives rise to principle and law or Word. As mentioned above, though the Logos is one of the Divine natures, it is God's object, and the Logos itself has polarity, just as the Original Image does. This means that the Logos has a quadruple structure, which is an inner one. In other words, the shape of the inner structure of the Logos is the same as the inner structure of the Sung Sang, mind (Inner Quadruple). The only difference is that the former is developing and dynamic while the latter is identity maintaining and static. Logos is the created being brought about by the developing movement of the Inner Quadruple. Then, why did the Inner Quadruple develop? It developed because the purpose factor acted upon it. As the Heart inclined to realize its purpose, the Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang interacted to fulfill that purpose, and as a result the Logos appeared as the object attribute of the Original Being. Let me give a more concrete explanation. The Inner Sung Sang, the function of intellect, emotion and will, and the Inner Hyung Sang, ideas (concepts) and principles (laws), gave rise to the multiplied body (new life) through their give-and-take action centering on purpose (the purpose of creation). That is, they gave rise to the Logos. In this give-and-take action, reason in the Inner Sung Sang and law in the Inner Hyung Sang may be understood as playing the main role to fulfill the purpose. Accordingly, the Logos is neither simple reason nor simple law. When we say that the universe was created by the Logos, if the Logos is regarded as reason alone, then there is no explanation for the laws which act upon the creation. And if the Logos is looked upon as law only, then there is no explanation for the intellectual aspects of things, such as the structure and shape of existing beings, or the purposeful function of living beings. This is why the Logos should be regarded as the union (synthesis) of the polarity of reason and law. This inner structure of the Logos is the inner structure of the Original Sung Sang in creation. It is shown in Figures 5 and 6. This is how God created the whole universe with the Logos. This two-stage Developing Quadruple is called the two stage structure of creation. As the Original Image's Sung Sang has such a structure, man, who is a created being, also forms a two-staged structure in the creative process, thus taking after the creative structure of the Original Being. In inventing or producing anything, the thinking (Inner Developing Quadruple) precedes the manufacturing (Outer Developing Quadruple). b. The Chung-Boon-Hap Action or the Origin (Thesis)-Division-Union (Synthesis) Action As already mentioned, since the world of the Original Being (God) is outside of time and space, the Original Image (God 's attributes) has no spatial structure, but rather all its attributes are completely united. However, to clarify the content of the Original Image, an analysis using the concepts of time and space becomes inevitable. This is because language itself, the means of expressing the truth, was developed and formed in the world of time and space. It is composed of concepts which connote the facts of time and space. The above mentioned concept of the quadruple is dealt with in terms which particularly imply the spatial aspect of reality. But space can not be understood separated from time. Therefore it is also possible for us to understand the Original Image from the aspect of time.
xix
Fig. 6 Outer Developing Quadruple Base
The action of Chung-Boon-Hap (C-B-H) (Origin-Division-Union) deals with the Original Image in relation to the time spectrum. In other words, the quadruple is the concept which deals with the factors of the structure, whereas the action of Origin-Division-Union is the concept which deals with the formation process of that structure. After all, the structure of the Original Image is composed of four factors, and it is completed through a process of three stages. According to the Principle of Creation, every creature has to grow through the three stages of Formation, Growth, and Perfection, for the Original Being is based on the number three. Then why is the Original Being based on the number three? It is because "God is the absolute reality, the existing neutral center of the two essentialities; therefore, He is the reality of the number 'three'." (Ibid., p. 53) This means that the Original Being has three stages the absolute, the relative, and the united (synthesized). These three stages in the Original Being are nothing other than the action of Chung-Boon-Hap (Origin-Division-Union or Thesis-Division-Synthesis). An actual lapse of time exists only in the created universe. Therefore it would seem that the action of Chung-Boon-Hap can exist only in the creation. But since the created world is a result, there should be, in the world of the Original Being (God), an ultimate cause of these resultant phenomena. In this manner, God, as the origin is divided into two separated substances, after which these two again unite to form one body. We call this process "origin-division-union (Chung-Boon-Hap) Action." (Ibid.,p. 31) Accordingly, the prototype of the action of Chung-Boon-Hap, that is to say the three stages which are called the absolute, the relative, and the synthesized (united), necessarily exist in the world of the Original Being. The Chung (Origin) of Chung-Boon-Hap occurring in the created world is equivalent to the Absolute in the Original Being (exactly speaking, the Heart or Purpose of God), the Boon (Division) to the relative polarity, and the Hap (Union) to the synthesis (united stage). Thus, judging from the time perspective, the formation of the quadruple of the Original Being is the action of Chung-Boon-Hap. It is the process which completes a harmonious figure through the give-and-take action of polarity, centering on Heart. Consequently, this action of Chung-Boon-Hap necessarily has a stage of completion or conclusion. From the spatial perspective, this completion is the Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple. Accordingly, this action of Origin-Division-Union is an Identity-Maintaining (Static) one, and, as in the quadruple, there are also inner and outer actions. That is to say, we know there are actions of Chung-Boon-Hap equivalent to the quadruples shown in Figures 1 and 2, and this indicates the
xx self-existence of the Original Being. All creatures maintain a definite shape due to the fact that they take after the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple which is formed by the completed Chung-Boon-Hap action of the Original Being. Yet every existing being in the created world not only maintains its definite shape but also incessantly changes and develops toward a new being. These phenomena are particularly noticeable in men, animals and plants. Therefore, the prototype of these phenomena should exist in the world of the Original Being. This prototype is the Developing Quadruple Base, namely the Quadruple Base for creation. As mentioned above, the purpose factor works in the formation of the Quadruple Base. From the time perspective, this formation of the Quadruple Base is also the action of Chung-Boon-Hap (C-B-H action), so this C-B-H action is not a completed one, but rather a developing one. Since the developing ChungBoon-Hap action exists in the structure of the Original Image, with this as a prototype (cause), the created world has developing and multiplying phenomena. The Principle of Creation reads: ‌multiplication occurs through the O-D-U [C-B-H] action caused by the action of give and take. Seen from this aspect, the universe is the substantial manifestation of the invisible God occurring through the give and take action between His essential character and form, centered on the purpose of creation. (Ibid., p. 40) The Chung-Boon-Hap action can be illustrated as in Fig. 7.
Fig. 7 Completed C-B-H action & Developing C-B-H action
But we should pay attention to the fact that in the created world the purpose factor acts even upon the completed C-B-H action. In the Original Image, the completed C-B-H action forms the IdentityMaintaining Quadruple as the self-existing form of the Original Being, so there is no purpose to it. But there should be a purpose to every created being, in spite of the C-B-H action having been completed. This is because, even though a being exists for its own maintenance of identity or self-preservation, every being came into existence in the created world by God's purpose of creation. This is the purpose for the individual. It is impossible to fulfill the purpose of creation without preserving the self-identity. Unless both man and nature maintain their individuality, nature cannot be man's substantial object, nor can man be God's substantial object. Therefore to realize the purpose of creation, one's self-identity must necessarily be maintained. Accordingly the completed C-B-H action must occur with a purpose as its center. We should note that in the Original Being the completed C-B-H action occurs centering on the static Heart which does not pursue the object of the purpose, but in the general existing being, this same C-B-H action occurs centering on the purposes of creation (purpose for the individual and purpose for the whole).
xxi Every being has a dual purpose.... Therefore, there cannot be any purpose of the individual apart from the purpose of the whole, nor any purpose of the whole that does not include the purpose of the individual. All the creatures in the entire universe form a vast complex linked together by these dual purposes. (Ibid., pp. 41-42) This means that there are no existing beings which do not have a definite purpose. We call these "individual truth bodies" (existing beings). Also, each individual truth incarnation [individual truth body] is a substantial object of God; therefore, each not only reflects God's dual essentialities of character [Sung Sang] and form [Hyung Sang] in the individual self, but each also has within itself the dual essentialities of positivity and negativity. (Ibid., p. 26) In view of this statement it can now be seen that every existing being exists because of the completed C-BH action, centering on purpose. c. The Structural Unity of the Original Image As mentioned above, when we explain the structure of the Original Being within the concepts of time and space, it becomes clear that the Original Image has both Inner and Outer, and Identity-Maintaining and Developing Quadruples as well as the C-B-H action. Here I emphasize that these types of structures are not separate and different but rather are united with each other. Since the world of the Original Image is outside of time and space, there can not be an inside and outside, nor position and process. There is no difference between the infinite and the infinitesimal, nor between eternity and the moment. The inside, middle or outside are the same as are the past, present or future, and also the large, medium or small. The infinite here and the eternal now are the essence of the world of the Original Being. Even though it is not definitely stated in the Unification Principle, we can understand that there is a world beyond time and space from biblical sayings such as: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?" John 14: 10) and "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." John 8:58) Also, according to the teacher of the Divine Principle, "The mystery of the universe is contained in a cell." and "Even if a star be thousands of light years away, at the moment that we think of it, our bodies [spirit body] exist there simultaneously in the spirit world." Thus there is neither place nor distance, nor priority nor posteriority in the world of the Original Image. Frankly speaking, it is not appropriate to use the expression "world" itself. So the four positions in the quadruple are actually one position, and the three stages of the C-B-H action are one stage. That is to say, Heart, Sung Sang, Hyung Sang, and the Union are one, and both division and unity are contained in the Origin; and quiescence and movement, identity maintenance and development are all one. In other words, there is quiescence in movement, and there is movement within quiescence; identity-maintenance within development, development within identity-maintenance; the Inner Quadruple exists within the Outer one, and the Outer Quadruple exists within the Inner one, etc. Thus the attributes of the Original Being are completely united and harmonious. So the entire existing world is penetrated by one principle and the whole universe has unity and harmony as an organic body. For that reason, all the existing beings from heavenly bodies to atoms are connected with each other, have order, and exist in the polarities of mind and body, inner character and outer form, life and organic body, essence and phenomena, and time and space; and yet all those relative factors are united. To understand the Original Image exactly, it was inevitable that we use the concepts of space and time; but in spite of that, the Original Being should not be thought of as a composite being, but rather as unique and absolute with completely united and harmonious attributes.
Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 3) Section D - The Being Image of Existing Beings (part 1)
xxii Now let me explain the being image of the existing beings. It is obvious that all beings would have some image since they are created by the Original Being (God) who has the Original Image. But what can we call the existing beings with such images? In the Unification Principle, all the existing beings are called individual truth bodies and "connected bodies." Since the Original Image is cause and the created beings are result, they must be dealt with in relation to the Original Image. This is why every existing being is called an individual truth body and a connected body. The former concept (individual truth body) is derived from the formation of the Inner Quadruple Base and the latter concept is derived from the formation of the Outer Quadruple Base of the Original Being. 1. Individual Truth Body Since every existing being, according to the Law of Resemblance, is created reflecting the Divine Image (in the narrow sense), each being is identity-maintaining in the same aspects as the Divine Image. As already mentioned, there are both Individual and Universal Images in the Divine Image. The Universal Image means the two relative polarities of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity while the Individual Image means the individual, and proper characteristics of each being. The differences among animals, plants and minerals originate from the differences among the Individual Images. The various animals named horse, cow, dog, hen and the like are due to the different Individual Images in the world of the Original Image. Let me explain more concretely about Universal and Individual Images. a. Universal Image (i) Sung Sang and Hyung Sang All existing beings have both the aspects of function and character and the aspects of matter (hyle), structure and shape. Of these, function and character are invisible, while matter, structure and shape are visible. The invisible part is referred to as Sung Sang, whereas the visible part is referred to as Hyung Sang. For example, in a mineral, the physicochemical nature of the inorganic matter is the Sung Sang, while the structure of the molecules and atoms, the material shape created by the inorganic matter, corresponds to the Hyung Sang; in a plant, its life and unique characteristics are its Sung Sang, whereas its cells, systems structure, and shape are its Hyung Sang; in an animal, its life, instinct, and the function of its cells, tissues, and organs are the Sung Sang, while the shape made up by those cells, tissues (muscle, skeletal, nerve, and skin), and organs is the Hyung Sang; finally for man, life, the physical mind, the spirit man, spiritual mind, and the specific functions of cells, in addition to the kind of Sung Sang found in animals, correspond to his Sung Sang, whereas his physical body composed of the cells, tissues and organs are equal to his Hyung Sang. As the above explanation points out, the Sung Sang of a plant consists of both function and life plus the Sung Sang of a mineral; the Sung Sang of an animal is composed of instinct in addition to the Sung Sang of a plant; and man's Sung Sang consists of the spiritual mind in addition to the Sung Sang of an animal. There is a similar progression in the Hyung Sang aspect. In other words, a plant's Hyung Sang is composed of structure and shape in addition to a mineral's Hyung Sang; an animal's Hyung Sang consists of organs and nerves in addition to a plant's Hyung Sang; and finally man's Hyung Sang is composed of the spirit body and the spiritual organs in addition to an animal's Hyung Sang. This is shown diagrammatically in Figure 8. We can understand through this diagram that the stepped increase of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in both quality and quantity is proportional to the level of the existing being. Thus it can be seen that the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of man, who is in the highest position, contain all the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang elements of the mineral, vegetable, and animal kingdoms. All this is a systematization of the following part of the Principle of Creation: Likewise, the things of all creation, though they may vary in dimension, have an invisible internal character which corresponds to the mind; since this is the cause and subject, it manipulates the external form which corresponds to the human body. This relationship between mind and body enables the
xxiii individual creation to maintain its existence as a being with a certain purpose. Animals have an aspect which corresponds to the human mind; since this is the subject and cause which directs toward a certain purpose, the animal body is able to live according to the purpose of its individual being. A plant also has an internal character which enables it to maintain its organic function. Men can be united because the mind is a common factor in every person. Similarly, positive and negative ions are united to form a certain material because within each ion there are aspects of both internal character and external form which tend to unite, thus forming a molecule. Again, when an electron revolves around a proton to form an atom, it is because each contains an aspect of "character" that directs it toward the purpose of constructing an atom. (Ibid., p. 23) Before creating man, God made all things in the image and likeness of man's character and form. Therefore, man is the encapsulation of all things. (Ibid., p. 44)
Fig.8. Stepped Structure of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in Existing Beings Therefore, man contains the structure, elements and essential qualities of animals ... plant ... and mineral. (Ibid., pp. 44-45) [Note: We should, however, take note that in spite of this, it is not true to say that man was created based on the attributes of animals. From the evolutionary standpoint, man appears to have been made by the addition of some more attributes to those of animals. But in creation, on the contrary, ". . . God made all things in the image and likeness of man's character and form." (Ibid., p. 44) In creating man from dust, God in no way made him by making an animal, rather man was originally created as man. Even though my previous explanation made it appear as if upper level beings were made by adding some new factors to lower level beings, (See "Individual Image") I only used this method of expression to help the reader understand the concept more easily.] At this point it should be made clear that there are three kinds of concepts of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. That is to say, when man is regarded as the composite of the whole universe, when he is considered as a simple possessor of mind and body, and when he is considered to be a being of duality, both physical and spiritual. Each time the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are regarded as quite different. In the first view of man, which sees him as the composite of the whole universe, his Sung Sang refers to the composite of the mineral Sung Sang (physicochemical nature), the life factor in plants, the instinct of animals, and the human mind (including the spiritual mind); and his Hyung Sang refers to the composite of all the outer elements of atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, organs, and nerves.
xxiv In the second view of man, which sees him as a simple possessor of mind and body, the mind and life alone are his Sung Sang, and the physicochemical quality, for example, with the other outer elements belongs to his Hyung Sang. In the third view, which sees man as a being of duality, both spiritual and physical, the spirit man is the Sung Sang and all the physical aspects belong to his Hyung Sang. Accordingly, in this case, the spiritual mind is Sung Sang, whereas the physical mind belongs to Hyung Sang. Now let me make one more remark on the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of spirit men. The spirit man is connected with flesh, but when we look at it alone, it belongs to the spiritual world. Since the spirit man can not live alone on earth, it is hard to regard it as a man in the ordinary meaning of the word; however, it is surely a man when it reaches the spirit world. (For a long time the soul has been considered only as mind which is separated from the physical body, but the Unification Principle considers the soul to be the spirit man.) This spirit man itself is an individual truth body with both Sung Sang and Hyung Sang attributes. The spirit mind is its Sung Sang, whereas the spirit body is its Hyung Sang. Consequently, including this one, there are four kinds of concepts of the human Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. There are also different concepts of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in all other existing beings. We can know this because the existing beings in higher positions are considered as composites of the factors of the beings in the lower positions. Plants contain minerals, animals contain the elements of plants and minerals, and man contains the elements of animals, plants, and minerals. Exactly speaking, the higher position contains the Sung Sang aspects and Hyung Sang aspects of all the beings of the lower positions. Generally, however, people understand that the existing being is at a definite stage of evolution, and thus has distinctive qualities, namely the specific differences. In Unification Thought the specific difference of the Sung Sang of the lower position is included in the total Hyung Sang of the upper position. Accordingly, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are dealt with not as a stepped structure, but as a horizontal structure. This is shown diagrammatically in Figure 9. (ii) Positivity and Negativity Here positivity and negativity, the other relative elements of the Universal Image, are discussed. As mentioned in the section on the Original Image, positivity and negativity are attributes of the Original Being, and they are direct attributes of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. This means that both Sung Sang and Hyung Sang have positivity and negativity as their attributes. For example, there are positive and negative aspects to the mind, the Sung Sang. Positive, active and creative will; bright, delightful and joyful feelings; and bright, clear and abundant concepts and good memory within the intellect, all belong to the positive aspect of the Sung Sang. Negative, passive, and conservative will; melancholy, unpleasant and sad feelings; and stupid, ambiguous, bewildered and absent-minded intellect belong to the negative aspect of the Sung Sang.
Fig. 9. Structure of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in Existing Beings
xxv Likewise, in the body, the Hyung Sang of man, there are both positive and negative aspects. Standing, jutting or convex parts of the body such as the bridge of the nose, the arm, leg, finger, toe, and masculine genitals are the positive aspect, while the sunken or concave parts of the body such as the nostril, ear hole, feminine genitals, etc. are its negative aspect. Generally, there is not a clear view of the difference between man and masculinity, and between woman and femininity, but in Unification Thought these differences are clearly distinguished. There are two kinds of human beings, man and woman, and both kinds of people have both the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity, which are the attributes of the Original Being. The difference between man and woman is that man has some additional positive elements unique to man that woman does not have. Likewise, woman has some additional negative elements unique to woman that man does not have. The other positive and negative elements of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang mentioned above are all common to both man and woman. However, it is more essential that both men and women are human beings with Sung Sang and Hyung Sang than that they are sexual beings with masculinity or femininity. It should not be overlooked that positivity and negativity are the attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. According to the Principle of Creation, What is the relationship between the dual characteristics of character and form and the dual characteristics of positivity and negativity? Fundamentally, God's essential character and His essential form assume a reciprocal relationship with His 11 essential positivity" and "essential negativity." Therefore, God's essential positivity and essential negativity are the attributes of His essential character and essential form. (Ibid., p. 24) Positivity and negativity can be considered as the attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in both the static, identity-maintaining dimension, and also the dynamic, developing dimension. As already mentioned in the section on the structure of the Original Image, the Sung Sang and the Hyung Sang maintain their identity by forming Static, Identity-Maintaining Quadruples centering on Heart, and they develop and multiply through the Dynamic and Developing Quadruples centering on Purpose. How do positivity and negativity function as the attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the formation of the Static, Identity-Maintaining Quadruple? As already mentioned, the Static, Identity Maintaining Quadruple is the one which maintains the self-identity; it is the quadruple which allows the individual truth body to remain the same over a period of time. For example, congenitally each man has a unique and particular mind, body and individuality. These are his unique aspects of positivity and negativity within his mind and body. The reciprocal relationship of each one's inherent elements is unchangeable throughout his whole existence. The mind and body of A can never change to the mind and body of B. This shows that positivity and negativity play the role of the attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the formation of the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple. Therefore, precisely speaking, the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang can not form the Quadruple Base by themselves. The base is necessarily regulated by positivity and negativity, too. In this way the individual truth body with an Individual Image of the Original Being is formed. In this term, "Individual truth body", individual refers to the Individual Image and truth refers to the Universal Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity). Next, what is the Dynamic Quadruple Base? The Dynamic Quadruple indicates development and multiplication. It is the Quadruple Base which deals with the changing, multiplying, and developing aspects of the structure, beyond the identity-maintaining aspect of the individual truth body. For example, man comes under environmental influences a posteriori. First, when a man comes into being, he is influenced by his family centering on his parents. His family may be of a positive or negative character. In addition, there are positive and negative aspects in the various environmental factors, such as food, weather, time (morning, noon, night, etc.), seasons (spring, summer, autumn and winter), places of residence (seashore, country, mountains, stream or riverside), education, ideas, etc. Moreover, all of these environmental elements are changing incessantly. It is obvious that these changing elements also influence the mind and body over a period of time; therefore it is natural that all of these environmental factors act upon the formation of the Quadruple Base by the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (Developing Quadruple Base centering on Purpose). From this standpoint, man, as an individual truth body, is not a vague abstract being of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, but a concrete being regulated by many positive and negative factors, both
xxvi a priori and a posteriori, and he is the united being of his Identity-Maintaining (Static) and Developing Quadruple Bases. This occurs because the Original Being itself contains these united attributes. (iii) Logos and the Harmony between Positivity and Negativity As already mentioned, the Logos is a new creation of the Inner Developing Quadruple Base of the Original Image, and because it is multiplied through the give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity of course affect its creation. Positive and negative aspects necessarily exist and remain harmonious in order for the Logos to create and have dominion over the whole creation. According to the Gospel of John, Chapter 1:1-5, God created the whole creation with the Word, Logos. This Word contains the principle of positivity and negativity. If the Original Being had only Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, there would have been no creation and much less development. This is because development is a kind of movement, and there can not even be a visible (created) being without movement. For the creation to exist, motion is necessary, and not only circular movement in space, but also developing movement in time. Developing movement means incessant change toward a definite goal while the selfidentity is maintained. Development can not occur apart from such a change. Growth and the multiplication of children are nothing other than change. However, as all the elements in the Original Image are united and harmonious, there should be unity and harmony in the change. Such unity and harmony in change are incomplete if there is only give-and-take action between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang and not between positivity and negativity. An adequate alternation of changes and pauses in development only appears by means of the action of positivity and negativity. For example, when a symphony is played in a concert, each of the wind and string instruments, some of which are more positive and some more negative, harmonizes completely with the positivity and negativity of the ensemble; and thus with time the full harmony develops, involving the long and short notes and the high and low tunes, including the harmony of the peculiar sounds of the instruments. The phrases unite into passages, and the passages unify into movements. Such harmony and unity in the passage of time occur only because of the principle of positivity and negativity. Therefore, it goes without saying that the more distinguished the symphonies are, the better the harmony and unity between positivity and negativity. We can understand therefore, that the principle of positivity and negativity acts during development. The universe was not only created by the Logos, but has been also developing for billions of years, and will develop forever by the Logos. This means that there have been give-and-take actions between positivity and negativity, as well as between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang; consequently, the Logos for development was already contained in the Logos for creation. Since the Logos was regulated by the giveand-take action between positivity and negativity in the development of the universe, Logos has brought diverse changes. The record of creating the universe in six days can be regarded as creation by means of the principle of positivity and negativity. So the development of the universe has been the continuation of a grand symphony that fulfilled ideal beauty and was made with countless instruments called Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (each having positive and negative aspects). The symphony continues today. The harmony and unity of the symphony have been lost only in the history of man, due to the fall. Finally, let me touch on the give-and-take action between positivity and negativity. The give-and-take action between positivity and negativity, as that between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, has both static and dynamic aspects. Static give-and-take action means the horizontal and simultaneous giving and taking which occur regardless of time, such as conjugal harmony, a mixed chorus, the harmony between males and females in the animal kingdom, the harmony between mountains and plains, sea and land, dark and light colors, activity and inactivity and the like. Accordingly, in these give-and-take actions, the positive elements (husband, man, male, mountain, land, activity, etc.) and the negative elements (wife, woman, female, plain, sea, inactivity, etc.) co-exist in creation and perform the give-and-take action. This is shown in Figure 10
xxvii
Fig. 10 Static Give-and-Take Action between Positivity and Negativity The beauty of all the static artistic works such as painting, architecture, sculpture and the like is the outcome of the harmony between the static give-and-take actions of positivity and negativity. The dynamic give-and-take action refers to the vertical and successive harmony of positivity and negativity, while the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang bring about change and multiplication through the formation of the Developing Quadruple Bases. To say that the Quadruple Base develops means that one aspect changes to another. The change itself is initiated by Logos, but the actual changing aspects appear through the give-and-take of positivity and negativity such as high key to low key, strong sound to weak one, melancholy after delight, night after day, fortune and misfortune, positive birth (son) and negative birth (daughter) and the like. The germination of a plant in spring is the positive aspect of its Sung Sang and the descent of the sap into the roots in autumn is the negative aspect of its Sung Sang. Thus, the dynamic (developing) give-and-take action between positivity and negativity is vertical and successive. This is shown in Figure 11. The beauty of all the dynamic artistic works such as dance, novels, poems, music and the like is the outcome of vertical harmony between positivity and negativity.
Fig. 11 Developing Give-and-Take Action between Positivity and Negativity In the development of the Quadruple Base, the three aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, Logos, and positivity and negativity act unitedly. If one of these aspects does not participate, there is no development; they are thus called the "Three Motives of Development." (iv) Subject and Object
xxviii I have touched upon the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity, all of which are attributes of the Original Being. The relationships between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and between positivity and negativity are those of subject and object. Sung Sang is the subject of the Hyung Sang, and the Hyung Sang is the object of the Sung Sang; while the positivity is the subject of the negativity, and negativity is the object of the positivity. The Principle of Creation says, What then is the relationship between internal character and external form? The invisible internal character is the cause and is in the subjective position, while the visible external form is the result of the former and stands in an objective position to it. (Ibid., p. 22) Accordingly, positivity and negativity also have a reciprocal relationship existing between internal and external.... subject and object. (Ibid., p. 24) From the fact that the relationships between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity are those of subject and object, and from the fact that every individual truth body has the Universal Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity), we can conclude that every existing being contains both subject and object elements. Namely, every individual thing necessarily has the two elements within it, and one is subject and the other is object. The subject takes the center or upper position, whereas the object revolves around or is below the subject. Because the positions of subject and object are not the same, the world of existing beings is ordered. The Inner Quadruple Base is the outcome of the give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang within the Original Sung Sang (subject). Thus within the concepts of subject and object, there is also this other level of an inner subject part and inner object part within the subject. The Outer Quadruple Base is the outcome of the give-and-take action between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Image. In other words, it is the Quadruple Base formed through the give-and-take action between the subject and object. The relationship between positivity and negativity in the Original Image is like this also. The fact that the Original Image has such a structure means clearly that the individual truth bodies, existing beings, have the same structure. To put it concretely, the Inner Quadruple Base can be formed by the inner subject and inner object elements, and the Outer Quadruple Base is composed of outer subject and outer object elements. What is the Inner Quadruple Base in the individual truth body, then? It consists of both the Inner IdentityMaintaining (Static) and Developing (Dynamic) Quadruples. I previously made it clear that the individual truth body, like the Original Image, is the union of the Identity-Maintaining and Developing Quadruple Bases. To say that the individual truth body takes after the Original Image means that it takes after the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity of the Original Being. Additionally, the Quadruple Base of the individual truth body takes after the Inner Quadruple Base of the Original Image, because every existing being is created to have outer relationships with other beings. In other words every existing being has both the inner and outer relationships, and in order to exist, the formation of both the Inner and Outer Quadruple Bases is indispensable. In other words, everything should have both existing structures. Taking the example of man for instance, the human being, as an individual truth body, has both inner and outer relationships. The relationships between mind and body, spirit man and physical man, and the spiritual mind and physical mind are the inner relationships; and the relationships between family members, teachers and students, are the outer relationships. For flowers there is the inner give-and-take between the stamen and pistil (self-pollinating only), and the outer give-and-take with bees and butterflies. Thus the individual truth body taking after the Original Image has both inner and outer aspects, namely all existing beings perform both inner and outer give-and-take actions simultaneously. [Note: When an individual truth body performs outer give-and-take actions with other beings by forming an Outer Quadruple Base, the individual truth body is called a connected body. (This will be clarified later.)]
xxix Through this, it is possible for us to understand that the Quadruple Bases (Identity Maintaining and Developing) that compose the individual truth body are equivalent to the Inner Quadruple Bases of the Original Image. Accordingly, we can easily understand that an Outer Quadruple Base which is formed between one individual and another individual, such as the familial Quadruple Base, would correspond to the Outer Quadruple Base of the Original Image. Consequently, one individual is an individual truth body taking after the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (or positivity and negativity) of the Original Being not only from the sense of being a mere creature, but also from the sense of taking after the Inner Quadruple Base of the Original Image. (See Figure 12) In short, every individual truth body not only has a subject and object relationship with other individual truth bodies, but also contains the two elements of subject and object within itself. These two elements necessarily form an Inner Quadruple Base by give-and-take action. Thus every individual is actually an individual truth body.
Fig. 12 Individual Truth Body, and the Inner and Outer Quadruple Bases (v) Paired Elements and Opposition The fact that every existing being has two elements internally and also has relationships with other beings externally means clearly that the concept of the individual is relative. That is, an individual not only has relative elements within itself but is also relative to other individuals externally. Furthermore, every individual exists as a partial being which composes the whole, and at the same time as a whole being composed of some partial elements. Thus an individual truth body can also be seen as a relative body. For example, a molecule is an individual truth body both as a whole composed of atoms and also as a partial element that adds to the composition of cells as a whole. Therefore we call the subject and object elements of the individual truth body paired elements. In other words, every existing being can be regarded as the union of the paired elements of subject and object. Since give-and-take action occurs centering on Heart, Purpose or a definite cause, both the subject and object center on one common element. It has often been overlooked that there is always a common purpose, motive or cause whenever two individuals have any relationship. According to the Unification Principle, every give-and-take action has a center. This center is called God. Here God sometimes means the God with personality in the broad sense, but in the narrow sense, "God" also means the Heart, Purpose, aim, cause, motive and so on which concern God's creation. The fact that this sort of common element is always the center of give-and-take can be easily understood from the case of the give-and-take between men. Strictly speaking, the union of man and woman is made centering on the purpose of creation which
xxx causes them to unite, even though they may appear to unite centering on their own realistic purposes. The common purpose behind the give-and-take between governments and people is to improve economic life. In the give-and-take action within nature other than man (animals, plants, minerals, etc.), however, the common factors between things are not so obvious. But according to the Unification Principle, there is, and should be a common factor acting as their center. For example, even though it is matter of course that the male and female sexes in the animal kingdom breed because of their instinct, in the broad sense, this action originated from the purpose of creation to preserve individuals through multiplication. The give-and-take between butterflies or bees and flowers through exchanging nectar and pollen also has its origin in the common purpose of keeping individuals preserved. The stamen and pistil have give-and-take based on the common purpose of bearing fruit. Sodium and chlorine combine into salt because the valence requirement of each is equal. This equality of the valence requirement originates in the purpose of the creation of God, and since the Na ion is a positive ion and the C1 ion is a negative ion, they tend to unite with each other. So from this standpoint they may be seen to have a common purpose. Thus all existing beings (subject and object) perform the give-and-take action centering on common factors. If there were opposite or contrary purposes or elements rather than common ones, there would be repulsion or exclusion rather than give-andtake action. This is why two positive electrodes exclude or repel one another. Even in human society, any difference of interest, purpose or duties, etc. between two persons causes them sometimes to be disharmonious or to quarrel. Through the above-mentioned, it may have been clarified that paired elements (subject and object) perform give-and-take action centering on a common purpose or element. This concept of paired elements is of great importance in investigating the communist view of matter. As is widely known, communist philosophy, which is based on dialectical materialism, regards all things (existing beings) as objective beings or as consisting of matter alone. According to this theory, all things consist of two elements, but these two elements are not relative (paired) but rather are contradictory. Communism contends that all things change, move and develop because the two contradictory elements in an existing being struggle against each other. They maintain that these two elements need each other on the one hand and repel each other on the other. This need they call unity and this repulsion they call struggle. Communist philosophers compare the relationship between any two elements to that between the ruling and ruled classes. In other words, the classes require each other on the one hand and repel each other on the other. They consider struggle to be more essential than mutual necessity in the class society. just as a society is overthrown and replaced by a new one through struggle, so the relationship between the two elements within anything is one more of struggle than of mutual necessity, and the movement, change and development of material are accomplished through this struggle. They call these two elements opposition or contradiction. In the communist view, things are not a union of relative (paired) elements (individual truth bodies), but rather the unity of contradiction and opposition. Now let me investigate this in detail. Communist dialectics, which were first advocated by Marx, had their origin in Hegel's philosophy. Therefore, its concepts of "opposition" and "contradiction" are the same as Hegel's. According to Hegel's "Theory of Essence" in his Logic, contradiction means not simple opposition, but sharp opposition completely denying or repelling the other party. Neither a common purpose nor common elements can be found between oppositions. Thus, his contradiction is thorough negation. These concepts have been used by the communists including Marx. Accordingly, when they call every existing being a "unity of opposition" or "unity of contradiction", they recognize no common purpose between the two elements. Engels, in his book Dialectics of Nature, cited many natural phenomena within the realms of dynamics, biology, physics, chemistry, mathematics and astronomy as being the unity of opposition or of contradiction. However, after a close examination of his theory, it becomes obvious that he made a big mistake, because he applied the concept of opposition or contradiction to all correlative or unified phenomena and mere differences among natural things. Dialectics of Nature reads,... so-called objective dialectics rules over all nature, ... every chemical process involves attraction and repulsion.... meanwhile all the progress to man has been made through the incessant struggle between heredity and adaptation. (Dialectics of Nature, lwanami Library Vol. 11, p. 56)
xxxi He regards all relative phenomena as opposite and contradictory. For example, he says, When a magnet is cut in two, its neutral middle part becomes polarized maintaining the relationship of the previous poles; moreover, if an earth worm is cut in two, it maintains the in-taking organ at the positive pole, and makes a new negative pole, having the anus on the negative pole, but the previous negative (anus) changes to the positive pole, and becomes the in-taking organ (mouth), and a new excretory organ (new negative pole) is made in the cut part. (Ibid., p. 66) He says that the same opposition or contradiction as before is maintained after cutting a magnet or an earthworm in half. Is this true? The positive and negative poles in a magnet do not exist for the purpose of repulsion or exclusion but rather for unity, just as the mouth and the anus of an earthworm do not exist to repel each other but rather have the common purpose of keeping an individual alive through taking in nutrition and excreting digested food. He says, "In chemistry, analysis is the main form of study, but without its opposite pole (synthesis) chemistry is nothing." (Ibid., p. 78) This means that the methods of analysis and synthesis are opposites and thus chemistry can not exist without the opposition or contradiction of analysis and synthesis. But are analysis and synthesis contradictory? No, they are never contradictory. They are only relative methods being used together in order to acquire perfect knowledge. In other words they are not in a repelling and negative relation, but rather in a coordinated and affirmative one. Engels applies the concepts of opposition and contradiction even to the field of mathematics as follows: Subtraction (a-b) can be expressed as addition (-b+a), division
as multiplication
... all the fixed distinctions of the kinds of calculations cease to exist and all can be expressed as the opposite forms. The power can be expressed as the power root
and the power root can be expressed as the power
... This means that addition and subtraction, multiplication and division, and power and power root are contradictory opposite ways of calculation. This is far from the truth; however, all these are relative ways to attain the exact calculation. They are not contradictory ways of calculation, repelling each other. He says also, Nowadays, if physiology does not regard death as the essential moment of life, it is not referred to as science. The denial of life is contained as an essential element within life itself. Thus life must necessarily be considered in relation to death (which is the inevitable result of life); that is, as part of the form of an embryo. This is the dialectical understanding concerning life. (Ibid., p. 208) In other words, "Life is maintained by the denial of death, its opposite party." But this is also a mere mechanical interpretation forcibly adjusted to the dialectical category. Let me give an example. If a man
xxxii has lived for seventy years, and if Engel's saying is true, then these seventy years should be the length of the opposition between life and death. However, how can we possibly find the confrontation of death with life? It is impossible to find death existing; that is, death can not be found among the brains, the nerves, frame, internal organs, and the five organs of sense, but rather there is a perpetual replacement of cells and blood corpuscles. It is inaccurate to look upon the replacement of cells as a relationship of opposition. In the first place, if the relationship between life and death is regarded as opposition, this relationship of opposition should be considered within the same unit of life (the same individual body). But the whole human body and a cell are quite different units. Although a cell may die, the human body continues to live. And even this death of a cell, exactly speaking, is not really death, but rather the cell's replacement by new cells, as will be mentioned later. In the example of man, the fetus grows up and becomes a newborn child, separated from its mother. After birth, the child then grows up without negating the life of the parents at all. On the contrary, most children help their parents. Man does not die due to being negated by the fetus, but rather dies of old age or due to illness. In the second place, human life is maintained not by an opposition with death, but by the harmonious giveand-take between cells, tissues, organs, and the like; that is to say, by the formation of various levels of Quadruple Bases. While life is maintained, there is no connotation of death. Each of the cells disappears and new ones appear just as when clothes wear out, and are replaced by new ones. Like this, in human life, old cells are replaced by new ones. Through the above explanation, it may have been clarified that while communists look upon every existing being as in opposition, actual existing beings have neither opposition nor contradictions. This explanation dealt with the universal images of the individual truth bodies. In conclusion, each existing being thus takes after the Universal Image of the Original Being and necessarily has relative (paired) elements rather than opposition within it, thus forming the existence structure named the Quadruple Base. b. Individual Image As already mentioned, all the existing beings take after the Original Universal Image by having the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, and they take after an Original Individual Image by having individual characteristics. Namely, every existing being has its own peculiarity, and this is its Individual Image. According to Genesis, Chapter 1, God created man in His own image after He created the whole universe in six days. In the Divine Principle it says, That is, man is God's substantial object with His dual characteristics manifested as "direct image," while all things of the universe are the substantial objects of God with His dual characteristics manifested as "indirect image" (symbol) (Divine Principle, p. 26) and The universe consists of countless such individual truth incarnations, mutually related in good order, from the creature of the lowest grade to the highest, with man as the highest truth incarnation. (Ibid., p. 36) Summarizing these statements, God's creation is a differentiated one. Taking after God, the universe shows differentiation in various aspects. God began His creation with animals of a lower order, then created animals with a more complicated function; and finally He created man, who has the highest function. (Ibid., p. 44) This means that all things including man have peculiar shapes, structures and functions. In creating the protozoa, fish, amphibia, the reptiles, and mammalia, the different forms, structures and functions were differentiated at each level. The same is true for plants and minerals. We know that the atomic structure and chemical qualities of each element are different. All these examples show that all the existing beings
xxxiii take after both the Individual and Universal Images of the Original Being. Then to which part of the Original Image does the Individual Image of the Original Being belong? And what are the concrete contents of the Individual Image? Let me touch upon this question now. (i)The Location of the Individual Image There are Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity in the Original Image, thus the Individual Images should be located within one of them. In other words, one of the polarities should be the location of the Individual Image, because, since an Individual Image is an image, and not character or matter (hyle), the image can not be located in the Divine Character (Divinity). Then where is it located? It is in the Inner Hyung Sang within the Original Sung Sang. I commented before that the give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang, namely, intellect, emotion and will, and Inner Hyung Sang, namely, principle and law, form the Inner Quadruple Base. We can not but consider that the countless Individual Images are located nowhere else but within the Inner Quadruple Base. As an Individual Image is neither only positive nor only negative, nor mere matter (hyle), nor the Universal Prime Energy, the Individual Images can not be within the positivity, negativity or the Original Hyung Sang, but must be within the Original Sung Sang. However, as the Sung Sang consists of the Inner Sung Sang, that is the part which thinks (intellect, emotion, will), and the Inner Hyung Sang, that is the part which is thought, its location is the Inner Hyung Sang. This means that in the creation of the universe, at the beginning there was an idea in the Original Image of the Original Being; then the word appeared, and finally the creation was developed. Logos (Word) comes into being centering on purpose, and that purpose is the very purpose of creation. Once the purpose is established, there should naturally follow the idea of what and how to create to fulfill that purpose. Logos appears as a concrete plan through this action. In thinking, there must be the subject part of thinking which is the intellect, emotion and will (particularly reason, which is part of the intellect), and there must be the object part of thinking or thought part which is the idea or shape,. structure and function of an actual individual that isto be created. Let me give an example. If the Original Being intended to create a bird, He would have first thought of a bird, and then an Individual Image of the bird (representation of the bird) would have come into his mind. That is, an Individual Image would have appeared in the Inner Hyung Sang and He would have thought of how to create it. Then the principles (laws) within the Inner Hyung Sang would have been used by the reason and finally Logos, the concrete Word to create the bird, would have been formed. Through the giveand-take action between this Word with the rest of the Original Sung Sang (emotion and will) and the Original Hyung Sang (hyle), the bird would have appeared as a being (a creature). This is shown in Figure 13.
xxxiv
Fig. 13 Relation Between the Location of the Individual Image and Creation (ii) The Monostratic Nature of the Individual Image As already mentioned, every creature is a concrete individual truth body, and has both the Universal and Individual Image of the Original Image. Thus it has peculiarity as an individual being. Then what is the concrete meaning of an Individual Image? Does it mean the individual's own features which are beyond the attributes common to other individuals? Here the attributes common to others are the Universal Image. Then, is it the Individual Image which is left after the Universal Image has been abstracted from the individual truth body? Logically, it would seem that the remainder after the abstraction of the Universal Image is the Individual Image. Within logic, the distinctive features remaining after the abstraction of the Universal Image (common character) from existing beings are called specific differences. So the specific differences seem to be the Individual Images. However, as specific differences have many levels of application, the issue is not so simple. For example, an actual person, say a Korean person, has various specific differences, i.e. peculiarities. Let us trace these peculiarities. In the first place, since he is a living organism rather than inorganic matter, he has the peculiarities (specific differences) of living things such as cells, life and multiplication. In the second place, among living things, as he is an animal rather than a plant, he has the peculiarities of animals such as digestion, excretion, respiration, reproduction, sense, and movement as specific differences. In the third place, as human beings belong to the sub-phylum Vertebrata, he has the peculiarities of this kind of animal such as a head, trunk, limbs, tail, nerves, circulatory system and the dioecious feature. In the fourth place, among the classes of vertebrates, he belongs with the Mammalia rather than fish or reptiles, and hence has mammalian peculiarities such as hair, viviparity, and lactation. In the fifth place, among the orders within the Mammalia, he belongs to the Primates, and so has primate peculiarities such as a developed cerebrum, short face, limbs with five fingers or toes, two breasts and the like. And among these Primates, he belongs to the human race, and therefore he also has human peculiarities such as reason, value criteria, language and creativity. Since he belongs to the Oriental race, he has certain peculiarities of skin and hair, and because his nationality is Korean, he has peculiarities such as a particular language, history, tradition and way of life. Finally, because he is a particular person among the Koreans, he has individual peculiarities of height, appearance, individuality, etc. Thus if we regard the
xxxv remainder after excluding the Universal Image (common character) as Individual Images, according to the increase of the number of species in a particular level, the kinds of Individual Images (specific differences) can be seen to decrease proportionally. That is, if we compare the specific differences (Individual Images) with the number of species in the different levels of beings, we find that the number of species and the number of specific differences are in opposite proportion. (e.g. Man is the most specialized being. He has all the specific differences of all the other beings; however, in his level of specialization, he is the only species.) In other words, a concrete person, A, has various peculiarities (Individual Images) such as those of a living being, of an animal, of a vertebrate, of a mammal, of a Primate, of a human being, of a Korean, and of a particular individual. Is it true that the Individual Image in the Original Being before creation is such a conglomerate? According to Unification Thought the creatures God intended to create were not vague and abstract beings but actual and concrete ones. In other words, God had a mind to create each of the concrete and actual beings directly. Scripture says, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father." (John 1:14) This passage means that the begotten son was not a vague human being, but Jesus, an actual person with peculiarities of height, appearance, character, temperament and the like. He was not a person with an Individual Image based on a polystrata of the collected characteristics of all living things. Jesus was not a man made of a "polystrata" of the lower levels, but a man of "monostratum." In this theory there may be some who disagree because this view disregards the theory of evolution. But in reality, the Unification Principle does disregard the theory of evolution. Only from a phenomenal perspective does the process of creation seem to have evolved. That living things seem to have evolved from lower stages to higher is due to the gradual process of creation from lower to higher. Thus, even though man was created in the last stage, it does not necessarily mean that he was made by adding one more Individual Image to the features of all the minerals, plants and animals of the previous stages which had been added one after another. According to the Divine Principle, "Before creating man, God made all things in the image and likeness of man's character and form.� Therefore, man is the encapsulation of all things." (Ibid., p. 44) This quote makes it clear that, on the contrary, nature was created to take after parts of the human peculiarities; that is to resemble man's Individual Image. After all, the human Individual Image is not polystratic but rather simple and monostratic. Scholars have tried to analyze the Individual Images academically and classify them into various differences. Though this may be of academic significance, it has nothing to do with the human Individual Image in the Original Being. It is similar to all the other beings, because, although in the order of creation, the lower things were created first in the Original Image, they were preceded by the Individual Image of the higher beings. The lower beings were created taking after the parts of the Individual Images of the higher beings. To say God created the entire universe setting up man, the highest being, as this standard, means that He created animals and plants setting up man as their standard, and He created minerals setting up animals and plants as their standard. The Individual Images of the lower beings which are formed by taking after parts of the Individual Images of the higher beings are never polystratic in nature, but are rather monostratic simplifications. Every existing being has monostratic peculiarities in relation to its shape, structure, function, elements, action and the like. (iii) The Individualization of the Universal Image Since an individual truth body has both Universal and Individual Images, what is the relationship between these Universal and Individual Images? Is the Individual Image within an individual separate from the Universal Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity)? Do the Universal and Individual Images within individuals have nothing to do with each other? To jump to the conclusion, the Individual Image is the individualization of the Universal Image. That is, it is a Universal Image with a concrete uniqueness. Let me demonstrate this using as the example, two persons named A and B who have quite different personalities. A has a squarish face; he is tall; his frame and muscles are well developed, and he is fond of sports and music. His forehead is not so broad; his temperament is bright and sociable, and he is kind and has a lot of common sense. In contrast with A, B is
xxxvi short and high browed; his face is narrow and long; his frame and muscles are average in development, and his particular taste is for reading rather than sports or music. His temperament is introverted and unsociable; he has great technical knowledge in a special realm rather than broad general knowledge. All of these aspects are the peculiarities and Individual Images of A and B. Both of them have the Universal Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positive and negative aspects) while their Individual Images are the peculiarities of their mind (Sung Sang) and body (Hyung Sang), and of their positivity and negativity. A's tall stature, squarish face, developed frame and low-browed forehead are the peculiarities of his Hyung Sang (body) namely the Individual Image of the Hyung Sang; and his taste for sports and music, sociability, and kindness are the peculiarities of A's Sung Sang, namely the Individual Image of the Sung Sang. Likewise, B's short stature, averagely developed frame and muscles, and high-browed forehead are the peculiarities of his Hyung Sang; while his taste for reading, his unsociability, introversion, and capacity for technical knowledge, etc. are the peculiarities of his Sung Sang. The relationship between positivity and negativity and the Individual Image is similar to this. For example, to express the positive side of his mind, A may smile while B may make a joke. That is to say, there may be different ways of expressing positive feelings, such as brightness and cheerfulness. It is the same with negative feelings. That is, to express grief, A may shed tears while B may endure in silence. Also in both positive forms such as the nose bridge and negative forms such as the ear hole, there are many differences between people. Thus the Individual Images appear in the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity. In conclusion, the Individual Image is not unrelated to the Universal one. Rather, it is nothing but a special type of Universal Image, its peculiar phenomenal type. There is no concrete Universal Image which does not hold an Individual Image. Namely the Universal Image is, without fail, regulated by an Individual Image in its development into the world of phenomena. This is because the location of the Individual Image is in the Inner Hyung Sang of the Original Being. The Inner Hyung Sang is the Hyung Sang part within the Original Sung Sang. In other words, the Original Individual Image is already in existence within the Universal Image of the Original Being. In the formation of the Developing Quadruple Base of the Original Image (the Universal Image), this Individual Image causes it to have definite peculiarities by regulating the character of the give-and-take action. (iv) The Individualization of the Chung-Boon-Hap Process Here I am going to touch upon the relationship between the Individual Images and the C-B-H process. As already mentioned, an individual truth body forms a Quadruple Base internally and there are both Static and Dynamic Quadruples. judging from the time perspective, this formation of the quadruples is the Chung-Boon-Hap Process. Because the Individual Image is one of the attributes of an individual truth body, the relationship between the Individual Image and the C-B-H process should rightfully be made clear. Stating the conclusion prematurely, an Individual Image is nothing less than the individualized Chung-Boon-Hap process, that is, the individualized action of give-and-take. Here the G-T (give-and-take) actions are those between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, that is to say, the G-T actions of subjects and objects. Yet as mentioned above, when a Universal Image appears, it naturally has a definite peculiarity, or Individual Image. A Universal Image appears, of course, only through the G-T action. None of its elements (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity) can appear by themselves. For instance, mind (Sung Sang) can not directly appear without the G-T action between mind and body (brain cells) which gives rise to mental activities such as pleasure, displeasure, perception, memory, reasoning and the like. And it is obvious that the mental activities are incomplete when the G-T action is interrupted such as when the brain is benumbed by alcohol or high fever. The same is true for the body. The physiological operations such as digestion, respiration, blood circulation, and so on can not become perfect through the functioning of the stomach, lungs and heart alone, but only together through their harmonious G-T action with the other organs. For example, the stomach can function fully only through its G-T action with the heart, liver, pancreas, etc. A healthy body (Hyung Sang) is indebted from childhood to the ingestion of nutritious food, to harmonious physiological action and to a perfect G-T action between the mind and body, whereas a sickly body is due to imperfect G-T actions between the above-mentioned factors.
xxxvii It should not be overlooked that a good or bad internal G-T action has a decisive effect on the development of a Universal Image. Accordingly if an Individual Image means the individualized Universal Image, in the same sense, the individualized Chung-Boon-Hap process is also the Individual Image itself. Then what is the concrete meaning of the individualized C-B-H process? It means that each person has a different way of giving and taking. Owing to the differences of the G-T actions between the mind and brain cells in each person, even when we look at the same moon, one person may rejoice while another may feel sad. Furthermore, as there are differences in the physiological operations of men, while eating the same kind of food, one person will be all right while another will develop urticaria. Medical science has recognized that there are differences in the physical constitutions of people. These in fact are the differences of man's physiological operations and the individualization of the many compound C-B-H actions within man. As already mentioned, there are two aspects to the C-B-H action, both static and dynamic. Of these, the dynamic developing C-B-H action has three dimensions, that is, its development occurs due to three factors: the G-T action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, the G-T action between positivity and negativity, and the Logos. All these factors are the universal elements common to all individual truth bodies. However, since every individual is an existing being with individual peculiarities in addition to the universal elements, these three actions must have their respective Individual Images. The Individual Images mentioned above are those of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and of the positivity and negativity. Here I am to touch on the Individual Image of the Logos. As stated above, the Chung-Boon-Hap process is also regulated by the Logos. Logos means the nomological dimension within an individual truth body, so it obviously affects its development; that is to say, development also has a special aspect according to each individual. This is the Individual Image of the Logos. Take, for example, multiplication. When a pregnant woman delivers her baby, it is the contraction of the uterus that actually delivers the child; but the intensity, frequency, and duration of travail, time of delivery, and the strength of the womb contractions, etc. are different according to different women. The delivery of the baby by the womb contractions is a physiological action which is a kind of natural law (Logos). Thus the differences in the concrete expressions of the action (law) are due to the individual peculiarities such as, the differences in the anatomical structures of the wombs and of the path of delivery (in childbirth), mental and nervous distinctions and the like. This is the Individual Image of the Logos (Principle). Thus, it is clear that the action of Logos in development has both universal and individual aspects. After all, there is evidently another element-the Individual Image involved in development-along with the three elements of 1) Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, 2) positivity and negativity, and 3) Logos. It is the unified action of these four elements which gives rise to concrete developing phenomena. We call such a feature the "Four Motives of Development." Through these four motives of development, it is possible to explain how an individual truth body changes constantly while maintaining its identity. However, in dealing only with the Universal Image in development there is no need of the Individual Image, so in this case, a concept named the "Three Motives of Development" is established. (v) The Individual Image, Idea and Concept First let me deal with the relationship between an Individual Image and an idea. An idea, as is widely known, is the image in the mind which portrays an object. In creating the universe in the beginning, God would have had mental images of each thing to be created. In other words, in His mind, He would have thought of the images of each creature with their peculiarities such as shape, structure, function, and so on and He would have surely created things just the same as these images which would have been the standard for creation. As a painter maps out his scheme first and then paints what he visualized in his mind, so God caused the images in His mind to be expressed in time and -space. According to Scripture,
xxxviii And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light ... and there was evening, and there was morning, one day .... and God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so .... a second day .... And God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit". . . . And it was so .... a third day. And God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night;" . . . And it was so.... a fourth day. And God said, "Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens.". . . a fifth day. And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so.... God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them ... And it was so ... a sixth day. (Genesis 1: 3- 3 1) The words "it was so" mean that all things were created like their images in His mind as well as created as He had wished. Such a mental image is referred to as an idea. Then what is the relationship between an Individual Image and an idea? Needless to say, the idea is the very Individual Image itself. The Individual Image in the Original Image was the mental image pictured in the mind (Sung Sang) of the Original Being; namely it was an idea or representation. I mentioned above that the Individual Image was in the Inner Hyung Sang of the Original Sung Sang. The Inner Hyung Sang contains ideas and representations. As frequently mentioned, the Sung Sang contains both the actual thinking element and also the thoughts themselves. The thinking element is subject while the elements being thought are the objects of the thinking element. The former is the Inner Sung Sang which has the function of intellect, emotion and will, and the latter is the Inner Hyung Sang which contains ideas (concepts) and principles (laws). The ideas composing this Inner Hyung Sang are Individual Images. (See "The Structure of the Original Image.") Next, I will touch upon the relationship between an Individual Image and a concept. A concept is a mental image which is the synthesis of abstracted elements common to various kinds of individuals. It has both intension (connotation) and extension (denotation). After all, a concept is a name given to common features; it thus may contrast with the Individual Image which means the individual peculiarities. The concept "man" is a "rational and valuable being", while the individual peculiarities of a Mr. Kim may be expressed by his particular appearance, stature, personality, unique temperament and the like. The concept "bird" is "an animal which flies", while the individual peculiarities of a crow may be "a black bird which cries, 'caw, caw. " Thus, concepts indicate common features, and ideas indicate peculiarities. From such a view, the relationship between concepts and Individual Images seems the same as that between the Universal and Individual Images. But, strictly speaking, this is not true, because the Universal Image means only Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity. Needless to say, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity may be denoted by a concept, but since a series of subordinate and superordinate concepts exists, the subordinate concepts may be considered individual compared to the superordinate concepts. For example, though "fowls" is the superordinate concept to sparrows, doves, hens, and the like, it may also be regarded as a subordinate concept along with fish, reptiles, mammals, and so on in relation to the concept "Vertebrata." Accordingly, compared with the Vertebrata, the concept of fowls is more individual because it is more specific. In other words, when considered as a peculiarity, the concept fowls is individual but when considered from the point of common features, it is a concept. But most important here is that no vague animals, plants, men, fowls, and so on, that is to say, no conceptual beings were predetermined in creation. Rather, concrete animals were determined such as cows, horses, dogs, hens, sparrows, doves, mackerels, anchovies, etc.; and concrete plants such as pine trees, bamboo, apple trees, rose bushes, rice, barley and the like; and concrete human beings with peculiarities of appearance, personality, etc. What must be clarified here is that these individuals have concepts, namely common features, in multifold strata. For example, a hen (individual) has not only the peculiarities of being a hen itself but also the peculiarities of fowls, the vertebrata and even of living beings, as broader superordinate concepts. In other words, people may say that higher beings (such as higher animals) are polystrata of all the characteristics of lower beings (such as lower animals); however as mentioned in the section "Monostratic Nature of the Individual Image", the polystrate concept is false. The fact that individual characteristics seem to form a polystraturn is due to the abstraction, classification and systematization of
xxxix the common features of various individual truth bodies through man's rational approach which is attempted for a better understanding of existing beings. If, however, all these concepts are the outcome of the abstraction and classification of individual characteristics, were there not originally concepts in the Original Image? Were there only ideas in the Original Image? No, never. Concepts were in the Inner Hyung Sang of the Original Image along with the ideas. Abstraction existed in the world of the Original Image and man's ability to abstract resulted from this. As the creation is one of resemblance and there are so many ideas, and they are so diverse, it is natural that all the individual bodies have common features. Accordingly, it is obvious that the abstraction of common features and the concepts of it would have already existed in the Original Image. To put it exactly, concrete ideas and abstract concepts co-existed in the Original Image. (vi) The Universal and Individual Here I will now touch upon the relationship between the universal and individual again, but from a different angle. It was previously made clear that the Universal and Individual Images are not separate but rather compose the individual truth body through their unity. Which of these is prior, the Universal Image or the Individual Image? As mentioned above, ideas are prior to concepts. But since the relationship between the Universal Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity) and the Individual Image is not the same as the concept-idea relationship, I will deal with them in a separate way. To jump to the conclusion, a Universal Image is prior to an Individual Image, because in the Original Image, the Universal Image is the attribute necessary for the self-existence of the Original Being; whereas an Individual Image is a necessary condition only for the act of creation. For example, in the relationship between mind and body (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang), and thinking, which is prior? Since mind and body are inborn and thinking is acquired, the former are, of course, prior, while the latter is posterior. In the Original Being, the Universal Image is indispensable for the self-existence of the Original Being while the Individual Images are a necessary condition or means only for making the Original Being joyful through creation. They have no relation to His self-existence. Therefore the Universal Image is primary or prior and the Individual Images are secondary or posterior. (Strictly speaking prior and posterior do not really exist, but rather, as mentioned above, the term "prior" really means "more essential", and the term "posterior" means only "less essential.") There is a similar question, however, which asks which is prior, the universal or individual? Here universal does not mean the Universal Image but has a meaning similar to "concept." It is the kind of name given to the common features of various kinds of things, such as mineral, plant, animal, and man. Here individual means the concrete individuals such as Mr. Lee so and so, Mr. Kim so and so, hibiscus, peach, hen, dove, iron, copper and the like. Accordingly, the question of priority between the universal and individual presents the following issue. Did "a man" exist as an idea in God and then develop into Mr. Kim or Mr. Lee through creation, or was there no vague "man" in the beginning but rather were the concrete men named "Mr. Kim" or "Mr. Lee" created first and then the term "man" made by the abstraction of the common features of these concrete men (such as "men are rational and valuable beings, different from all other animals")? The so-called Universalienstriet (the dispute about the universal) among scholastic philosophers was typical of the disputes concerning this question throughout the history of philosophy. This philosophical question is such an important one that Unification Thought should clarify its own standpoint on this issue. According to Unification Thought, the relationship between the universal and individual is considered like that between concepts and ideas, idea being prior and concept posterior. The reason the relationship between the universal and individual is considered to be like that between concepts and ideas is that we have to seek the ultimate cause of the universal and individual in the world of phenomena and deal with the problem in the world of cause. And next, the reason that idea is prior and concept is posterior is, as mentioned above, that the creation of God is not a creation of vague conceptional beings but one of concrete individual truth bodies. Both concepts and ideas were required for creation. To repeat, however, ideas were prior while concepts were posterior, for as already mentioned, God's creation was not of concepts but of concrete individuals. The ultimate causes of the universal and individual were the concepts
xl and ideas in the Original Image. The concepts came to be formed as mental images corresponding to the common features of ideas which had existed prior to them. To put it concretely, since the Original Being has Heart, he is considered to have first visualized Adam and Eve, concrete human individual truth bodies, as objects of heart and love. Then because creation begins with the outer aspects, it was inevitable that God create an environment for human life such as animal, plant, and mineral individual truth bodies. For their creation, God used Adam and Eve as the standard (specimen). In other words, the mineral, plant, and animal kingdoms were created taking after certain parts of the elements of Adam and Eve. [Note: Taking after certain partial elements implies disregarding the rest of the elements. For instance, God disregarded man's (Adam and Eve's peculiarities such as reason, heart, and so on and created animals, plants and minerals using man's physical body as the specimen. This means that the parts of the specimen (the flesh body of man) given to the animals, plants and minerals through imitation are their common elements. Therefore taking after partial elements means abstracting these very elements. Man's faculty of abstraction must have indeed come from that of God.] These parts then became the common features of all the existing beings other than man, and accordingly became the concepts of these beings. We call such common features the "Concept Derived from the Specimen." Meanwhile, since the descendants of Adam and Eve have taken after them, the parts taken after have become the common features of the human race, and so necessarily make up the concept "man." One or several concrete animals would be created first, and then many other similar animals would be made in imitation of those already created. In other words, in the creation of animals also, the ideas of individual beings were formed first, as in the case of man, and then many kinds of animals similar to them were made imitating the individual beings. In this case also, the imitated aspects become the common features of all the other various individual beings taking after them. These aspects corresponding to the imitated aspects then, namely, the concepts derived from the specimens, are considered to have been formed in this way. Thus in the creation process first there was the idea which became the specimen, then secondly, from this idea, the concept was formed. In this case, in Unification Thought, the idea is called "Idea as Specimen." In this view, the idea-forming process of the Original Being is opposite to the creation process of the universe. In the universe, the creation order was from inorganic matter to organic matter, plants, animals, and man. To the contrary, in the world of the Original Being the order of the formation of ideas was from man to animals, plants, organic matter and inorganic matter. Thus even the ideas of the individual beings of the microscopic world, such as the ideas of molecules, atoms, and elementary particles, were all formed in imitation of the elements of human physical constituents (the human physical body is composed of many elements). In nature there are, of course, many elements that are not in the human physical body, but the ideas of these elements may be considered to have been formed through a further imitation of one of the imitated parts of the human physical elements. With such a view, we can understand the true meaning of the Principle of Creation that the entire creation, from atoms to heavenly bodies, was created for man. The saying "Before creating man, God made all things in the image and likeness of man's character and form.. Therefore, man is the encapsulation of all things." (Ibid., p. 44) is a concise expression of this fact. This, then, is the Unification Thought standpoint on the relationship between concept and idea. However, it should not be overlooked that this order applies only to the order of ideas as specimens and the concepts derived from the specimens. The ideas of the various kinds of individual truth bodies of the lower positions, that had to be created by the imitation of the concepts which were derived from the specimens, were created after the concepts. Thus an idea coming from the concept which was derived from the specimen had an aspect which imitated the specimen. This aspect is called the "Idea of Similarity." For example, there first was an idea for the specimen named Adam, and then with Adam's physical body as the specimen, the concepts derived from the specimen appeared: animal, plant and mineral. These concepts, based on the specimen named Adam, were posterior to the idea. But when the ideas of the similarities of the various individual beings such as cow, dove, snake, salmon, hibiscus, barley, pine tree, tulip, hydrogen, chlorine, and iron, were formed from the concepts derived from the specimen, in these cases the concepts were prior to the ideas, because, in these cases, the ideas are of similarities not of
xli specimens. In conclusion, the idea as specimen is prior to the concept derived from the specimen, while the concept derived from the specimen is prior to the idea of similarity. This is the viewpoint of Unification Thought. Thus there are two ways to settle the dispute of the order of the appearance of ideas and concepts in Unification Thought. [Note: Since Adam and Eve took after the Original Image, the idea of Adam and Eve could be considered an idea of similarity, and the Original Image may be referred to as a concept derived from the specimen. In this case, the concept seems to be prior to the idea. But as mentioned before, the Original Image can not be considered a concept. This is because the Original image is an attribute of the Original Being, while concepts are one of the composing elements of the Inner Hyung Sang. The concepts contained in the Original Being are not the Original Image itself, but rather these exist in the Inner Hyung Sang. Therefore the relationship between the Original Being and man is, as mentioned before, like that between the Universal Image and Individual Image, and never like that between concepts and ideas.] (vii) The Individual Image and the Environment Through the above explanation, it has been made clear that the unique features of all individual truth bodies originated in the Individual Images within the Original Image. Here it should be added that these individual beings change and develop through G-T with their environment. As already mentioned, [see ii and iv] the individual truth bodies form Developing Quadruple Bases through G-T action (in a subject and object relationship) with other beings. This means, in other words, that an individual body itself changes through its G-T action with the environment. That is to say, the Individual Image of the individual truth body is ruled not only by the Original Image, which conditions it even before it is materialized, but also is still partly under the influence of the environmental factors after it is materialized. For example, when a man comes into being, the Individual Images such as his frame, appearance, individuality, physical constitution, etc. are predetermined by heredity. But in the growing process, a man's physical frame and constitution change, and his personality, individuality and posture are influenced by food, weather, regional conditions (mountains, seashore, coast or city), education, family environment and so on. Namely, the human Individual Image is not totally determined a prz*orz*, but is also influenced a posten*0n*. The same is true for the animal, plant and mineral kingdoms. For example, though the Individual Image such as the specific kind and quality of rice is already determined inside the rice seed, after the young rice plant is planted, the realistic length, volume and quality of rice produced are influenced by water, weather, fertilizer, etc. Every chemical element changes incessantly through G-T, that is, through physicochemical interactions with other elements. Thus, although an Individual Image is regulated by the Original Image, a part of it changes through the environmental factors. Before, I said that when an individual truth body forms the Inner Quadruple Base and the Dynamic (Developing) Quadruple Base, from the time perspective this is the C-B-H process. The individualization of the C-B-H process meant the G-T actions between mind and body (brain), and the actions among the various organs such as sense organs, tissues, cells, etc. Yet, this inner C-B-H process does not develop independently of the outer G-T (the relationship with the environment), but is related to it. The Inner Quadruple and inner C-B-H process continue under the influence of the outer conditions, and the outer G-T action appears through the inner G-T action. This is an outline of the environmental influence on the Individual Image of the individual truth body. The individual truth body as a subject also often exercises influence over the environment. In relation to man, this means that man, as a subject, exercises dominion over nature. The animal, plant and mineral kingdoms also influence the environment as individual truth bodies. The influence of an individual truth body means that each individual being (according to its Individual Image), exercises a particular influence on the environment. There are many films on Nature which show clearly that every animal, from microscopic to huge ones, exercises a particular influence on its living environment, and so the animals, plants, and minerals mutually affect each other. Thus the outcome of the respective particular influences of one individual being on another through the G-T actions between them is here called the "Individual Effect of a G-T Action. " Accordingly the Individual Image of an individual truth body was essentially regulated in the Original Image but in actual phenomena, it is outwardly and incessantly regulated and changed by countless
xlii individual effects of G-T actions. In other words, an Individual Image exercises influence over others and is also influenced by them Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 4) Section D - The Being Image of Existing Beings (part 2) 2. The Connected Body The connected body, just like the individual truth body, is one of the being images of existing beings. As all existing beings take after the Original Image, they must have some images corresponding to it. One of these images is the individual truth body and the other is the "Connected Body." a. The Connected Body and Dual Purposes Directly speaking, the connected body refers to a being with dual purposes, namely the existing being, which simultaneously has both purposes for the whole and for the individual. Every being has these two purposes. The purpose for the whole (called the Sung Sang purpose) means the purpose by which the individual contributes to the preservation and development of the whole. The purpose for the individual (called the Hyung Sang purpose) means the purpose for the multiplication and development of self as well as for self-preservation and self-strengthening. A certain purpose in life is given to every man, such as contributing to one's state or society in one or more realms such as tax-payment, military service, business, administration, education, industry, and science. A family member must contribute to his family, a teacher to education, and a workman to the enterprise to which he belongs, and so on. These examples show the purpose for the whole. Few people recognize this kind of contribution as the purpose for the whole given to every man by the Original Being. Most men regard it as their duty. Men who are able to perform this duty willingly, do so because they feel the purpose for the whole unconsciously. Because, in terms of the Principle, this performance of duty and the consequent fulfillment of purpose are determined and projected by the mind, because the largest whole is God, and because the whole in the created world represents God to an individual, the purpose for the whole may be called the "Sung Sang Purpose." This is also true for all the other things besides man. Though animals and plants may seem to struggle against one another for existence, in reality they do not. They all contribute to the whole. Were a part of the earth's plant life destroyed, the human race would find difficulty in living due to a lack of oxygen; and if all animals disappeared the result would be the same, because due to the shortage of C02 and fertilizer, plants would have difficulty maintaining themselves. If the mineral kingdom disintegrated there would be a crisis in the preservation of the biological world, for every living thing has to ingest mineral matter. What about the individual purpose? No individual exists without the purpose of preserving and maintaining his existence. Every being without exception has the purpose of self-preservation, development, multiplication, and benefit. Food, clothing, housing, the fine arts, academic life, religious faith, and so on, all exist for self-preservation, joy, multiplication, growth, and development. Thus for a man to be for himself means to be for physical life or one's own sake. An individual man is the object of God, the whole, and in a position of Hyung Sang to God. Consequently the purpose for the individual may be called the "Hyung Sang Purpose." This sort of purpose is recognized in animals, plants and minerals as a matter of course. We can easily understand that animals and plants have this purpose for the individual because it seems as if they live only for self-preservation and self-existence. And even though it is not so obvious whether minerals have a purpose for the individual they should and do have this purpose. This issue will be dealt with in detail later. The purposes mentioned above were applied only to existing beings on the earth, but all the existing beings in the cosmos, from atoms to heavenly bodies are the same. For example, the nine planets, centering on the sun, rotate on their own axes for their own purposes, and revolve around the sun for the purpose of the whole. If one of the planets suspended its revolution, the whole aspect of the solar system would change.
xliii Therefore, it is true that even planets and fixed stars have both the purposes for the individual and for the whole. An electron revolves around a proton due to its purpose for existence as a particle and also for the atomic structure as a whole, similar to the relationship of the planets to the sun. An element unites with another and forms a molecule also because of both the purposes for the individual and the whole. The purposes for the individual and the whole are not independent but interdependent, intercausative, and they exist in an inner and outer relationship. As the purpose to serve the whole may also indirectly be a purpose to better the individual too, likewise, the purpose for the individual to become better indirectly presupposes an intention to serve the whole more effectively through the individual's betterment. The greatest purpose for the whole, for nature, is the purpose of serving man, namely bringing him pleasure and joy. Not only the sunlight but also the stars twinkling in the night sky, and the elementary particles of the microscopic world all exist to serve human life. Some may be skeptical of how stars and elementary particles serve human beings, but according to the Unification Principle, even these things have dual purposes and their supreme purpose is to bring pleasure to God, through giving joy to man. The universe is the object in which man's character and form are manifested in substance. Therefore, man, whose center is fixed upon God, would feel immense joy when he objectively feels his own character and form through all things as his substantial objects. (Ibid., p. 45) God created the universe so as to feel joy and peace by feeling objectively, His subjective Sung Sang, through the creation. (The Explanation of the Divine Principles, p. 50) God's purpose in creating the universe was to feel happiness when He saw the purpose of goodness fulfilled in the Heavenly Kingdom.... (Divine Principle, p. 41) Because man was created as the center of the universe, the supreme subject and dominator of all things, the supreme purpose (purpose for the whole) of all creation is to serve man. As mentioned above, man is a microcosm, a composite substance of the whole of nature. Though man was created last of the created world, in the world of the Original Image the idea of man was set up first, and then the ideas of the whole universe were set up taking after the various features of man. All this means that the ultimate purpose for the whole of all things, including heavenly bodies, was to be for man. Thus man freely dominates all of nature. The moon which previously contributed to man only through light has now also begun to contribute material to him since man has reached her. Now man has begun to explore Mars and Venus. According to the teacher of the Unification Principle, a spirit man can easily reach stars which are at a distance of several hundred thousand or several million light years away. The motivating force behind astronomical research is to make space serviceable to human life. All things are of service to man in one of various forms: for instance as raw materials for products; as experimental objects; as objects with artistic beauty such as landscapes, colors and sounds; as inspirations to find truth (many philosophers including the Apostle Paul perceived truth through observing nature); as stimulants to the artistic feelings of man (birds, flowers, trees and the moon were often the themes of poems); and as means of comparison (metaphors) of the characteristics of man (we sometimes express certain characteristics of man with expressions such as "steady as a rock", "strong as an ox", "delicate as a flower", "iron will", "happy as a lark", "hungry as a bear", and the like). Thus each thing's ultimate purpose for the whole is to be of service to human life in some way. What is mentioned above is concisely expressed in the Divine Principle as follows: Man was thus created to be the center of the whole creation, and so the point where God and man become one united body is where we find the center of the macrocosm. Let us discuss man's being the center of the macrocosm from a different aspect. We call the two worlds, the visible and invisible, the "macrocosm," with man being the substantial center of this total macrocosm. (Ibid., p. 38) Consequently, the purpose of the universe's existence centered on man is to return joy to God, the Creator. Every being has a dual purpose. As already explained, every existence has both character and form; accordingly, its purpose is two-fold. One purpose pertains to internal character and the other to external form. The relationship between the two is exactly the same as that between character and form in any individual being. The purpose pertaining to the internal character is for the whole, while the purpose
xliv pertaining to the external form is for the individual. In other words, the former and the latter relate to each other as cause and effect, internal and external, and subject and object. Therefore, there cannot be any purpose of the individual apart from the purpose of the whole, nor any purpose of the whole that does not include the purpose of the individual. All the creatures in the entire universe form a vast complex linked together by these dual purposes. (Ibid., pp. 41-42) b. The Connected Body and the Original Image I have touched on the connected body from the viewpoint of purpose. Now let me explain it in relation to the Original Image. The individual truth body mentioned before is a concept which deals with the aspect of the existing being that reflects the Inner Quadruple Base of the Original Image. The connected body on the other hand is a concept which deals with the aspect of the existing being that reflects the Outer Quadruple Base of the Original Image. Before, I explained that an individual truth body performs the give-and-take action not only between the subject and object parts within itself through forming the Inner Quadruple Base, but also performs the give-and-take action outwardly with other individual truth bodies in a subject and object relationship, through forming the Outer Quadruple Base. This means that an individual truth body also simultaneously plays the part of a connected body. The Outer Quadruple Base of the Original Image is one of absolute dimensions formed through the absolute give-and-take action between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. As the Quadruple Base of the Original Image is in the world of the Original Being outside of time and space, its Inner and Outer Quadruples can not but be formed in a unique, absolute dimension. But as the universe is the four-dimensional world of space with time, the Quadruple Base should be formed within the passage of time and in the three dimensions of space. Accordingly, the Quadruple Bases under the influence of time and space are formed in the various dimensions of the upper and lower sides, right and left, front and back, and before and after. For example, a person will have his parents, elder brothers and sisters, and superiors above; younger brothers and sisters, sons and daughters and inferiors below; teachers, leaders, and seniors in front; disciples and juniors in back; friends and neighbors to the right; opponents to the left; and within the passage of time, he performs the give-and-take action with new persons and new environments incessantly. Thus, the formation of Quadruple Bases occurs in various dimensions in the created world. There is not one of the countless individual beings composing the universe which does not form these kinds of multidimensional Quadruple Bases. This means that every creature is connected with others through its upper and lower sides, in the past and in the future, directly and indirectly, etc. For example, man is directly connected with food, clothing and housing; with his environment or surroundings (family centering on parents; minerals, plants and animals through foods; mountains, lands and climate through dwellings, etc.); and with social life (getting in touch with members of the community, contacting foreigners, and the like); and indirectly connected with the planets of the solar system (through gravitation, the rotation and revolution of the earth, and the sunlight); and with stars (through the cosmic rays and utilization of the constellations). If any one of these connections were cut off man would be influenced greatly. It is well known that cosmic rays exercise an important influence on the living things on earth. Thus to say every existing being takes after the Original Image means that each being in nature has paired (relative) elements inwardly (in itself) and has give-and-take actions in various dimensions outwardly (with others). The former state is called an individual truth body and the latter, a connected body. In other words, every existing being is an individual truth body for self and a connected body for others. That is, an individual truth body is the image for self of an existing being; whereas the connected body is its image for others. Because existing beings have these two aspects, the dual purpose comes into existence. The purpose for the individual is for the maintenance of the self, that is to say, self-existence; and the purpose for the whole is for the maintenance of the whole, that is to say, the purpose to make the whole more perfect. This is the reason for calling the existing being with dual purposes a connected body. Therefore, there is no solitary being in the universe; all are connected to each other. The entire universe is a vast organic body composed of connected bodies with dual purposes. Consequently, when we consider this in relation to the Original Image, we can see that an existing being is composed of the Inner and Outer Quadruples. Dealing with self it is called an individual truth body, and dealing with others it is called a connected body.
xlv Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 5) Section E - The Yang Sang ("Status-image") and the Position of the Existing Being It was made clear above that every being taking after the Original Image had to form the Inner Quadruple Base inwardly as an individual truth body, and the Outer Quadruple Base outwardly as a connected body. This formation of the Quadruple Bases is the being image, namely, the existing structure taking after the Original Image. The existing being with this structure does not remain stationary but incessantly moves. Its type of movement is a kind of revolution, that is to say, circular movement. In other words, when the subject and object form the Quadruple Base through give-and-take action inwardly and outwardly, circular movement develops. The Unification Thought calls this the Yang Sang of being. (The detailed explanation of the Yang Sang is given in the section "The Status of Existence of the Four Position Foundation," in Divine Principle, pp. 32-39). Here let me explain the difference between the concepts of the being image and the Yang Sang. As the content of both the being image and the Yang Sang is the formation of the Quadruple Base, it can be seen that the two concepts are similar. But there is quite a difference between them. The being image is a concept which deals with the structure and elements only, whereas the Yang Sang is a concept which deals with the movement. As frequently clarified, the being image, as it takes after the Original Image, consists of the Universal and Individual Images of the existing being. The Original Image has the Quadruple Base structure; namely the system which is formed by the four elements in the four positions is the Quadruple Base. Furthermore, viewed from the time perspective this formation of the structure is called the ChungBoon-Hap action. Thus reflecting the Original Image, every existing being is called an individual truth body or a connected body. After all, all forms of the Quadruple Bases of the existing beings take after the structure of the Original Image. Then, does circular movement, as an aspect of the existing beings, take after the Original Image too? From the standpoint of causality, it may take after some aspect of the Original Image, and by such reasoning, the circular movement might reflect the non-angled nature of the love (G-T action) of God (Original Image); but as the world of the Original Image is one of absolute dimensions outside of time and space, there is no actual circular movement in it, because circular movement requires time and distance (space). [Note: Accordingly, a moving body is not able to stand still at a definite point in space or at a definite moment. If we maintain that a moving body stands still at a definite point in time and space, this accepts Zenon's assertion that a "flying arrow stands still", and also accepts the communist sophistic and dialectical viewpoint of movement which says "a moving body simultaneously exists and does not exist at a definite point at a definite moment." In essence a point has no size. But if a point actually exists, it naturally has size, large or small, which means that it occupies space. Within space, movement can not stand still, because to stand still is not movement. Therefore there is no true point in the spatial world. Accordingly, a moving body never stands still in space but constantly moves. In strict terms, a point has only position and no size, and is dealt with only in mathematics.] 1. The Yang Sang Of Existing Beings As mentioned above, the Yang Sang refers to circular movement. Namely, it means a state of being displaying circular movement through the formation of the Quadruple Base. Whenever a creation has formed a four position foundation by fulfilling its three objective purposes through O-D-U action, it begins to perform global spherical movement in order to maintain its threedimensional existence. (Ibid., pp. 32-33) But it should be noted that to say the existing being displays circular movement by the formation of the Quadruple Base does not mean that all of the four elements in the four positions move in circles. As already mentioned and clarified in the section on the Original Image and individual truth body, in the Chung-Boon-Hap action which completes the Quadruple Base, the origin is Heart or Purpose. Accordingly the "origin" (Chung) of an Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple Base in the created world is not an actual existing being, but rather the quadruple's "division" (Boon) (subject and object) are existing beings, while the "union" (Hap) is nothing but a union of the division (subject and object). And in the Developing
xlvi (Dynamic) Quadruple Base also, the "origin" is Purpose, and not an existing being. Although the "multiplied body" (Hap) is a new being, it is an outcome of the movement. Consequently the subject and object are the only elements involved in the circular movement of the Chung-Boon-Hap (Origin-DivisionUnion) action or in forming the Quadruple Base. What is the concrete meaning of the circular movement of these relative beings? It means that an object revolves centering on the subject. Needless to say, in this case, the relative beings perform the G-T action with a common purpose, and in the process of the G-T action, the object revolves around the subject. The movements of particles and heavenly bodies are examples of this. Electrons revolve around the nucleus of protons and the nine planets revolve around the sun. It is a matter of course that the proton and sun are the subjects. Yet it should not be overlooked that within the circular movement both the subject and object rotate on their own axes. This is because when we consider the Quadruple Base of subject and object we find that within both the subject and object, there are Inner Quadruple Bases containing inner subjects and inner objects. The inner objects revolve around the inner subjects and thus create the inner rotational movements. For example, as the moon revolves around the earth, the earth rotates on her own axis, and as the earth revolves around the sun, the sun rotates on its own axis. This means that the object elements within the moon, earth, sun, electrons, and protons also revolve around their subjective elements. Astronomy says that not only the solar system but the galaxy as well, to which the solar system belongs, rotates. It is said that centering on a nuclear system of fixed stars, the galaxy with a diameter of several hundred thousand light years rotates once every two hundred forty million years. Thus the simultaneous rotation and revolution actually means that every existing being is an individual truth body in relation to itself and a connected body in relation to others. For that reason, by means of the G-T action between the subject and object, circular movement develops both internally and externally. Then why do all the existing beings rotate? Does circular movement develop by chance or necessity? The circular movement is necessary, because it is caused by the purpose or dual purposes of the existing being. As touched on before, every existing being has both a purpose for the individual or self-existence, and a purpose to improve the whole. Due to these purposes every existing being moves in circular motion. In other words, there can be no existence of the individual or whole without circular movement. When an electron rotates on its own axis and revolves around the proton, these motions occur both for self-existence and for the maintenance of the eternity of the atomic structure. The same is true for the rotation and revolution of the earth. Thus in order to maintain the eternity of existence of both the individual and the whole, the object rotates and revolves centering on the subject. In this case the subject, the center of the circular movement, also revolves centering on a new subject and thus becomes an object in the higher dimension. The sun, along with other stellar groups, as an object revolves around a system of nuclear fixed stars which is the center of the galaxy in the higher dimension. Thus all existing beings, from the small atoms to the great cosmos, including the galaxy, form a hierarchy consisting of many levels of centers, and develop circular movement. Then what is the center of the highest level of these circular movements? It is man. The highest center of these countless centers is man. Thus man is the supreme center of the circular movements of the individuals within the universe. Again, every individual truth incarnation moves spherically, with the lower individual truth incarnations in the objective position to the higher ones. The center of the spherical movement of this object is in the individual truth incarnation which is in the position of subject, on a higher level. Likewise, the centers of countless such symbolic individual truth incarnations are connected with one another from the lowest to the highest. Man, the individual truth incarnation in image, is the highest and central created being. (Ibid., p. 36) When many objects revolve around one subject at orbits of regular intervals or at different angles, spherical space is formed centering on the subject, -and the movements of all the objects are synthesized into one spherical movement. This is shown in Figures 14 and 15.
xlvii
Fig. 14 When the orbits are at regular intervals Fig. 15 When orbiting angle is different The rotation of the earth corresponds to Diagram 14, and in this case the center, its subject, seems to be a line. The movement of atoms may correspond to Diagram 15 and in this case the center looks like a point or a ball. To say the circular movements of many objects centering on one subject form a spherical shape means that all individual truth bodies have a spherical shape. It is a matter of common knowledge today that atoms or heavenly bodies have a spherical form, and we can easily understand that seeds or fruits have spherical shapes too. Besides we know that the fertilized eggs of animals and various kinds of bird's eggs are spherical. All these examples indicate that in principle the basic form of every individual truth body is spherical. That the shapes of plants, animals, and men seem to have nothing to do with the spherical form may be due to the fact that the spherical forms were transformed so as to be more favorable to the realization of the purpose of each individual. [Note: The same physical conditions do not exist in the formation of the spherical forms between heavenly bodies such as the earth and of fertilized eggs or fruits. In other words, the formation of the spherical forms of the heavenly bodies and the formation of the spherical forms of fertilized eggs (cells) are not necessarily the same. The former surely originate in circular movement, while the latter are caused by the liquidity of cytoplasm which is like a water drop. Yet the Unification Principle does not regard these spherical forms as the accidental outcome of liquidity. In creation, an idea has to be set up first in the Original Image and then the individual truth body is created according to that idea. It is not valid to regard spherical form as a result of the liquidity but rather to consider that the cytoplasm was made liquid so as to ultimately create the spherical form. From such a standpoint, it is possible for us to understand that the spherical forms of heavenly bodies, fruits, seeds, and eggs all originated from the same common motive, and it is possible for the Quadruple Base of the Original Image to be expressed in a sphere. As already mentioned, since the world of the Original Image is outside time and space, inside and outside are one; large and small are one; and the past, present, and future all exist in the eternal present. Accordingly it is possible to say that the four elements of the Quadruple Base consolidate at one point centering on Heart, and if that point is expanded, it may be expressed as a sphere.
xlviii Particularly, in the Static Quadruple Base, since the fourth position is nothing but a union of the subject and object, the components are the three elements of Heart, subject and object. To say the subject and object perform G-T action centering on Heart means that the subject sometimes becomes the object, and the object sometimes becomes the subject. When a husband and wife have give-and-take, sometimes the husband is subject and sometimes object to his wife. Such a phenomenon is due to the nature of the Quadruple Base in the Original Image. That is to say, in the Original Image, the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang can change positions with one another. This nature of the Original Being may perhaps be shown diagrammatically as a circle. When the needle of a compass is turned to the object from the subject at the radius of SH (distance between subject and Heart) centering on the heart point (when subject stands at the position of object), a semicircle appears with S 0 as its diameter, and at the same time the object comes to the position of subject, its locus also forming a semicircle. Here finally a full circle is made. From such a standpoint, the Original Image may well be called a circular image, for the Original Image centers on Heart, and Heart is the starting point of love, and the nature of love is harmony which has no angles, like a circle. As such, the Original Image is a circular one and in the first stage of the creation every creature was made circular. However, as the creation progresses, every being develops the peculiar shape suitable for its own purpose and function.] 2. Position Of The Existing Being Here position refers to that of the subject and object, which, strictly speaking, are in different positions. As already mentioned, every existing being has within it the two elements of subject and object (paired elements) as an individual truth body, and as a connected body every being performs the give-and-take action in a subject and object relationship with another being. In this case, the subject and object are not at the same level. The relationships of subject and object are those of superior and inferior, active and passive, dominating and submitting, central and dependent, creating and conserving, and positive and negative. The subject being lies above the object being. The subject is superior to the object. Such a difference in the positions of subject and object is due to the following facts: In the first place, in the Original Image, Sung Sang (subject) is mind which has positive functions (intellect, emotion, and will), whereas Hyung Sang (object) is undetermined passive matter. In other words, all things were created by mind's dominion over material (matter).
Fig. 16 Circular Expression of an Original Image In the second place, in the relationship between positivity (subject) and negativity (object), the difference of positions is inevitable, because positivity has bright, full, prominent, hot and warm qualities, whereas negativity has dark, vacuous, concave, cold and cool qualities.
xlix Thus in the relationships between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity of the Original Image, the position of the subjects is above, and that of the objects is below. In other words, the Original Image itself has an orderly structure. For that reason in the world of beings (created world), differences of positions and levels exists. If there were no differences, all the existing beings on the same level would have a mind to dominate each other or to refuse each other's dominion, and this- universe would eventually be thrown into confusion. Order is necessary in the natural world and human society. Therefore, even if we disregarded the fact that all creatures take after the Original Image, there would have to be differences of positions between subjects and objects if only to maintain order in the created world. How much more the order is necessary then, when the created world takes after the Original Image. How can this sort of difference of positions between the subject and object bring about order? The order originates in the fact that the object revolves around the subject due to the purpose for the whole. An object rotates on its own axis due to the purpose of the individual and revolves around the subject due to the purpose of the whole. Then the subject, which becomes an object, revolves around another subject on a higher level, in addition to rotating on its own axis for the purpose of the individual. Thus, in the created world there is a series of countless centers, and man occupies the supreme position of this series. In other words, man is the center of the whole universe, which forms a vast, orderly, organic body. Here a further explanation about the fact that man is the center of the universe should be given. We know, of course, that man merely lives on the earth just as animals and plants do. Then how can he be the center of the universe? The earth on which man lives revolves around the sun as its object, and the sun itself revolves, in the object position, around the system of nuclear fixed stars as a member of the galaxy. From such a standpoint, man along with the earth on which he lives is one of the most minute beings in the universe. judging from a physical viewpoint alone, man can hardly be the center of the cosmos. As a physical being, man is between 5 and 7 feet tall, and weighs 100-300 pounds or so. But from the standpoint of the purpose of creation, the situation takes a new light. No matter how vast the universe is, it was created to bring pleasure and joy to man. Namely, it was created as the object of man. Man is the dominator and the entire universe is the dominated being. Comparing the relative importance of man and the universe according to the purpose of creation, human value is greater than the united value of the entire universe, because an object exists for the subject. Therefore there are two kinds of centers which are named the physical center and the purpose center. The former is called the Hyung Sang center; the latter is called the Sung Sang center. As already explained, every existence has both character and form; accordingly, its purpose is two-fold. One purpose pertains to internal character and the other to external form. The relationship between the two is exactly the same as that between character and form in any individual being. (Ibid., pp. 41-42) Therefore, the physical centers of circular movement are the physical subjects at the various levels (the nucleus in the atom, the sun in the solar system, etc.), but their purpose center (Sung Sang center) is only man. In view of the purpose of creation, the electron revolves around the proton (nucleus) not only to maintain the atomic structure (purpose for the whole) but also to bring joy to man indirectly. And the earth revolves around the sun not merely to form the solar system (purpose for the whole) but also to bring joy and pleasure to man indirectly through the changing of seasons. The purpose for the physical center (purpose for the whole) of a lower level is no more than an individual purpose when considered from the higher level. For example, at the level of atom, the purpose of the electron, to preserve the atomic structure through revolving around the proton (purpose for the whole) is, at the molecular level, a purpose for the individual atom. The purpose of the earth to maintain the solar system through revolving around the sun (purpose for the whole) is, at the galactic level, nothing but a purpose for the individual solar system itself. Thus in physical movement, the subordinate purposes for the whole are superordinate purposes for the individual. Such physical purposes for the whole are superordinate purposes for the individual. Such physical purposes for the 'Individual and whole are called Hyung Sang purposes whereas the ultimate purpose of every individual to contribute to human life directly or indirectly is called the Sung Sang purpose. Now it has been clarified that the Sung Sang purpose of all individuals other than man is to serve man, and the expression that man is a cosmic center means that man is the Sung Sang center. This is shown in Fig. 17.
l
Fig 17 The Relationship between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang Purposes of the Existing Beings As frequently mentioned, through all things staying in their definite positions, various levels of centers (subjects) are formed, and the center of the highest level is man. This means that the higher the subject level is, the broader its scope of dominion becomes, and since man is the highest center, the whole universe is under his dominion. Though man doesn't have direct dominion over the entire universe at present, the day will come in the future when, through the further development of science, human beings will directly dominate other heavenly bodies from the earth. Even though man's scope of dominion will always be restricted to some extent, this does not mean that man is far from having dominion over the whole universe. This sort of restriction applies only to a man on the earth who is limited by physical conditions, but the restrictions of time and space do not exist for the spirit man free of his physical body. 3. The Various Types Of Circular Movement, And Developing Movement The circular movements of each existing being are not identical, but rather vary. It was clarified previously that every existing being must have the circular motion of G-T actions both inwardly and outwardly in order to exist. But the actual phenomena of the natural world show that there are a lot of exceptions to this. Molecules, which are composed of various elements, do not rotate inwardly, and the cells composed of molecules stand still without any rotation or revolution, as do the tissues made up of cells and the organs composed of tissues. Animals and man are the only beings that move, but still they do not move in a completely circular motion. If a man rolled around like a top, he would surely find it difficult to maintain his life because he would get too dizzy. Thus most phenomena in nature do not coincide with the fact that every existing being rotates and revolves. This seeming contradiction can be resolved through reaffirming that all existing beings are connected bodies with dual purposes. Before, I made it clear that atoms and heavenly bodies rotated and revolved due to their dual purposes. In order to realize the dual purposes for both the individual and the whole, every being performs circular motion. Therefore, strictly speaking, circular movement is a condition for existence as well as a Yang Sang (Status-Image). In other words, for existing beings to exist they can not but become connected bodies. Accordingly, every existing being is both in the position of subject and whole to subordinate beings, and in the position of object and part to superordinate beings. To say that an existing being develops circular movement inwardly and outwardly
li means it is functioning as a connected body. In short, circular movement is a means or condition through which a connected body can function. In other words, for a connected body to perform the function of its dual purposes, conditions other than circular movement may be necessary. There may be many ways of realizing the dual purposes of a connected body, according to the positions of the various beings such as molecules, cells, plants, animals, and man. Let a more concrete explanation be given about this. (i) Types of Circular Movement Let me first deal with the conditions necessary for realizing the purpose of the connected body at the molecular level. All molecules are composed of atoms and exist as either inorganic or organic matter. From an historical viewpoint of the development of the earth, organic matter was created far later than inorganic matter, which has been proven to be the fundamental material of the earth. Considering the significance of the development of the earth from the standpoint of creation, the earth was surely created as the environment for human life, as man's object of beauty and dominion, and as the place for the various minerals, plants, and animals to exist. If this is true, then inorganic matter (the basic building block in development), that is, all the elements in the form of molecules, must compose all the minerals, plants and animals, and at the same time, solidify the earth so as to make it suitable for the life of all things. If it were sparse like cotton, or gaseous like a cloud, there could be no evolution of minerals and no habitat for plants or animals. The function of molecules (inorganic matter) as connected bodies may thus be considered to solidify the earth and for that purpose, circular movement which requires spatial intervals at the molecular level could not occur since the molecules need to be tightly connected through chemical unions. Furthermore, in order to maintain the particular characteristics of different minerals such as gold, silver, iron, etc., the components must be completely and tightly connected with each other. Thus, the molecular level of connected bodies because of its specific dual purpose performs its function through chemical union rather than circular motion. In the second place, let us deal with the function of the cell. The cell is the basic unit that composes living things. For that reason, unless it is fixed in a definite position as part of a living body, the continuity of the shape and structure of the individual can not be maintained. If the muscle cells which compose the heart (cardiac muscle cells) began to travel here and there, the structure of the heart (cardiac structure) would crumble immediately. The position of a cell which is a component of a living body must be fixed in order to realize the purpose for the whole. Rather than moving itself, it is connected with other cells through the circulation of blood and lymph. Since the cell itself is an individual truth body, it performs the give-andtake action between its nucleus and cytoplasm which are its inner subject and object parts; however, this give-and-take action is not circular movement either but rather a form of biochemical action. This same situation applies to tissues and organs. Now let me deal with man as an individual truth body or connected body. In the first place there is the inner Chung-Boon-Hap action of the individual truth body, namely the inner give-and-take action which establishes harmony between the physical mind and the spirit mind. In the second place, the coordination of the organs (stomach, heart, lungs, etc.) through the blood and nerves makes the physiological action perfect. The Sung Sang aspect of man's purpose for the individual is to enjoy living in truth, goodness and beauty in addition to perfecting his personality through raising his standard of heart, and the Hyung Sang aspect of his purpose for the individual is to multiply children as well as to have food, clothing, and shelter to make the physical body sound. Furthermore, as a connected body, a person can and should do his best to fulfill his responsibilities to the persons he is in touch with through the relations of upper and lower, left and right, before and after, and so on. For example, he should be dutiful to his parents, respectful to his teachers, and should love and educate his children. In the final analysis, to perform the give-and-take action as a connected body is a matter of loving the object as a subject, and following the subject as an object. Next, what is give-and-take action like in social life? It may be similar to that between individuals. A government is to enforce good policies in the political, economic and social realms to improve the social welfare of its people, and the people are to be grateful to the government and follow its policies. The same should be true for relationships, such as those between teachers and pupils, employers and employees, and
lii officers and soldiers. Particularly in economic life, the harmonious circulation of capital, raw materials, and goods should be established between different industries, between the cities and rural areas, between different enterprises, between production and consumption, and so forth. Through the above explanation it may have been clarified that all the levels of connected bodies other than atoms have no physical circular movement, and that the types of give-and-take action are different on each level. But as mentioned before, all connected bodies have common features in that no matter what type of give-and-take action they perform, it is a method of, or condition for, fulfilling the dual purposes as a connected body. The circular movement of atoms, the chemical union of molecules, the biochemical action of cells, the physicochemical action of tissues and organs, the physiological action of the human physical body, the Sung Sang action between the physical and spirit minds, the harmonious give-and-take in social life, and the like, are the same from the standpoint that all these connected bodies can not but perform G-T action in order to realize their dual purposes. However, we can consider the most basic and typical of all these forms of give-and-take action, for according to the principle of resemblance, at least one of these will surely directly reflect a certain aspect of the Original Image. Which then is the most basic form? It may well be the circular form; that is, the circular movement shown in atoms and heavenly bodies is the essential form of the give-and-take action. To say all the movements of heavenly bodies including the earth and the atoms which compose the material of the whole universe are circular movements, in other words, to say the movements of both the macroscopic and microscopic worlds are circular, means that the basic type of give-and-take action of connected bodies is circular movement. Then how can we understand the rest of the patterns of give-andtake actions? They may be considered as transformations in order to be suitable for the positions and purposes of the beings. Circular movement was transformed to chemical union to allow the close connection of molecules; to biochemical action owing to the colloidal liquidity of cells; to physiological action due to the specific structure of the human body; to mental action centering on heart and value, due to the peculiar feature of the duality of flesh and spirit; to the circulation of commodities and money due to the economic and social peculiarities, and the like. From such a view, all these patterns of give-and-take actions may be included within the category of circular movement. (ii) Development and Spiral Movement The above-mentioned circular movement was chiefly physical and spatial, but there is another kind which may be called circular movement in time. This is a developing movement, and as developing movement is one of the important categories of philosophy, let us consider it in detail. The concept of development generally means a changing process which moves irreversibly forward. To put it concretely, it is a process of changing to a high phase from a low one, to a new phase from an old one, to a complex phase from a simple one and so on. Such processes of change are irreversible. The processes such as the growth of plants and animals, multiplication, the formation of the universe, or the evolution of living things, never retrograde to the previous phases. For example, a seed grows into a sprout, then into a stem, branches, leaves, flowers, fruit and then develops into many more seeds than existed before; this process of growth is irreversible. The formation of the universe going from a gaseous to a liquid, and then to a solid state, may also be regarded as the process of development. Thus development is an irreversible directional movement. Accordingly, the features of developing movement are finality (goal), time, and stages of development. The irreversibility of direction can not be formed without the establishment of a goal (purpose) and the change can not become fixed without a lapse of time. [Note: Communist philosophy recognizes only the direction of developing movement, and not its goal. It asserts that development occurs due to the contradictions within material and that the direction is decided secondarily and automatically by the physicochemical laws acting in material. Their philosophy does not recognize that a goal is established first and then the physicochernical conditions are prepared in
liii order to direct toward the goal. If an established goal is recognized, this admits a teleological cosmology which would finally result in the breakdown of atheistic communism. Therefore it is inevitable that communists deny established goals in order to adhere to their atheistic philosophy. But one has to regard an egg as having the possibility (goal) of becoming a chicken, and a seed can not but be looked upon as containing the possibility of becoming a new fruit after maturity. How much more valid this view of an established goal is, when considered from the standpoint of the Unification Principle which asserts the creation theory of the cosmos.] Furthermore, the reality of stages becomes apparent in the development shown in the above examples. When a plant bears fruit, a new stage, the seed stage appears. After a chick hatches from an egg, it grows to become a mother hen, and then starts a new stage by laying an egg. In the formation of the cosmos as well, it is said that there were the three stages of gas, liquid and solid. In the evolution of living things, the evolution occurred not through a gradual and continuous process but through stages. Consequently, it has become obvious that development is a directional movement with a goal (purpose), time and stages. Then what shape does developing movement take? According to its directivity toward the goal, it takes the shape of a straight line, and according to its stages, it would be circular. But as development involves time, its form will be spiral-the united form of a straight line and circular forms, as shown in Figure 18
Fig. 18 Development in Spiral Form Thus development is a kind of circular movement. When a solid body is performing circular movement and a force acts along the direction of the circular movement, the circular movement changes into a spiral one. What are the concrete contents and significance of a developing movement which displays a spiral form like this? As already mentioned, development is a phenomenon which appears in the formation of the dynamic Quadruple Base. Namely when the subject and object perform the action of give-and-take centering on a definite purpose, the outcome appears with direction toward the accomplishment of the purpose, and this itself is development. In other words, development occurs through the dynamic Chung-Boon-Hap process. Before, it was said that new multiplied bodies appear as a result of the dynamic Chung-Boon-Hap process. In the Unification Principle, the terms "multiplication" and "development" are often taken to mean the same thing. But strictly speaking, the multiplied body means a new stage of development. In plants, for example, the stage of new fruits is multiplication; in animals, the stage of the newly born offspring is multiplication, and so forth. Development is, after all, the dynamic inner and outer C-B-H action of an existing being. To say development takes the shape of spiral or circular movement means that all development is performed with similar contents in every stage and with a definite period.
liv Why does development take the form of circular movement and pass through stages? It is because of the principle that every existing being has to perform circular motion in order to maintain its existence eternally. As already mentioned, every existing being performs circular movement which appears by the GT action between the subject and object. Here the following question may arise. If a physiological action occurring within the physical body is circular movement, and an animal's growth is development; and if, as mentioned before, circular movement is indispensable for maintaining eternal existence; why isn't physical action enough to maintain the eternity of existence? Why is it necessary to multiply offspring, a whole new stage of development? Why is a spiral movement required in addition to circular movement (physiological action)? Atoms and heavenly bodies maintain their eternity of existence through circular movement alone. Why can plants and animals not do the same? It is because atoms and heavenly bodies are mere physical matter, while plants and animals are vital beings. Physical beings have only space while vital beings have both time and space. Since, in principle, time and space are inseparable, physical beings can not disregard time, but because the same forms are repeated in physical change, time may be comparatively ignored. The time for the earth to revolve around the sun now is 365 days, and this period was the same a hundred years ago, a thousand years ago; the seasonal changes in these 365 days have always been the same. In other words, there are no real changing aspects involved. Therefore just one period of the circular movement can be regarded as the eternal movement of the earth, if one disregards time. However the movement of vital beings, such as plants and animals, is quite different. A vital being has a time limit (life span) because of the necessity of multiplication given to living things at the creation. In other words, vital beings must have succeeding generations and multiply posterity according to the law of vital creation. "Be fruitful, and multiply and fill the earth (Genesis 1:28). "And God blessed them, saying 'Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.'" (Ibid., 1:22). Accordingly, for a limited, vital being to multiply, another circular movement is required. Needless to say, because vital beings also have material Hyung Sang aspects, they develop specific circular movements (physiological action). But these are only the functions for maintaining existence during a life span, not for multiplication. Furthermore, the time aspect of multiplication (new generations) should be a new period whose contents are different from the previous one, because succeeding generations means a numerical increase through multiplication and also a diversification of features. For example, in the period of the parents, there are only two persons (beings): male and female; but in their children's period, there are more than two beings in number and a variety of features of these persons appears. Because of this numerical multiplication of lives and the diversification of features, vital beings can not but have a succession of generations and eternity of existence. Therefore vital beings do need another circular movement. Thus unlike mere physical beings such as inorganic matter, vital beings are required to perform circular movement both in time and space, and this circular movement, in relation to the lapse of time, is the so-called spiral movement of development. It should be added here that the vertical G-T action between the subject and object (the replacement of the former generation by another) appears in spiral movement as the G-T action between the positivity and negativity in development. This doesn't mean that the object revolves around the subject. Rather, to put it concretely, when a mother animal (subject) gives birth to her children (object), the children become new subjects and give birth to new children (objects). This is the vertical G-T action of development and spiral movement manifests aspects of this vertical G-T action. (iii) Direction of Developing Movement Why does developing movement have direction? As already mentioned, to say movement has direction, means that the movement is heading toward a definite goal. Development occurs through the dynamic Chung-Boon-Hap action and this action occurs centering on a definite purpose. The goal toward which development heads is established by this purpose. Actually, the purpose itself is a goal. The purpose of a fertilized egg is to be a chicken, and with this as a common purpose, G-T action occurs between the embryo and the white and yellow, which results in a chicken. That is, the purpose that the egg contained was the very goal it reached after development.
lv Then what established the purpose? In an egg, the purpose was established by the life within the embryo. In other words, the life within the embryo which was to become a chicken established the goal and direction of its movement. Life, which is called a gene in genetics, means the consciousness latent in material, and it has different aspects according to each individual. Thus, the gene should be regarded as an individual truth body, and it should have both the aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. The Sung Sang aspect is life in the true sense and the gene (DNA) dealt with in science is a bearer of life and not life itself. The DNA is nothing but the Hyung Sang aspect of life. In other words, the actual structure of DNA should be regarded as the Hyung Sang in relation to the Sung Sang which is life. Thus since life is consciousness, it is no wonder that it establishes a definite purpose and goal. In the Unification Principle, such life is called the autonomy and dominion of the Principle itself. There are no existing beings which are not based on the Principle, because the Principle means rules, Logos, reason, law and mathematical reason. Accordingly, the Logos gives an individual being a larger or smaller amount of intellectual elements, and when a being is given mostly mathematical law and less intellectual elements, the individual becomes quite passive, ruled by physicochernical law. When a being is given more intellectual elements, it becomes active and autonomous, because the intellectual elements are nothing other than reason. Since reason is part of consciousness as well as part of intellect, the autonomy of the Principle is conscious and purposeful. Thus the principle acting upon inorganic matter is merely physicochemical law, but when acting upon living things, like organic matter, the Principle is autonomous, conscious, and purposeful. Life is the very autonomy of the Principle. Therefore not only physicochernical laws but also autonomous functions act together within the physical body of a living thing. Therefore the G-T actions within living beings display developing movement with direction. To the contrary, since the movement of inorganic matter is controlled by simple law, this movement becomes repetitious or circular. Needless to say, since inorganic matter is also a created being, it is true that it has both the purposes of the individual and the whole. But since its purpose is only given to it from outside, inorganic matter itself is never conscious of it. The earth revolves around the sun only because of the purpose given it from outside, and not because the earth is conscious of it. Communist philosophy regards conflict between inner contradictory elements as the cause of all movement, including development. It considers even reversible repetitious movements like chemical reactions as contradictions. Communists can not clarify the difference between developing and repetitious movements. Because they look upon life as being only a peculiar form of mere physicochernical action rather than regarding it as consciousness latent in material, it is inherently impossible for them to distinguish between the two movements. Marx took the phenomenon of water boiling at 100'C as an example to explain the abruptness of revolution in social development. However, this example is not related to development, but only to repetition. This foolish act of Marx originated in his lack of discrimination between development and repetition. (iv) Purpose, Law, and Necessity in Development Here let me touch on the purpose, law, and necessity in development, for they have often been dealt with in philosophy. Jumping to a conclusion, the Unification Principle maintains, as could be known from previous sections, that there is purpose in development. It is the natural conclusion of a creation view of the universe. But materialism, and communist materialism in particular, strictly denies any purpose in development, and judging from their atheistic theory, it is no wonder. Which is the more valid and rational view? The followers of communism recognize both law and direction in development but not goal or purpose. Is this a true view? Is the establishment of direction possible
lvi without a goal? Communists say that direction appears from the necessity of principle (law). As the law of causality acts upon the natural world, cause A always gives rise only to effect B and not to effect C. Therefore if a cause as well as the law of causality can be known exactly, the effect can also be foreseen exactly. When a fire is lit in the fireplace, smoke necessarily rises up out of the chimney. The sprouting of plants in spring and bearing of fruit in fall are the necessary outcomes of natural law. They are caused by the weather conditions and the attributes of the plants, and there is no need to recognize any mysterious purpose or plan in it. If any mystery were admitted, natural phenomena would lose their laws and an unscientific and mythological view of nature would be established. However, this is a groundless assertion in philosophy. The acceptance of necessity and law in nature is only a scientific standpoint, not a philosophical one. Since natural science deals only with phenomena and keeps a neutral attitude toward all philosophy, natural science transferred the issue of purpose in the explanation of natural phenomena to philosophy in order to maintain the purity of science. For example, the cause of smoke in the case of a fire is in the realm of science, but the reason and motive for one to light a fire is out of the scientific realm. The phenomenon that a union of a bull and cow gives birth to new life is a scientific phenomenon, but the reason for a man to raise cattle belongs to the purpose of man. In this way, the scientific and philosophical realms do not necessarily coincide when dealing with natural phenomena. Of course, the contents of philosophy should not contradict scientific truth, but philosophy should establish a farther reaching universal truth which includes scientific truth. If it is not only a scientific assertion but also a philosophical assertion that necessity is part of development only due to the laws present in natural phenomena, the following question should be answered. Why does every natural thing have law? Materialism recognizes the cosmic essence as matter, and mind as its product. Then the laws should originally be contained within the matter itself without any regard to mind. Yet matter itself should originally be undetermined material. If that is true, then how is it possible for matter as an undetermined and unrestricted material to become determined? Communist philosophy can offer no solution to this problem. Communist philosophers say that law is the attribute of matter itself. This is mere dogma and conjecture. A true man of science may only say, "Judging from the current scientific knowledge, legality can not but be regarded as an attribute of material. But there is room for possible change in this concept as science develops further." Frankly speaking, communist philosophy is controlled by science so it is far from being a true philosophy which can lead science. Since Unification Thought maintains that the universe was created, it strongly maintains that development has purpose, and regards all the laws as necessity, as preparation for realizing the purpose of cosmic creation. Acceptance of God's existence will not destroy purpose and necessity but rather further assure and stress their existence by the logic which shows that purpose and necessity originate in the Logos. Thus Unification Thought looks upon all the laws of the natural world as necessary, because they were prepared beforehand for the realization of a definite purpose. Chapter II - Ontology Based on the Unification Principle (Part 6) Section F - Existing Form of Being From the standpoint of the Unification Principle, every existing being has a definite Yang Sang and form in order to maintain its existence. Then, what is the difference between Yang Sang and form, and their actual concepts? As already explained, the Yang Sang refers to circular movement and it is a concept which deals with the co-existence aspect of the subject and object elements. Circular movement is a necessary aspect and condition for both the subject and object to co-exist. There can be neither the rotation of an object without a subject nor the existence of a subject without an object revolving around it. On the contrary, the existing form means the form or condition which the subject and object respectively have as individual truth bodies. Prior to G-T action, the subject and object have to possess conditions and forms as individual truth bodies and existing beings. Considering man, before marriage a man has to prepare the conditions of being a male person and bridegroom such as education, health, age, a means of living, virility, and so on; and a woman has to prepare the conditions of being a bride such as education,
lvii health, age, posture, fecundity, countenance and the like. All these conditions are necessary forms for the male and the female to exist as bridegroom and bride. After these conditions are fulfilled, the man (subject) and woman (object) marry and carry on family life by maintaining a harmonious G-T action. This G-T action is the very living Yang Sang of the couple. Through this example, the difference between the concepts of the Yang Sang and form should surely have been clarified. In the long run, the existing Yang Sang means the co-existing form which consists of both of them (subject and object) existing together, whereas the existing form means the self-existing form with which each individual is endowed. There are the ten following existing forms: (1) Self-Existence and Prime Force All existing beings tend to constantly maintain their identity. But in order to maintain one's identity, there must be a certain force which is always active. This force is the very Universal Prime Force. Human beings never become animals or plants. Even after death man lives eternally as a human being. It is due to the ability of self-existence endowed by God that man maintains himself for eternity. All other beings are the same. But since living things have a specific duration of life, their self-existence has significance only during that duration. The force to maintain such self-existence is called Universal Prime Force. (2) Sung Sang and Hyung Sang As an individual is an individual truth body, it has both the aspects of inner, invisible character (Sung Sang) and outer, visible form (Hyung Sang). In this case the fact that it has both natures means it has the existing form, and when this individual performs circular movement through G-T action with other individuals, this is its Yang Sang. (3) Positively and Negativity For an existing being to exist, it must manifest positive or negative aspects both in time and space. In this case when an existing being with positivity performs the G-T action with any other being with negativity, this is the Yang Sang. (4) Subjectivity and Objectivity Every being has the aspect of existing in the two positions of either a subject or an object to another being. (5) Locality and Location Every being necessarily has a position; namely, an individual can exist only by taking a definite position. In other words, all existing beings have a quality which requires them to have a definite place to exist. Each and every being, from atoms to heavenly bodies, has a certain position. There are countless positions in the universe, and all these positions without exception are to be occupied by certain individuals. The place itself is called "locality" while the taking of a place is called "location." (6) Relativity and Bond As the G-T action was presupposed at the creation, it is every individual's nature to have relations with others and to find it a necessity to be connected with one particular being. This necessity is called a "bond." For example, when Mr. Park and Miss Kim marry, since they are opposite sexes, it is in their natures to relate to each other as the opposite sex. This aspect of their nature is "relativity." But for Mr. Park to marry Miss Kim out of many women was due to some indispensable, necessary condition. This aspect is the bond. (7) Action and Multiplicativity Every individual has a tendency to exercise his influence over others. This is "action." It is also in every individual's nature to change or develop due to influence from others. This is "multiplicativity." The
lviii original meaning of the concept multiplication or multiplicativity is to make a new individual, but in Unification Thought multiplicativity means not only bringing forth a new individual, but also means the appearance of a new form or new nature. As change and development may be considered manifestations of new forms or new natures, these phenomena are also looked upon as multiplicativity. (8) Time and Space Every being necessarily occupies a definite space because it has form, namely a material aspect, and it also has a time aspect since it is to preserve itself (identity-maintenance) throughout the change processes, such as development, growth, perfection, decline, movement (motion), and the like. (9) Mathematical Reason and Principle Every being is a created being and thus necessarily contains the Logos. Logos is a complex of reason and principle, and simple reason is both intellect and mathematical reason. Mathematical reason is also contained in every individual. Here mathematical reason does not refer to a number itself but rather to the reason which deals with numbers, and to the principles which act upon individuals as basic laws. This requires a definite number and system. For example, in a spherical body, it is a matter of course that it has such existing forms as mentioned above because it is an existing being. Besides these forms, there is also a content which pertains to a definite number. Namely, the mathematical formula 4p r2 is formed by measuring the sphere and defining the sphere's surface area. This formula shows that four times the circumference-diameter ratio multiplied by the squared radius (4p * r2 ) is the numerical value of the spherical surface. The ratio of the circumference to the diameter (2r) is known to be 3.1416:1. This means that every sphere is endowed with a definite law which is able to express such a numerical value. And since this law contains the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter (p ), the formula 4p r2 is a unified system which consists of several elements (laws). Such a system of laws is called "principle" in Unification Thought. Yet a principle (system of laws) is considered to contain a kind of reason. It is well known that the discovery of natural laws requires rational speculation, namely research. But even laws discovered through such research have sometimes proved to be wrong. Thus rational speculation is considered necessary to discover laws. This means that reason (intelligence) was very much required in creation. Because laws have this mathematical aspect, the reason required to set up these laws (principles) is called mathematical reason. (10) Infinity and Finiteness As every being is a concrete individual and not the whole, so each being may be regarded as having finiteness. If any being has an infinite size, nature or capability, it will no longer be an individual nor a creature. However finite the individual may be, there can be no finiteness apart from infinity. For example, although man's physical mind in his Sung Sang has a finite feature, it is connected with God's Sung Sang in the spirit mind, and man's heart originates in God. In other words, the infinite Sung Sang (God's Sung Sang) is contained in the finite Sung Sang, and man's physical body, his Hyung Sang, is connected with God's Hyung Sang (hyle, matter). The search for the cause of all beings, from the physical body to cells, molecules and atoms, is clarified in the understanding that man's physical body is connected to the infinite hyle (matter) of God. Particularly, since the whole creation was created with eternity as its standard in principle, inorganic matter is to maintain the eternity of its Universal Image and a part of its Individual Image through circular movement, whereas living beings maintain their eternity through multiplication. In other words, all beings contain even infinity of time (eternity). This then, is what constitutes the infinity and finiteness of the existing form of being. [Note: It should be noted that this infinity and finiteness are not the game sort of relative concepts as Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Infinity and finiteness do not correspond to Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Infinity exists in both the character (Sung Sang) and form (Hyung Sang). Finiteness does too. Besides, they exist in the other existing forms such as action, multiplicativity, positivity and negativity, and the like. Accordingly, infinity and finiteness should be dealt with as another existing form.]
lix There may be other aspects to the existing form, but judging from the Unification Principle, since the existing Yang Sang should be presupposed, the existing form should be expressed in terms of the basic concepts concerning the quadruple, and the ten mentioned above are regarded as the basic existing forms
Chapter III - Critique of Major Traditional Viewpoints of Substance Through the above explanation, the ontological view of the Unification Principle, and the basic differences (of standpoint) between the Unification Principle and traditional philosophies should be clear. Now for reference, the traditional views of substance (essence) will be criticized and compared with that of the Unification Principle. (i) Plato (427-347 B. C) Plato regarded "idea" and khora as separate from one another. Calling the cosmic essence "idea", Plato recognized khora (hyle) as another element which existed with idea. This resulted in dualism. He further recognized Demiurgos as the maker (God) of individual beings, constructing them out of the khora (hyle), material). But he did not clarify the relations of causality, and of order (prior and posterior) among them. Thus his view may be said to be pluralistic because it is obvious from his assertions that idea and khora are not attributes of Demiurgos. Accordingly, in Plato, the source of idea and khora is left unclarified. He set up a teleological cosmology in that Demiurgos created the universe for goodness' sake, but the reason that creation was necessary was not clarified. His ontology is equivalent to the theory of the Original Image in the Unification Principle, in that idea corresponds to Sung Sang (strictly speaking, Inner Sung Sang), and khora to Hyung Sang. In Plato's view Demiurgos is God, but his God can hardly be looked upon as a personal being, so it is unlike the personal God of Heart of the Unification Principle. If we do have to make a comparison to the theory of the Original Image, Demiurgos is equivalent to the Inner Sung Sang of the Original Image, particularly its will part. But as already clarified in the section on the Original Image, the Inner Sung Sang did not mold the Hyung Sang using the Inner Hyung Sang as Demiurgos molded khora using the idea as the pattern. That is, the Logos was formed through the give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang (concept, idea, law, etc.) and creation was brought about through the give-and-take action between the Logos and the Original Hyung Sang (hyle). This is God's process of creation. (ii) Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) The ontological viewpoint of Aristotle is also dualistic. According to him, his eidos is equivalent to Plato's idea and his hyle to Plato's khora. Idea transcends the actual world but eidos is imminent in individual matter, where it is manifested as the structure, shape and function of the individual. Khora is pure undetermined material, but hyle is determined material with a definite actual shape. Aristotle thought the eidos and hyle, which composed a concrete individual, each had their own causes. He called the cause of eidos, causa prima (prote aitia) or eidos of eidos, and he called the cause of hyle, materia prima (prote hyle). The former means first (final) cause, the latter first material. Thus there are some differences of concepts between Plato and Aristotle, but they are the same in that they regard these two elements as the ultimate substance. Thus Aristotle's ontological view is also dualistic. But in dealing with God, Aristotle did not establish God as separated from eidos and hyle as Plato had, but rather regarded the causa prima itself as God. He said the eidos of eidos was the causa prima (pro te aitia) or forma prima (prote eidos) and called it nous or God. So according to him, God is nous or thinking or mind, and hyle (prote hyle) is another being separated from God. Finally, however, the source of hyle was left unclarified. Now let us criticize these concepts of eidos and hyle in relation to the theory of the Original Image. Seemingly eidos and hyle are equivalent to the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of the Universal Image of an individual truth body, but this is not true. The eidos of Aristotle means shape, structure, function and the like, of a mere individual and the hyle means only its material.
lx But the Sung Sang in the Unification Principle means the invisible aspect of an individual, so only the function aspect of eidos is equivalent to Sung Sang. For example, the physicochernical action in inorganic matter, the life in plants, the instinct and physical mind in animals, the physical mind and spirit man in human beings all correspond to Sung Sang. The shape, structure, and size in eidos, including the material (hyle), belong to the Hyung Sang of the Unification Principle. In the Principle, the invisible is Sung Sang and the visible is Hyung Sang, yet the ultimate causes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the individual truth body are the Original Sung Sang and Original Hyung Sang of the Original Image. The Original Sung Sang and Original Hyung Sang seem to correspond to causa prima and materia prima of Aristotle. However the Original Sung Sang and Original Hyung Sang in the Principle, are God's attributes, and neither of them can be God Himself. Thinking (mind) and material (hyle) are His attributes. Especially since thought and matter are not truly totally disparate, they can not but be God's attributes. Thus the dualism of Aristotle is discredited and monism is suggested by the Unification Principle. (iii) Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) Thomas Aquinas, the most prominent theologian and philosopher of the Middle Ages, adapted the abovementioned concepts (eidos and hyle) of Aristotle to theology, setting up a theory that the causa prima was God, and hyle was made by God from nothing. Accordingly, his concept of God is also as a pure spiritual being with no material content (hyle). This sort of view of God seems to have been typical in Christianity. But it is impossible to clarify how God can create material from nothing. In other words, Aquinas left the question of how material can be made from spirit unsolved, just as materialism left the question of how spirit can be produced from material unsolved. This question can easily be answered through Unification Thought. As already mentioned, mind, and matter are not the basic substances (essence) of the world of cause, but rather are attributes of the Absolute Being. Therefore, they are not totally disparate in nature. Material (hyle), in the world of the Original Image, is a Logos-bearing force, and mind (spirit) in the world of the Original Image, means a force-bearing Logos or force-bearing mind. In other words, in the world of cause, mind has force (power) and force has mind. The difference between both the attributes is not radical and essential but only a difference of degree; the difference is only that between subject and object, motion and stillness, activity and passivity, and the like. If there were a true and essential difference between them there could be no give-and-take action between them. Consequently, mind and material (matter, hyle) were not created by God but were originally attributes of the Original Being (God) in the world of the ultimate cause. (iv) Descartes (1596-1650) Descartes also set up a dualism by regarding matter and mind as quite different. He arrived at the proposition "cogito, ergo sum" through methodical doubt (doute mkhodique). He was convinced of the originality and independence of mind and looked upon the essentiality of mind as thinking (speculation). He asserted the following: "Mind is so clear and distinct [clair et distinct] that it can not be questioned. And it is also obvious that mind perceives objective matter and that objective matter exists as the object of sense." Recognizing the certainty of the existence of matter besides the existence of mind, he called its attribute extension, because he thought that all matter occupied a definite space. Although thinking and extension are substance (essence), according to him they are not the ultimate substance. He considered the true substance to be God, and thinking and extension rely on God. Although mind and matter rely on God, they are original elements each separate from the other; and, since his view was that thinking and extension (mind and matter) are independent of each other and quite different in nature, his ontological view is also dualistic. Such a dualism of mind and matter brings about the following difficult problem. Since mind and matter are two quite independent substances, there can be no direct interaction between them. And as they are two completely different elements, a partition wall lies between them. To solve this problem, Descartes' successors such as Arnold Geulincx (1624-1669) and Nicole de Malebranche (1638-1715) proposed occasionalism. This is the theory that mind and matter are unable to interact directly except that the Almighty God is able to connect the two.
lxi For example, when any movement develops in either the mind or matter, making this movement the occasional cause (cause occationalls) God will give rise to another movement in the other side. This occasionalism was eventually applied even to epistemology, in order to solve the question of how a mind with no spatial area can recognize matter which has space. Thus God was interposed to solve the mind and matter issue. The fault of this theory which is unacceptable nowadays originates in Descartes' dualism. In the Unification Principle, the difference between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, mind and matter, is not considered an essential difference. Since the difference is only one of degree in the world of cause, matter can act upon mind and mind act upon matter. There can be a direct give-and-take action between them and recognition can also occur. (v) George Wilhelm Hegel (1770-1831) Next I will mention the substance of Hegel's philosophy. Hegel expressed God as Absolute Spirit, Reason, Logos, Absolute Intellect, Being (Sein), Thesis, etc. All these are known to be equivalent to the eidos of Aristotle. If Logos corresponds to eidos, then what is the relationship between Logos and matter (hyle, Materie)? As is widely known, his philosophical system consists of Logic, Philosophy of Nature, and Philosophy of Spirit, and his system deals with the dialectical process of the self-realization of God. The dialectical process means that God has development in Himself and then develops into nature and finally returns to the Absolute Spirit (Himself). Yet Hegel explains God in his Logics in a dialectical way. God is reason and mind and is equivalent to "Being" in his dialectics: Being (Sein)-Not Being (Nich ts) -Becoming (Werden); and to "Essence" (Wesen) in the dialectical method of Being (Sein)-Essence (Wesen)-ldea (Begriff). But the concept of matter (Materie, hyle) is not contained in either Being or Essentiality. [Note: In the triad of Being-Not Being-Becoming, and Being-Essence-Idea, when the actual process (natural world) is dealt with (in other words, when the triad of his dialectics is applied to actual processes), "Being" means an undetermined, mere finite being, that is, anything that is merely existing itself; but, in the case where these dialectics are applied to the world of God before creation, "Being" means pure Logos as indeterminability.] His dialectical structure has been known as thesis-antithesis-synthesis, affirmation-negation-negation of the negation, etc. So not only Being-Not Being-Becoming, and Being-Essence-Idea, but also the three stages of the process of Logic-Nature-Spirit, in his Enzyklopedie, coincide with the principle of the thesisantithesis-synthesis. Therefore, though he did not touch on the relationship between God and matter in the world of God prior to creation, the relationship may be guessed according to his theory of dialectical development. He said that the outer development of the Logos was nature, but this brings up the question of how Logos, a spiritual and rational being, can develop into material nature. Since Hegel never dealt with this directly, we have to guess what his viewpoint would have been. According to his dialectics, since the thesis contains its antithesis in itself, and the affirmation connotes negation, the motions from thesis to antithesis, and from affirmation to negation come to occur. According to his Enzyklopedie, nature is the outwardly developed Logos. Namely Logos developed outwardly to become nature. In other words, in creation the movement from Logos to nature occurred. So we can not but consider that nature (matter) was contained in the Logos as its antithesis or negation and as such it was possible for nature to exist. It may have been the dialectical viewpoint of Hegel that God Himself was a unity of Logos and matter. Because Hegel regarded God as pure spirit or reason, even though God contains matter within Him, matter must be a different element (Anders) from God, not part of God. In other words, though matter is contained in God as His antithesis, its source should be somewhere other than God. Then where is its source? Hegel couldn't clarify this point. Because Hegel regarded God as pure spirit, reason, or Logos, such a question came about. As already mentioned, the Logos is not God Himself but one of His attributes (Original Image) along with reason and matter. Furthermore reason and matter are not completely different but rather relative elements with common features. So the natural world did not come about by the thesis-antithesis-synthesis process;
lxii that is, not by the negation or antithesis, but rather by the Chung-Boon-Hap process, or in other words by the G-T action between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. However, Hegel also raised another question. Why would the motion to antithesis develop and the development from the affirmation to the negation appear when the thesis (affirmation) contains an antithesis (negation)? It is groundless and irrational that a developing movement would appear when the thesis is denied by an antithesis. According to the Unification Principle, all developing movement in the objective (Outer) and subjective (Inner) worlds comes from the dynamic Chung-Boon-Hap action centering on Purpose (Heart). Therefore, the development of concepts also comes from a dynamic C-B-H action centering on the Purpose (desire) to attain a better concept (knowledge). [Note: In the book Logic, regarding Being in the dialectic of BeingNot Being-Becoming as Logos, Hegel looked upon "Not Being" as complete erpptiness (Vollkommene Leerheit), indeterminability (Bestimmungslosigkeit) and contentlessness (Ingaltlosigkeit). This view does not mean that "Not Being" denies matter, but rather means that matter is indeterminability, and contentless void. Accordingly this "Not Being" can be regarded as the other being (Sein Anders) of Logos (essentiality), non-being (Nichtsein) or nature prior to being determined by the Logos. Edward Erdmann, Kuns Fischer and Tatchito Takechi agreed with these concepts. (See Dialectical Problems by Takechi, p. 61-62. and Logical System of Hegel by Takechi, p. 119-150] (vi) Karl Marx (1818- 1883) It is widely known that Karl Marx regarded matter as being the basic substance, while Hegel looked upon spirit (thinking, concept) as that substance. To Marx, spirit (mind) is the secondary element derived from matter. Succeeding Hegel's dialectic, Marx set up the materialistic dialectics or dialectical materialism. He maintained that the world (nature) developed not by means of the dialectic of the Logos or concept but rather by means of the dialectics of material itself. To the best of Marx's knowledge, actual nature (determined nature) never appeared through the action of Logos upon undetermined nature, but nature itself or material itself originally contained the physicochernical laws and the law of contradiction. Therefore, he opposed the concept of anything like reason or Logos acting upon nature. But such a viewpoint of matter raises a further serious question. In the first place, what is the accurate view of material? In the second place, to say that matter itself originally has laws is the same as saying that matter itself originally has Logos. Then why isn't matter itself indeterminable from the beginning rather than determined? The recent scientific viewpoint of matter has come to contradict that of Marx. In the age of Marx, matter was considered as an objective being with a definite mass occupying a definite space. According to the current scientific view of material, however, the atom which was considered the smallest unit of matter is no longer the ultimate unit, and the basic cause of material is energy having aspects both of waves and particles with neither space nor mass. From this view of an incorporeal element with no mass, matter and spirit (mind) are all the same. Accordingly, to say that matter has determinability (law) from the beginning means that reason (Logos) was originally in such an incorporeal element. In the Unification Principle, the cause of matter (hyle) is regarded as the Hyung Sang of the Original Image. But Hyung Sang is not a solitary being but rather is involved in a give-and-take action with the Sung Sang (Logos). Thereby mass originally has determinability. To put it more accurately, the Original Image of the Original Being is formed through the perfect unity between the Original Sung Sang and Original Hyung Sang. Therefore, in the actual world the Sung Sang element (heart, mind) is contained in matter and a kind of energy, the Hyung Sang element, is contained in Sung Sang (mind). (vii) Oriental Philosophy-Sung-Ih Hak Finally I would like to touch upon the Ih-Kih Theory of Sung-Ih Hak, a kind of oriental philosophy. SungIh Hak was founded by Chu-tsu (1130-1200) who was a famous Confucianist of the Song-dynasty of China. His philosophy (Sung-Ih Hak) is known as the dualism of Ih and Kih. Ih and Kih are the substance of the universe. They co-exist and can not exist independently of each other. According to Chu-tsu, Ih is the principle of the cosmos which exists within all things, and is a kind of reason and law which makes Kih act. Kih is the Yang Yin, positivity and negativity, and matter ,which causes all things to be formed. Accordingly Ih is invisible, while Kih is visible in the world of phenomena.
lxiii According to Yuk (the oldest oriental philosophy) the ultimate cause of the universe is the Taegeuk. The Taegeuk gave rise to both Euil (Eum and Yang); both Eui gave rise to the four Sang (elements); the four Sang produced the eight Kwai (factors), and the eight Kwai gave birth to all things. Therefore the Taegeuk is the unified body of Eum Yang (the negative and positive). But Chu-tsu regarded the Taegeuk as mere Ih, so to him, the Taegeuk and the Eum Yang (negative and positive) are different from each other (dualism). The Ih-Kih Theory seems to be similar to Aristotle's theory of eidos and hyle and the Ih seems to correspond especially to Hegel's Logos. This fact means that Sung-lh Hak had the same difficulties as the philosophies of Aristotle and Hegel. That is to say, if Ih (reason) is regarded as the Taegeuk (ultimate cause), and the Taegeuk is different from Kih, the origin of Kih is not clarified, and the reason all things should come into being from Ih Kih (reason and force) is not made clear. By the Ih-Kih theory, the formation of the cosmos is only inevitable by law, and not purposeful by any definite motive. In the universe, particularly in the world of living things, there are many purposeful phenomena. Such phenomena can not be understood without recognizing a purposeful motive. Though Chu-tsu added an ethical element to Ih (reason) and clarified that Ih was not only law but also virtue, it is still difficult to explain the purposefulness of movement in the universe merely by such a method of explanation. In order to recognize the purposeful movement (development) of the universe, the necessity for Ih and Kih to combine should be explained by a certain purposeful motive. If this problem can be solved through purposefulness, then the cosmos should be regarded not as having been generated, but as having been created. These weak points of Oriental thought would be completed by recognizing an emotional element (Heart) in the Taegeuk, and by regarding Ih and Kih as the attributes of the Taegeuk. That is, when the Taegeuk is dealt with not as reason itself, but as substance (essence) having Heart, and Ih and Kih as its attributes, all the insufficiencies of Sung-lh Hak are completely resolved. Because Ih corresponds to Sung Sang and Kih to the Hyung Sang of the Unification Principle, and because the interaction between Ih and Kih is carried out centering on Heart (Purpose), the view that the universe is formed in a direction where the Purpose can be realized is established. Part II - Partial Theories Chapter 1 - Theory of the Original Human Nature (part 1) The theory of the "Original Human Nature" is a field of philosophy unique to Unification Thought and until now no other philosophy has taken up this issue as an independent field. In this chapter, the differences among the Original Nature, the Second Nature and Existence are explained. Particularly, the limits of the Original Nature are clarified through a critique of the existentialist view of the human being. Then the standpoint of Unification Thought concerning the Original Human Nature is propounded. Section A - Meaning and Necessity of the Theory of the Original Human Nature (i) Necessity of the Original Human Nature The theory of Original Nature discusses what the original nature of different beings, especially that of human beings, is like. It is a philosophical field established for the first time by Unification Thought. There are two reasons we take up the Theory of Original Nature regarding it as a special philosophical field. One is that the philosophies of the past did not always clarify the qualitative difference between human beings and other natural things. According to Hellenistic thought, which originated in Greece, human beings are regarded as part of nature and are placed within nature. On the other hand in Hebraism, the basis of the Judeo-Christian tradition, human beings are considered different in value from nature; however, even here the difference was not explained satisfactorily.
lxiv According to the Unification Principle, there is a clear difference in position between human beings and nature (things). This is the first reason the Theory of the Original Nature is necessary. (ii) Original Nature and Fallen Nature Secondly, we think that although human beings were originally created in the "image of God" (Genesis 1:24), man has lost his Original Nature through the fall. If this is true, without clarification of the Original Human Nature in some way or other, we will not be able to know how great the gap between our present selves or society and the Original Nature is, and how this gap can be closed. Thus we will have to eternally continue our incomplete and unhappy lives which have deviated from the original state. We are of the opinion that the theory of the Original Nature must exist so that we may know our original state, and so that we may come back to the state from which we fell. Section B - The Original Nature The Original (Human) Nature is the true character of man as created by God. Human beings have fallen and deformed their Original Nature. Thus, in order to come back to the Original Nature man must know what it is like. a. The Original Nature and Essence 'Essence" is the specific quality of a thing (being) which makes the thing uniquely itself, and generally is the inner invisible universal aspect. On the other hand, the outer aspect appearing out of the thing is called a "phenomenon." Essence and phenomenon are usually used as relative concepts, Unlike essence, the Original Nature does not refer to the inside as opposed to the outside, but rather expresses the originality of both the inner and outer aspects. That is to say, both the original essence and original phenomenon, or the original content and original form are together called the Original Nature. This then, is the basic difference between the concept of essence and that of the Original Nature. b. The Original Nature and Existence The concept of existence (Existenz) came about in reaction to the rationalistic philosophies of Descartes and Hegel who saw human existence only from an abstract, universal viewpoint, and ignored the individual, concrete phase of an actual living man. It is said that Kierkagaard was the first to use the word existence to characterize his own philosophical standpoint. According to Kierkegaard and Heidegger, who deepened the former's thought from the standpoint of ontology, existence is not the mere fact of the existence of general things, but rather the peculiar fact of the life of an historical, subjective human being, or the fact of existence most fundamental for a human being. Among these philosophers, a sincere search for the meaning of life is usually seen. They ask, "What is original nature of man?" or "What is man fundamentally?", or say "I must seek for my true nature and maintain it to the end." Thus we can say that the concepts of existence and that of Original Nature are closely related. At the same time, however, there are various differences between the two concepts. The word existence comes from the Latin "existentia. - At first it meant to exist (sistere) out of something (ex), that is, it meant more to happen rather than to exist. Then in scholastic philosophy it came to be used as the word showing the actual existence or movement of a thing to distinguish it from the essence or true nature of the thing. Thus the word was generally used throughout history as the concept opposite to essence or true nature, and, as will be stated in the next section, today's existentialists also use the word as the concept opposite to essence. Especially Sartre says, "Existence precedes essence." He asserts that man appeared not from essence (God or an idea) but rather from nothing and then defined himself and gave essence to himself. Viewed from this standpoint, there is no basis on which to define man before his appearance; essence or Original Nature is
lxv nothing but what man freely creates according to his responsibility, and thus a discussion about an Original Human Nature is meaningless. It is difficult to claim therefore, that that which is sought after through the word existence is not the same in its content as that which is sought after through the words Original Nature, even though their attitudes of pursuit are not common to each other. Thus we shall criticize and examine the concept of Existence advocated by the existentialists, and then explain our theory of the Original Nature. Section C - The Original Human Nature Pursued by Existentialism It may be said that the representatives of existentialism are Kierkegaard, Jaspers, Heidegger and Sartre, and there is also Nietzsche who influenced Heidegger and Sartre. We are going to explain and criticize these five philosophers' theories on existence and man. First, taking a bird's eye view of the mutual relationships of these five men's thoughts, Kierkegaard's and Jaspers' are basically Christian, while Nietzsche's, Heidegger's and Sartre's are atheistic. The philosophies of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche are ethical, while those of Jaspers and Heidegger are ontological, and that of Sartre behavioralistic. 1. The Existentialists' Views On Existence And Man (i) Kierkegaard's "Individual" Kierkegaard (1812-1855) was born in Copenhagen, Denmark, and given a strict Christian education by his father. When he was 26 years old, however, he found out that when his father was young, he had cursed God. This struck him very much and deepened his consciousness of sin and fundamentally changed his view on life. He called the experience a "great earthquake." Later Kierkegaard fell in love with and became ' engaged to Legiene Olsen, but to his great regret the engagement was broken, creating another experience to further deepen his thought. According to Kierkegaard, man is a spirit which is the self, and the self is a relation which relates to its own self. Who in the world lets him have this relation with his self? It can not be his self, and so it must be a third person other than his self. Actually it is God who lets him have this relation. Thus man's self has a basic construction which makes him always face God. In spite of this fact, man often wrongly thinks that his freedom or independence does not depend on God but rather on himself, and he tends to go away from the fundamental rule (God). That self which originally had a close relation with God and left the relation, is in a state in which the self is alienated from true self, that is, in sin. Since an individual who is in sin has lost his original ground (God), he can not help but wander in a world of nothing, and because of this, man has anxiety and despair. However, this consciousness of emptiness allows man to decide to recover his true self and to return to his original self. The process of the effort to regain the original self, which starts from this consciousness of self-loss and from the subjective decision to have faith in God, and the growing process through which self becomes the original self-this process is "to exist." Actually, however, there is a strong power which makes a man stay in emptiness. That is to say, by this power, the concrete unique and individual being is "leveled" to be a part of "a group of abstract, unindividual beings." This manifestation of nothingness (leveled group) is called "public" (crowd). The public (crowd) is not a nation, nor a generation, nor an age, nor a group, nor a community, nor a certain human being. Because all of these exist just as they are, only by their concreteness ... The public is something gigantic or abstract, an emptiness which is all men and at the same time nothing. (Criticism on the Modern Age)
lxvi Kierkegaard advocates the concept of the "Individual" to truly sublate (auffieben) the public which is itself nothingness. Man can truly "exist" only when he is an individual. Only then can he be a concrete being and no longer an abstract being such as the public. As an individual, man truly stands before God. This is Kierkegaard's basic view on existence. He classified the process of the return to the original self, that is, existence, into three stages. They are the aesthetic, ethical and religious stages. (1) The Aesthetic Stage-This stage is formed by the aesthetic attitude which solely seeks after pleasure to satisfy desires. The satisfaction of one desire only brings about dissatisfaction soon after, and a man wanders around seeking after his next satisfaction. Thus, in the aesthetic stage, there is a constant alternating repetition of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Some pleasures are noble and others vulgar, but they are all common in their lack of seriousness toward life. However attractive it may appear, a life of seeking after pleasures is a life of despair because it brings about a vicious circle. (2) The Ethical Stage-A man enjoying the aesthetic stage will finally fall into deep melancholy. In order to escape from its vicious circle, he must regain a seriousness toward life and leap to the ethical stage. Here he takes into consideration the standpoint of other people as well as himself. In this stage he finds meaning in life through performing his duties and responsibilities. He may occupy a responsible position in his community and therefore does not fear the monotonous repetition of daily living. While the aesthetic person lives in moments, the ethical person lives in time and history. For the aesthetic person, pleasure and displeasure, and beauty and ugliness, are the standards of judgment; while for the ethical person good and evil become the standard of subjective decisions and deeds. But in this case, he comes to find that he can not do good however eagerly he may try. That is, he finds sin latent within himself and thus falls into serious ethical self-contradiction. (3) The Religious Stage-With this moment of the self-consciousness of sin, man comes to be conscious of his true self through the medium of God who is the source of man's self. Man's life in this world can be carried out only when it is connected with the eternal life, and his central life is faith or hope which is not outer but inner in character. The aesthetic person lives in moments, the ethical person in time and the religious person in the expectation of eternity. The third mentioned person is not satisfied with human sincerity and seeks after more internal seriousness than that. According to Kierkegaard, these three stages of existence do not develop by themselves naturally or necessarily; they can be crossed only through decisions and a leap of faith. At the time of the leap of faith from the ethical to the religious stage, paradoxical faith emerges through which men should believe what they can not understand with reason. For instance, in discussing the faith of Abraham who was ordered by God to offer his only son Isaac, Kierkegaard says: "Abraham was great ... by the power in which powerlessness was strength, by the wisdom in which stupidity was the secret and by the hope in which madness was its figure." (Fear and Trembling). Since faith includes strife such as this, he called the process for overcoming sin by this strife the paradoxical dialectic. Within Kierkegaard's theory of existence, various questions are left unsolved. Did God create man only as an individual who must continue to repent of his sin before God? What is the full meaning of the dialectical process of existence by which man is gradually elevated from the aesthetic to the ethical and then the religious stage? Why does the so-called paradox of faith occur? (ii) Nietzsche's Superman Thought Kierkegaard tried to regain the lost self by striving against sin and by self-extinction before God. On the contrary, Nietzsche (1884-1900) thought God was dead and tried to escape from the "leveling" of human beings by accepting destiny and fate subjectively and positively.
lxvii He was born in Germany, the son of a Protestant Minister, and was given a Christian education in his early youth. But when he grew up, he deplored the "miniaturization of human beings that was intensifying more and more in Europe." He regarded it as his task to reject this bad tendency and create a "great" type of human being. While Kierkegaard thought that the "leveling" or "miniaturization" resulted from the fact that people were not yet true Christians, Nietzsche thought that the Christian view on life itself brought about this miniaturization. Thus he came to think that it was his life-long philosophical mission to criticize and overcome Christianity. According to Nietzsche, the characteristic of the Christian view of man is that it regards man as the intermediate being between God and animals. Christians think that God, who is in the highest position in the order of God-man-animal (nature), is absolute and infinite. Christians think that the differences between men are mere trifles, and they reach the conclusion that everyone is "equal before God." But Nietzsche asserts that not the "common people" but only excellent, intellectually powerful men create the culture of mankind. The Christian ethic advocating "equality before God" was given its driving power by the revolt against the strong by the weak who try to "destroy the strong." Since the Christian principles of world order make human beings common and featureless, we must proclaim that the God who is at the top of this order is dead. Thus he declares that God is dead. After the death of God, the world for the first time loses transcendental principles and is totally governed by its own intrinsic principles. This loss of the transcendental principles brings about a loss of meaning and purpose in this world, and results in a loss of ground, or nothingness (nihilism). There is no longer a God who teaches us what we should do., so "there is nothing true and anything is allowed." Only the desire "I wish" remains. From here starts Nietzsche's philosophy of "will to power" (Wille zur Macht). If God is removed from His position at the top of the Christian order, it is natural that the position of nature (animals) which was at the bottom of the order is also changed. According to the Christian moral view, with its order of God-man-animals, whatever is near to God is regarded as good and whatever is near to animals e.g. selfish desire, sexual desire and appetite are regarded as evil; while whatever is farther from animals or nearer to selflessness or generosity are regarded as morally high. Nietzsche asserts that the Christian moral view is against nature, and that the three human desires follow the natural direction of humanity and life itself. Such an unnatural moral view was established because it regards nature as the bottom of the order. Now that God is dead, however, it is not necessary to deny nature or to regard it as evil. Thus Nietzsche says that what is useful for the enlargement and development of life is the true morality and advocates "morality as nature" in place of Christian morals. But he does not recommend licentiousness to us, for instance, because unlimited licentiousness does not always contribute to the development of life. On the contrary, talented artists and scholars remain chaste because it is more economical and hygienic, but we should not remain chaste from an ascetic standpoint. In the case of Nietzsche, life (Leben) serves as substitute for God. Thus God who was on top of the order God-man-animal is completely cut off. Then what must happen to recover order? Since God is lost, man himself must stand at the summit. Thus Nietzsche develops the concept of a "superman" (ubermensch) standing at the top of the order. According to Nietzsche, men are classified as "superman" and "the last man" (der letszte Mensch) by their basic differences of values and abilities. The superman is the ideal being, who elevates himself continuously and eternally; he is beyond good and evil. Like God, he gives orders to the people, and the latter should follow him. However, today's human being is an intermediate being between the ideal superman and animals. Without denying or escaping reality, man must heartily try to transcend himself to
lxviii become superman. By asserting this theory, Nietzsche wished to overcome the crisis of human miniaturization. Moreover, he says, showing the ground supporting the world without God, "Everything goes, everything comes back; eternally rolls the wheel of being." (Also Sprach Zarathustra). That is, he develops the doctrine of eternal recurrence (ewige Wiederkunft), that there is no future life nor world after death; there is only momentary fulfillment in this world (earthly world). He asserts that man must look at reality as it is, without escaping from it. He should "affirm without deducting, finding exceptions or selecting." In short, Nietzsche advocated an absolute affirmation of life, that is, love of fate (amor fati). His thought came to be used later as the theoretical ground for Nazism, though this was quite against his intention. Nietzsche's thought has some significance, but some of his assertions are very problematic. For instance, he asserted that the desires of life should be the center of morality, and that we should ignore God and the Sung Sang desires for truth, good and beauty. He asserted the love of fate and this leads to the conclusion that reality should indiscriminately be affirmed. These assertions can not but be a great problem. (iii) Jaspers' Limit Situation Jaspers (1893-1969) was influenced by Kierkegaard and Nietzsche and yet established his own unique philosophical system making use of his experiences in the fields of psychiatry and psychology which had been his major fields of study. Jaspers thought of man as a possible existence which is always linked to the situations around him. These situations mean, in short, the realities in which man (subject) takes a broad interest. When a situation has grown as bad as it can, Jaspers calls this situation a limit situation. Take the examples of death (Tod), trouble (Lerden), strife (Kamph), the guilt of sin (Schuld), etc. These are like walls against which man as a possible existence will inevitably collide. Man can change or avoid other situations but these situations are the basic realms which man can not avoid nor escape in the least. The self which is clarified in such limit situations is Jaspers' existence. "To experience the limit situations and to exist are one and the same." (Philosophy) He further asserts that the limit situations can not be objectively grasped from outside; they can only be known through self-consciousness from the inside. The existence of self is deeply understood not by avoiding the limit situations but rather by deciding to patiently remain in the situations. In these limit situations, intelligence, rational thinking or proof are of no use. Man feels as if the ground on which he stands has gone out from under him, and he feels giddy. At that moment, a comprehensive Absolute is perceived in this limit where all thinking has been deadlocked. The Transcendental expresses itself in the "cipher (chiffre) of frustration." When what can be thought of (objective world being and subjective self being) is transcended heading toward what can not be thought of, the tie of the Existence with the Transcendental (God) is suddenly seen and understood. At that point, the Transcendental appears only as a cipher. According to Jaspers, the most serious experience of mankind is written in cipher letters in metaphysics and in the history of religion. Metaphysics is the "deciphering" (chiffrelesen) of the manifestation of the Transcendental being. This cipher can not be read by ordinary people. Only those who have sought after standards with great resolution and who have experienced true frustration can read it. (iv) "Ex-sistence" of Heidegger Heidegger (1889- ) who is as great a philosopher as Jaspers, was born in a village named Meskirch in southern Germany. He took a deep interest in the spiritual history of the Middle Ages when he was Catholic and later thought that the basic problem of philosophy was to clarify the meaning of "Being." He made this his central issue.
lxix According to Heidegger, Being is beyond an ens (one who is being) and we can not grasp Being by seeking after an ens externally through rational categories. However, men have thought that they could grasp Being by that method, and have controlled nature externally through natural science. As a result, man has lost his home. Thus Heidegger's criticism of modern rationalism is very sharp. Then, how can we grasp Being? We can grasp it in the same way we interpret a book; by interpreting it from the inside of the experience (phenomenon) of an ens called man (Heidegger calls this Dasein). It is in a Dasein that the Sein (Being) of an ens (one who is being) can be understood, from the inside. However, it is not ordinary man (Das Mann) who is only interested in superficial things, but it is Dasein who clarifies Being by seeking after death and decision. This Dasein is generally within Alltaglichkett (the everyday world) and can spend his daily life without being conscious of the problem of thoroughly examining his own essence. Into such an everydayness, Dasein is fatally thrown out (Gewofenheit) against his will like a die as In-der-Weltsein (being-in- theworld) and he falls to become an ordinary man. According to Heidegger, Das Mann is an anonymous one, who is totally conformed to the public, and has no self. When he has become man, Dasein succumbs and is alienated from himself. In other words, he is left floating without a root. To be thrown out like a die (Geworfenheit) is not the original form of Dasein; if we become conscious of Geworfenheit, we come to feel anxiety (Angst) or dread at having lost ourselves. However, this anxiety gives, at the same time, the possibility to come back to one's original self. Thus Dasein is not only in a state of having been thrown out (Geworfenhel't) to become a being-in-theworld but he is also in a state of projecting his self to become his original self again (Entwerfenheit). The double character of Dasein is called by Heidegger concern (Sorge). Being (Sein) expresses itself as concern in Dasein. How is Entwerfenheit, the projection of one's self toward the original self, possible? At first Dasein exists as what was thrown out. Therefore, his being lies in the throwing. The fact that Da (there) appears, means that Being sends its self. Human beings accept Da where the light of truth sent by Being shines, in the form of care (Besorge) or concern (Sorge). In this context, a human being is one who expresses Da (there) where the light of Being shines, one who watches Being, or the shepherd-boy of Being. So long as human being does not watch the light of Da, Being leaves him though it stands near him. Thus Heidegger thinks that Being is what emits light in Dasein or what addresses man. However, it shines, gives and addresses only as long as human being has interest. Otherwise, it keeps silent. "Being gives itself and at the same time refuses to give itself. Being talks about itself and at the same time does not talk about itself." The address of Dasein itself, which tries to move man toward the light of Being is called conscience (Gewissen) by Heidegger. The voice of conscience is the voice without a voice which can be heard only by oneself, and it is the voice of the original self which awakens the everyday average self buried within man to the proper self. By listening to the voice of conscience, human being moves out of man to stand in the light of Being. This is Ex-sistence. Heidegger tries to solve the human distress in this Ex-sistence (to stand in the light of Being or to start toward the truth of Being) and also tries to give this the same significance as the existence Kierkegaard and Jaspers advocate. (v) Subjectivity of Sartre Sartre (1905- ), established his unique, thoroughly atheistic philosophical theory of "engagement" by adding his experience of the fight against Nazism during the Second World War to the traditional concepts of existentialism created by Jaspers and Heidegger.
lxx Dostoevski once said: "If God does not exist, anything is possible." It is said that here lies the starting point of Sartre's philosophy. While his forerunner, Heidegger, only ignored the existence of God, like Nietzsche, Sartre thoroughly denies God, and has established his existentialism on the premise that God does not exist. With atheism as his premise, he characterizes existence in the following two ways: First, existence precedes essence. This is not true in relation to ordinary artificial products, such as a knife for instance. Before the actual product named knife (the existence) is produced, it must have an aim such as "it is to be used for cutting." Otherwise, it would not have appeared on the market. The aim shows what the knife is to be, and in philosophy it is this that is called essence. In these cases it is clear that essence precedes existence. Essence precedes existence in the case of man too, if God has created human beings by His aim of creation. But what happens if there is no God, nor any world of ideas? Then before the existence of the human being there is no essence to decide his nature. It becomes impossible to define what man is. If this is true, we must think that man is originally nothing, that he has come or appeared from nothing, and he has defined himself and given essence to himself, by himself: " . . . at first he is nothing. Only afterwards will he be something, but he himself will have made what he will be." Second, existence is subjective. This is directly introduced in the thesis that " . . . he himself will have made what he will be." That is, man plans and selects his own way. Whether he becomes A or B, communist or liberalist, politician or minister of religion, all these depend on his free determination. According to Sartre, this determination, namely subjectivity, is the very essence of existence. Thus man can freely choose himself. But once he has chosen, he must be responsible for his choice. He is responsible for the way or individuality he has selected. Moreover, in choosing the way peculiar to himself, a man is also choosing it as the way suitable for other people too. Thus, he must be responsible to all of mankind in his choice. But this is beyond human ability, so he experiences anxiety, forlornness and despair. Nevertheless man is nothing but what he has made of himself and there is no existence except in action. So a man must decide his actions in spite of his anxiety, forlornness and despair. Sartre asserts that only when man acts through such despair, can freedom come to him. (vi) Summary For the convenience of the readers, we are now going to summarize these five thinkers' assertions. Kierkegaard's existence is the developmental process from the consciousness of self-loss to the recovery of original self by a subjective determination of faith. For this purpose, he says that man must give up being unspecific "public" and stand before God as an individual. Neitzsche thought it was the Christian view of the order of God-man-animal (nature) and also the view of the average man, which regards everyone as equal before God, that was gradually miniaturizing people in Europe. In order to overcome this bad tendency, Neitzsche asserts that we must declare the death of God, establish the view of natural morality which regards whatever develops life as good, and set up the superman in place of God. Jaspers' existence is the self facing the Transcendental (God) which is understood from within the experience of frustration when man, ready to accept destruction, courageously faces the limit situations such as death, trouble, strife and guilt, which no one can avoid. In the case of Heidegger, human being (Dasein) usually exists within the everyday world and was thrown into this world as a being-in-the-world (In-der-Welt-sein). Consciousness of this brings about anxiety and the voice of conscience shouting "you must return to the original self." It is Ex-sistence (same as existence
lxxi in meaning) to listen to the voice of conscience in order to escape from unspecific man and to come before the light of Being. Lastly, in the case of Sartre's writings, there is no essence or God that decides man beforehand, so man appears as existence, but from nothing; and after he has appeared, he decides his essence himself. Therefore, man can freely plan and select his own way by his own responsibility. However, as he does not have the strength to bear this responsibility, he has to carry out these decisions through his anxiety and despair. The subjectivity which carries out these decisions is existence itself. 2. The Critique Of Each Existentialist Philosophy And View Of Humanity (i) Critique of Kierkegaard First, why have human beings been dealt with as abstract, unindividual "public"? Why must man be an individual to truly stand before God? Is it good that the non-individual, universal aspect of human beings be ignored? These problems remain unsolved by Kierkegaard. From the viewpoint of Unification Thought, human beings have frequently been dealt with as "public" because man's Divinity was lost by the Fall; man's Individual Images have been ignored, and only man's biological aspects and twisted original Sung Sang aspects have been considered. Actually it was in order to restore man to the position of God's substantial object as an individual truth body that Kierkegaard tried to advance man toward God by man himself, as an individual. But, since the Individual Image or substantial object can not exist without the Universal Image. and since the whole of history is the history to restore the individual person, a man can advance toward God through gradually inheriting the baton of efforts of selfrestoration from respective predecessors through history. So he who advances toward God is a cooperator in the restoration and thereby possesses a universal aspect, and he is thus not a mere individual. Next, why does man come to God through the aesthetic, ethical and then religious stages? Because the providence of God's salvation is the providence of restoration through indemnity (Tang gam), that is, to let man, who has lost his value through the fall, regain it through a course which reverses that of the fall. The fall occurred due to the fact that man did not fulfill his responsibility for growth. It is necessary, therefore, to fulfill this responsibility by subjective determination in order to return to the original self through indemnity. Throughout this course, man must be exposed to uneasiness, despair or suffering. Also, since the fall occurred due to lack of faith in God's word, man is asked to compensate for this by believing unconditionally. But this belief must not be a superstition. It is for this reason that the paradox of faith or paradoxical dialectic appears. But such a paradoxical faith is requested only until the Second Advent. Starting from the Second Advent, faith stands on the base of the new words of God; therefore it is no longer paradoxical, because the absolute truth is revealed by the new words. Thus faith until eternity is not necessary. After having restored the original self and the world completely, through the Second Advent, we will not need faith nor prayer Finally, why does a man like Kierkegaard who wants to live with true faith always suffer from sin and why must he continuously repent of sin? It is because Christ's salvation through the crucifixion is only a spiritual one and the salvation of our bodies has not yet been carried out. However, when Christ appears again (Second Advent) to accomplish both the spiritual and physical salvation, man will be able to return to his complete personality. Then we will not need to repent, and Heaven on Earth or the Heaven of the afterlife where there is only great joy, will appear, 64 ... and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain . . . " (Revelation 21:4). (ii) Critique of Nietzsche According to Nietzsche, the Christian view of the order of God-man-animal, and its view that everyone is equal before God brings about the miniaturization of the human being. Viewed from Unification Thought, however, the main reasons for the miniaturization of man are that, as already stated, the true fulfillment of individuality has not yet been realized due to the fall of man, and that
lxxii man has not yet awakened to his Original Nature. To escape from the present miserable situation, there is no other way than to come to God through the principle of restoration through indemnity and finally to have faith in and accept the Messiah. However, the Christian view of "equality before God" is apt to ignore the order of positions necessary to realize family love. The view ignores differences of individuality, and even the differences of contributions toward the community, and thus falls into an anarchic, mobocratic blind equality. Also, Christian ethics make so much of the spirit that they one-sidedly regard physical desires as evil, and thus think that the farther a man is from bodily desires, the more moral he is; in short, Christianity is apt to fall into agnostic despise of the body or Stoicism. Nietzsche sharply criticized these two points, and his criticisms are worth listening to. As to the first, true equality does not mean to ignore all the individual differences, because these differences come from the Individual Images in the Original Being. Equality should be considered from the standpoint of Divinity such as equality in Heart, value, personality, loving and being loved. If the order of the positions in the Four Position Base were not maintained, it would be impossible to love. Individuality should be respected and should not be leveled. In the fallen world, however, the Divinity is usually so twisted or ignored, that the miniaturization and leveling of human beings are apt to appear. Accordingly the miniaturization is not due to belief in God but rather due to a lack of belief in the true God. The God denied by Nietzsche was not the true God, but a false god. As to the second point, the Sung Sang (spiritual aspect) and Hyung Sang (physical aspect) perform giveand-take with each other, centering on God, with the Sung Sang as subject; then the individual is fulfilled. Therefore, as long as the Sung Sang aspect is subject and can control the Hyung Sang, the physical desires, such as appetite and sexual desire, can be as large as possible. It is by these bodily desires that God's purposes of creation (the three great blessings [". . . Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it. . . " -Gen. 1: 281 ) are accomplished, and heaven and earth become full of joy. However, if the physical desires become so large that the spiritual desires wither, spiritual communication (the give-andtake relation of love and beauty) will be destroyed, and the growth of the spiritual body, which is the raison detre of the physical body, will not occur. It is only for this reason that we are advised to restrict our bodily desires. Thus Nietzsche's criticism is constructive in some points. But his ideas-that just because Christian morals are apt to bring about a leveling or miniaturization of man we should oppose the positioning of God, man, and things (animals, nature); that we should declare the death of God, and establish "nature as morality"; that we should "regard the development of natural life as good", and should set up superman in place of God-are all wrong ideas and quite contrary to the true solution. First, the positioning of God, man and things is the basis of order necessary to establish the one united world centering on the love of God. Without order neither peace nor freedom can exist, and without the relative positions of subject and object, love can not exist. Moreover, if the existence of God who is the center of love and life is denied, there will be no providence of salvation, and man must suffer forever due to this lack of a center and the exhaustion of love which will necessarily take place.
The worship of natural life as the necessary conclusion of such ideas (Nietzsche respects animality rather than moderate virtue, passion rather than reason, the will to power rather than ideas, and he asserts that man should sacrifice God for nothing), and the establishment of the superman shows that, since there was nothing which could be depended on after the denial of God, Nietzsche was compelled to worship man's physical body, beautified and sanctified, in place of God. Such being Nietzsche's assertion, the spiritual (Sung Sang) values of truth, goodness and beauty were subjugated by the will to power and animality, and the existence of the spiritual body which was the basis of man's eternal life was also denied. As a result, the way of salvation leading to eternal life was completely closed, and man was left to suffer eternally in a mere animalistic life. We must say that in
lxxiii ridding himself of God, the price Nietzsche paid to escape human miniaturization is too large. Despair and contradiction are exposed in his doctrines of eternal recurrence (ewige Wiedevkunft) and love of fate (amor fati). Man wishes to elevate himself infinitely but can not help admitting that this is impossible in a world without God. Thus while seeing his expectations always disappointed, man must accept the situation as it is. He can resolve his fate only by loving fate subjectively. This is really miserable. In reality, the Original Nature of man is that he is a being with the Divine Image in which the spirit body and physical body or spirit and body perform G-T action centering around the love of God. In spite of this, Nietzsche denies the existence of God and the spiritual body, and regards man as his physical body alone and sanctifies this as superman, ignoring the fact that man consists of both spiritual and physical bodies. He thinks that superman is the final goal for us to reach, with the result that everything becomes empty and results in frustration, because in reality the superman is a pseudoman and a false image. This is the critique of Nietzsche's thought by Unification Thought. (iii) Critique of Jaspers Jaspers' statement concerning the process of the clarification of existence (Existenzerhellung) in the limit situation seems to be almost correct. However, why is man pushed into such limit situations and why does he meet the Transcendental after suffering and frustration? The fundamental reasons for these occurrences are not clarified by Jaspers. Viewed from the Unification Principle, Jaspers' "limit situations" are the "indemnity conditions" necessary to restore the original state. God kindly gives them to fallen man in order to give him a chance to atone for his own sins or those of his relatives, and in this way to restore his lost value. Man's sudden encounter with "God after going through such a trial" means that he has approached, in proportion to his atonement, his original seat, namely his position as the child of God. The "cipher of frustration" is the aspect of God which is recorded in such things as history, mythology, philosophy, literature, music, etc. Nature is also part of the cipher and to decipher it (Chiffrelesen) means to see the Divine Image manifesting in the appearance. To see this is to connect with God. Yet one's true self can not be restored in this stage. With this experience as a clue, we must further approach God's inner seat guided by His holy words, inherit the Heart of God and become true children of God. For this purpose we must find a good guide who can make this possible for us. It is very important to know who such a guide can be. This is the view of Unification Thought concerning Jaspers' philosophy. (iv) Critique of Heidegger Heidegger made a distinction between Being and an ens (one who is being). He dealt with the Being (status of existence) of the an ens (Sein des Seiendes). This can be said to be an advancement in ontology, because his concept of Being almost corresponds to that of the Yang Sang (Status Image) of the existing being of Unification Thought. But according to Heidegger, Being can never be grasped by externally analyzing one who is being (an ens) through the rational category. Then what is Being? Heidegger did not clarify the Being (sein) of all things, including all human beings. He dealt mainly with the Being (sein) of the special human being namely Dasein. Furthermore he dealt only with Being as "being-in-the-world" (In-der-Welt-sein), and not the basic principle of being of general man. He considered man's state of being as anxiety (Angst) and concern (Sorge). But the cause of anxiety and the essence of concern are not clarified enough. He said that there is no cause for anxiety, man just exists in it. From the view of Unification Principle human beings are anxious due to the loss of their original position by the fall. Therefore men are uneasy either consciously or unconsciously. But according to Heidegger, anxiety stems from concern (Sorge). Human beings have their concern not only for others and nature but also for the past, present and future. Then what is the essence of concern? It seems to have not yet been clarified. He also says that having been thrown into the world (In-der-Welt-sein), human beings try to project (entwerfen) toward the future. Here, however, the relation between concern and the project
lxxiv do not seem to be made clear. According to the Unification Principle all things including society are the objects of recognition and dominion of human beings. Since human beings are connected bodies as well as individual truth bodies, originally man can not but be the "being-in-the-world." Accordingly, in order to have cognition, he has to have concern for nature and society, and in order to have dominion he has to act (practice). The project (Entwurf) of Heidegger corresponds to this very practice. But because of the fall of man the "being-in-the-world" (In-der-Welt-sein) has become anxious, and due to losing his purpose of creation by the fall, his practice has changed into projects for his own sake. Next, Heidegger explains about the historicity of time (historic time) from the fact of concern and project, but he also does not make it clear why historic time is necessary for man, while animals have only biological time. According to the Unification Thought, since the position of man and that of animals are quite different, in other words, since man is the subject of dominion and the substantial object of God, while animals are only the objects of man, the ideal of man is to establish the Heavenly Kingdom on Earth, after achieving the three blessings of God. This time required to realize the ideal is historical time. On account of the fall, the historical time has been formed by the providence of restoration and the efforts of human beings to realize a society of prosperity. Finally, he talked about the relation of conscience (Gewissen) and Being. According to him, when a man follows his inner voice of conscience, he can return to his original self from the daily self (Ex-sistence) and can stand in the light of Being. But within Heidegger's philosophy it has not been clarified what the standard of conscience is. We know well that the standard of conscience of communists and of liberalists are quite different. With this ambiguity around the concept of conscience, we can not expect to prevent the confusion of the world, and the suffering of human beings can not help but remain. According to the Unification Principle, however, there is another part of the mind called the Original Mind which is more fundamental than conscience. Its standard is God; so this standard is common to all people. Accordingly, if the direction of conscience coincides with that of the Original Mind, God becomes the subject of conscience, and all people can stand together in the light of Being without contradicting each other. Thus, we can see that though Heidegger tries to establish his ontology without any relation to God, it is impossible to understand the true meaning of his Being if the existence of God is ignored. (v) Critique of Sartre Sartre says that man appears from nothing and that there is no God to decide man's existence. However, how can such complicated organic structures as the human mind and body grow from nothing, with no plan? We think Sartre's view that man freely plans and selects his way of living has some truth in it, but it is a rather one-sided view. The Unification Principle teaches us; However, man is created to attain his perfection not only through the dominion and autonomy of the Principle itself, but also by accomplishing his own portion of responsibility in passing through this period. (Divine Principle, p. 55) In other words, man is originally the "Image of God", or child of God so that, unlike things, man's existence is not entirely decided beforehand, and he can freely create himself toward perfection using his God-given natures or qualities, so long as he does not violate the Principle. In relation to this point, it seems to us that Sartre misunderstands the true intention of God. It seems that he advocates atheism because if God exists and if man lives only in accordance with God's will, man will have no freedom and will accordingly lose his uniqueness or subjectivity, that is, his existence. According to our understanding, however, God originally created man as a free being similar to God himself and ordered man to follow the Principle, which is the very basis of freedom. He ordered man to maintain his
lxxv freedom just as the Bible says, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." (Genesis 3:1617) (The result in case of a violation of the Principle was a warning of the loss of freedom.) If this is true, it is God's intention that man freely plan and select his ways within the Principle by his own responsibility; originally there was no contradiction between following God's will and subjectivity, and living freely. At present, however, it is also true that man has no such freedom as this. Why does he not have freedom? Because he has lost the absolute center of Heart and Logos called God, and thus does not have a broad or deep enough heart to love everyone equally. There is also no true creativity, nor norm to give direction to man's heart. However, man has the desire (true mind) to perfect himself, to establish a home full of love, and to have dominion over all things. These desires are based on his Original Nature. Thus he naturally seeks after freedom and subjectivity as the premises to fulfill the desires. But it is impossible to find such freedom and subjectivity by casting oneself (projecting) toward a denial of God, as Sartre does. To do so is to oppose man's own subjective nature (plus) to God's subjective nature (plus). The two pluses repel each other so that a give-and-take action can not take place there. As a result, man is left alone, alienated from God; all that he can then do is to express a subjectivity which is only comparatively higher than what animals have. In addition, since men can not help repelling each other in order to guard their own subjectivity, struggles would continue forever in society. True subjectivity can be established not by opposing one's self to God but by making oneself a complete object (minus) to God. If we seek after God and follow God quite faithfully, we can communicate with God completely and become one with God. As a result, we can fully express our subjectivity toward things. Before man becomes a subject, he should be an object to God. True subjectivity can be obtained by true objectivity. We must be able to become objects willingly, not only in relation to God, but also in relation to others, if necessary. This is the view of the Unification Principle. Such being the case, the "subjectivity" which Sartre defines as the essence of existence is nothing but lifeless, groundless, fallen subjectivity; as Sartre himself notices, man necessarily falls into anxiety, forlornness or despair and can never find true freedom or liberty. When we give up such a small subjectivity and become nothing or a complete object before God, our true subjectivity will appear for the first time. These previous sections are the critique of Existentialism from the standpoint of the Unification Principle. Chapter 1 - Theory of the Original Human Nature (part 2) Section D - The Original Human Nature Viewed from the Unification Principle In Section C, we criticized the Existentialists' views of the Original Human Nature (views of existence). Here in section D, we are going to explain en bloc and systematically the Original Nature viewed from the Unification Principle, which we referred to in bits and pieces in the previous section. 1. Being With Divine Image a. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (Perfectness) Sung Sang is Subject, Hyung Sang Object According to the Unification Principle, man was originally a being modeled after God's Image (Genesis 1:27). That is to say, he contains the polarities of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang which are similar to God's polarities. This aspect is shown in the duality of the spirit man (Sung Sang) and the physical man (Hyung Sang), and the relations between the mind (Sung Sang) and body (Hyung Sang), or the spirit mind (Sung Sang) and the physical mind (Hyung Sang). These parts have a subject and object relationship between them and maintain their motion through the give-and-take action.
lxxvi Most important in the give-and-take action is that the parts maintain their respective positions. For instance, the subject should maintain the position of subject, and the object that of object, or the action will be destroyed by losing its order
Fig. 19 The Give-and-Take Action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Human Being Then, what are their right positions? The human mind is the union created by the give-and-take action between the spirit mind of the spirit man and the physical mind of the physical man. The spirit mind is the Sung Sang part of mind and the location of the value-seeking desires which seek out the values of truth, goodness and beauty in things and try to accomplish man's own individuality and love using these values. The spirit mind is also the location of the value realizing desires which seek to realize the values of truth, goodness and beauty in man's life in order to receive the love of God. On the other hand, the physical mind is the part of the mind where the instincts for maintaining the individual and tribe are controlled and where man's interest in his daily life or sex are located. The ideal function of the mind is to head in the direction of God with the spirit mind as subject and the physical mind as object. The mind carrying out such a give-and-take action normally, is called the Original Mind. This Original Mind always emphasizes love and regards the whole of life (life of food, clothing, and shelter) as a means for realizing love. If an issue conflicts with the purpose of love, it is left until later on. True love is concerned with the whole and takes care of it so that love benefits the whole. If the human mind continues to operate always emphasizing love, no contradiction or strife will occur in our lives, and we will be able to live a happy life at any time. The Unification Principle regards this aspect of man as the first of the Divine Images. When the spirit mind as subject and the physical mind as object continue to perform give-and-take action with each other maintaining their respective positions, this is called perfection. The first aim of education is for man's mind to reach such perfection. However, since man is fallen, having left God, the normal relationship with the spirit mind as subject and the physical mind as object is apt in reality to become abnormal (though the two minds often idealistically try to maintain the normal relation). It is also ideal if the spirit mind and physical mind are always resonant with each other, understanding clearly what happens within each of them. Because of the fall of man, however, this resonance often becomes weak or hardly takes place and man can not understand what he is or should be.
lxxvii b. Positivity and Negativity (multiplication and norm) The Combination of Man and Woman is the Complete Whole "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." (Genesis 1:27) That is, God has both the natures of masculinity and femininity (positivity and negativity) while mankind is divided into men with positivity, and women with negativity. This shows that no person can be a complete whole (one) as long as he or she is single because both man and woman are only parts of wholes. They are made such that they become complete only by the union which occurs through their mutual give-and-take. The union of man and woman, through the give-and-take action is indeed an event of cosmic scale. God created this large cosmos, but the creation will be completed through the creation of man, when he reaches perfection as the lord of the whole cosmos. As stated in "Epistemology", man is composed of substantial body holding both the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of all things in the cosmos. According to this meaning, man is a great being, equal not to other individual beings but to the whole cosmos itself. Moreover, since man is the subject, and the cosmos his object, he is originally higher in value than the whole cosmos. Since both positivity and negativity are in man there are also positivity and negativity in the cosmos. Man is the encapsulation of all the positive and subjective things in the cosmos; he corresponds to totality of the positive parts in the cosmos and is their representative. On the other hand, woman is the encapsulation of all the negative and objective things in the cosmos and represents them. Accordingly, the union of man and woman means the completion of the subject of the cosmos and is the completion of the creation of the cosmos. Originally the union of man and woman had such a cosmic significance. To our regret, however, because of the fall of man the union of man and woman now has no relation to the creation of the cosmos, and thus the creation remains unfinished. From this stems the necessity of recreation (the providence of restoration). This cosmic significance applies not only to the original union of man and woman, but the birth of the children and the formation of the family as the results of this union also have very important significance, for it constitutes the establishment of the Four Position Foundation among family members. This is the base for all love and order; only if the relationships among family members are smooth, will there appear a world full of love and joy without any contradictions or oppositions. This can happen by applying the family relation to the society and nation. Therefore, we regard the complete union of man and woman and the family Four Position Foundation, that is, the harmony of positivity and negativity, as the second of the Divine Images. The Logos is concerned with this harmony of positivity and negativity; therefore a norm is necessary in their harmony. This norm becomes the second goal of education in the Principle. c. Individual Image in God Individuality Comes from God Another important Divine Image within man's Original Nature is his individuality which comes from the Individual Image in God.
lxxviii People are apt to think that God is only a universal being and nothing more. Actually, however, God has limitless Individual Images as well as the Universal Image. These Individual Images are another important characteristic of God. The concrete expressions of God's Individual Images are the individuality of each man. Every man has his own peculiar nature; no man is ever the same as any other man. That is, the individuality of a human being, who is the object of God, is similar to an Individual Image of God, who is subject. By this similarity, God finds a unique joy in each particular man and thus each man's individuality must be respected fully since it is an expression of God's nature. This is also the reason the individuality of an artist or critic must be expressed fully in the creation or appreciation of a work of art. Totalitarianism or communism is apt to ignore or standardize man's individuality, but to do so is to debase the Divine Character. 2. Being In Position a. Being with Object Position Man Needs a Subject According to the Unification Principle, man was created as the substantial object of God and is the being created to give pleasure to God. Since this is the purpose of God's creation, every man has the desire to express his value toward beings of a broader scope. This is the value-realizing desire, and if viewed from the perspective of purpose, it is the purpose for the whole. Man must be an object before he is a subject, for he will not be able to become a subject if he does not serve God as an object in order to receive love (life) from God. When love is poured out by the subject, then for the first time man finds his life worth living, and he acquires the power to love as a subject himself, as well as the knowledge of how to love. Therefore, a wise man thinks it worthless to live only for his private purposes without any connection by Heart to broader level beings. He eagerly seeks after the true subject to whom he can devote himself; he does not want to live for himself but wants to dedicate himself to the greater whole and express his value by doing so. Originally every man wants to find such an absolute subject, but since the fall, he has not known his true subject nor how to return to that subject (God). Man suffers because he does not know what his Original Nature is seeking for, nor for whom he should live. This is the motive which brings a man to believe in religion Man often gives up his own life with pleasure for justice, for his nation, country or mankind. justice is the practice of love, and thus love is more than life. It is beyond the individual man, and so is universal and belongs to God. However, since man often does not know the true subject whom he should serve, he is apt to think wrongly that the ruler of his land is the true subject. One wrong example is the case of communists who loyally serve their dictator and party. At any rate, it can be seen that even those who deny religion have a strong desire for religious devotion. From this fact we can see that man is originally the object of God and that his Original Nature is to give up even his life for the subject. Therefore, we must know the true subject we have lost, and then return to it. b. Being with Subject Position-Dominion Things Exist for Man's Pleasure
lxxix As stated above, man is the object to God. At the same time, however, he is, through union with God, the subject of all things and should be the physical representative of God himself. As man exists for the pleasure of God, so things exist for the pleasure of man, who is their subject. Therefore, things that express their beauty fully for man will feel sorrowful if man does not accept them with joy, just as a child who eagerly tries to express his value will feel sorrowful if his parents are indifferent to him. Behind things, for instance behind a tree, there lies the creative Heart of God who has made the tree. So if the Original Nature of man has been developed, and if his mind is open to God, he will surely feel pleasure in seeing the tree. Man is the Subject of Love to Govern Things Also, the world of things is harmonized and completed only by receiving the dominion of love from man who is the leading spirit in the world. If the original dominion of man truly comes about, the disharmony of things and even the phenomenon of the "stronger preying upon the weaker" will disappear. The Bible also has a prophecy concerning this. The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf and the lion and the fading together, and a little child shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall feed; their young shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. The sucking child shall play over the hate of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea. (Isaiah 11:6-9) If man is perfect in love (Heart) and guides all things by love, the strife between men will disappear, because it is useless. However in actuality, man, who should govern all things, left his position as subject and carries out bloody warfare. As a result, "We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now;" (Romans 8:22) "For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God." (Romans 8:19) Therefore, man must restore his true subject position over things, that is, take dominion over them by regaining his object position to God. [Note: In this world there is a phenomenon of animals preying on one another which is regarded as strife. For example, some plants become food for animals, and in the sea many small fish are preyed upon by large fish. But these phenomepa can not be called struggle. Rather they are a phenomena of service in the order of the world. All created beings are connected bodies with dual purposes. This means that there are things of lower value and of higher value in the created world. Lower value beings can sometimes fulfill their purpose for the whole by becoming food for higher value beings. This is not strife but a synthesis of value or increase of it. In other words, this is a kind of service to the whole.] c. Being with an Intermediary Position Man Is the Center of Cosmic Harmony Lastly, this created world consists of not only the natural world known to us by the five physical senses (visible world) but also the so-called spirit world known to us by the five spiritual senses (invisible world). According to the Bible and the Unification Principle, man enters this invisible world after his physical body is destroyed and will live there forever. This invisible world is sometimes called "heaven" and the visible world "cosmos"; and the combination of the two are called the "heavenly cosmos." Man exists in both worlds and is the only being with such an existence. Man's physical body is created to be the composite of the material world and to have dominion over this world. On the other hand, man's spirit body is created to be the composite of the invisible world and to have dominion over it. Therefore if the spirit man and physical man communicate with each other centering on God, the two worlds will
lxxx become resonant, and communicate and harmonize with each other. Thus man is said to be the mediator between heaven and the cosmos and the center of harmony between the two. If communication and union between the two worlds are carried out, the spirit men already in the spirit world will be able to help the men in this world and join in the life on this earth. When give-and-take action between the two worlds occurs fully through human beings with physical bodies, a world full of freedom, peace and joy will appear. 3. Being With Divine Image a. Being with Heart Heart and Love According to the Unification Principle, man is originally a being with Heart who can inherit God's Heart as God's child. In Unification Thought, Heart is the concept which means the internal cause of love, and love is the concept meaning what is expressed as a result or what comes from the Heart. Heart lies deep in man's mind; when it moves out, it becomes love. The outward expression of the Heart, which is the internal cause, or more correctly speaking, the force of the feeling (emotion) which begins to move together with will toward the aim established by Heart-this is love. That is, Heart is the starting point of love. Without Heart, love can not appear. And love is the source of life; namely love makes man live. However rich a man may be materially, without love, his life will be lost and the individual, home and community will fall apart. Love is the source of life and makes man what he should be. Without Heart and the love issuing from it, we can not discover the satisfactory solution for any problem. b. Being of Logos (Norm) The World Consists of Logos God is also a being of Logos, and this world was created according to the Logos. Logos consists of reason and law (See "Ontology"). Therefore, nature can not exist without Logos (reason and law). God is the subject of all Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and the Sung Sang of God contains the Logos which is the union of reason and law, centering on Heart (Purpose) which thus forms the Inner Developing Quadruple Base. The expressions of God's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and positivity and negativity are decided by this Logos. Through it order and law appear in nature. Accordingly, man, who has taken on the image of God, is also originally a being of Logos or norm. Like God, man is also originally a free being. As soon as he leaves the Logos, however, oppositions and contradictions appear which give man discomfort and create chaos. Therefore, man should act freely while remaining true to the Logos. If we accurately systematize the Logos of God, we shall find the right thought suitable to the Original Human Nature, and if we act following the right thought, we shall live correctly. c. Being with Creativity Finally, God is the creator of the whole cosmos, and man, similar to God, is given creative power (Creativity). That is to say, man finds life worth living only when he lives a creative life. According to the Unification Thought, when man was created, he was given the same creative power as God's power that created the cosmos. This is Creativity. By this Creativity many inventions and discoveries have been accomplished in order to develop human culture. Moreover, man is always designing, planning, producing, constructing and appreciating new things in his daily life; he carries out creative activities every day.
lxxxi [Note: Strictly speaking, even plants and animals can be said to have creativity. The growth of plants and multiplication of animals may be said to be the creation of new cells or new life. Some birds have the ability to make nests; bees make hives and honeycombs. But these abilities are not the same as the Creativity of man. The Creativity given to man is a reasonable Creativity of Heart, while the ability for growth of plants is autonomy and that of animals is nothing but instinct.] Section E - The Original Nature and Second Nature (i) The Difference between the Original Nature and the Second Nature We have so far explained the Original Human Nature viewed from the Unification Principle. Based on this Original Nature, man develops various second natures according to changes of circumstance. The Original Nature is the true nature held naturally by man, and it does not change in any age or circumstance. On the other hand, the second nature though based on the Original Nature changes to meet the various changes of time and place; this can also be called the acquired nature. We think that while the second nature always changes, the Original Nature itself never changes. For instance, the style of dress which a man likes at a certain time will change at a later time, but the Original Nature which causes man to appreciate beauty will never change throughout eternity. This is the Original Nature viewed from the Unification Principle. (ii) The Communists' View of the Original Nature On the other hand, communists regard love, humanism beyond class, and the desire for freedom as changeable matters produced by circumstances or the social system. They do not think that man has a consistent, unchangeable Original Nature which goes beyond time or age. They do not think that family love (the love of parents, couple, and children) which we regard as the most basic among the Original Human Natures, and the ethical love held among friends and neighbors are unchangeable; they think that such love is an historical product formed under the feudalistic or capitalistic systems and that love is based on class feeling. Therefore, to love one's family and neighbors regardless of class is regarded as betrayal, giving an advantage to the enemy class. It is more important to love the communist party and its leader then to love one's family; there can be no humanism beyond class. One should always strictly distinguish between friends and enemies from the class standpoint. If one pushes the class strife to such a point and changes the living circumstances and system (production relation) fundamentally, then the character of man will also change and a new human being, unique in history-the communist human being-will be formed through the revolution. Is this view of the communists true? The liberalization movements brought about among the young people in the Soviet Union after the death of Stalin are powerful counter-evidence to this view, as is the strong resistance against various attempts to disorganize the family system in the country. It can not be possible that the young people in the Soviet Union, who were born after the establishment of communist power and educated in the communistic method, perfectly separated from capitalistic societies, could have been "polluted" by the remains of the bourgeois attitudes (liberalism, humanism beyond class, thought of family love). Yet liberal movements and assertions of humanism incompatible with communism appear even in the Soviet Union, especially in the field of literature. Do these tendencies not show that the desire for freedom and humanism is based on the unchangeable Original Human Nature? Communists regard love toward parents, brothers and sisters, or children as the dregs of feudalism or as a product of circumstances. Thus they separate very young children from their families, and educate them under special circumstances (e.g. in North Korea). They are trying to create a new type of human being who will love only the communist party and dictators, and who will have no interest in family love.
lxxxii No matter how the circumstances or system may be changed, or what education is given, it is impossible to change the Original Nature of man who has the Divine Image, the Divine Character and a certain position. The Original Human Nature may be oppressed for a time, but it has the strength necessary to reject the pressure, and sooner or later it will revive, because it comes from God. We who believe in God believe firmly in this. Chapter II - Epistemology (part 1) Epistemology is one of the greatest philosophical problems even in modern philosophy. In this chapter, I will suggest the basic ground for the formation of recognition through the critique of the main theories of epistemology of the past, and give answers, from the standpoint of Unification Thought, to various problems of epistemology such as the process of recognition and the causes of its development. Section A - The Meaning of Epistemology and the Process of its Formation (i) The Origin of Epistemology As we have already explained in the chapter on ontology, through a long history of more than several thousand years, many philosophers have taken an interest in the various phenomena of the cosmos and eagerly studied ontological problems such as the origins, meanings, and purposes of these phenomena. In modern times, however, the following questions, which are usually called the problems of epistemology, have come to be considered as the central philosophical questions. That is, can the method of cognition, which is adopted at present, correctly catch the essence or true meaning of the object which is being studied? Can we say that we have enough ability of cognition to catch the true meaning of the world correctly? If not, what is the limit of our cognition? In what cases and on what grounds or rights can we judge that a certain assertion or proposition is true? The reason for this new philosophical tendency is as follows. In the Middle Ages, the Christian theology, originated by Jesus Christ and completed by the Apostles and Fathers, and the philosophies of ancient Greece, made by Plato and Aristotle, were unified by Scholastic philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). This unified theory was believed to be an eternal, absolute authority so much that hardly any worthy thoughts have been developed since then. Influenced by the solid, traditional thought of those days, men saw things with strong preconceptions and did not bring forward new problems from free and creative standpoints. Dissatisfaction with and reconsideration of such theories came suddenly with the dawn of the modern age. For instance in the Middle Ages men would always think about nature in relation to God or it was regarded as the result of an act of God. Thus, in those times, Aristotle's metaphysics, which asserted that the cosmos consists of substance (hyle) and forms (eidos), was respected and esteemed. Following the pattern of this metaphysical philosophy, scholars applied their Scholastic method only to unchangeable substances, the meaning or aim of things; they did not try to pay attention to the concrete movements of nature. It was epistemology that appeared as the criticism or reaction against such a fixed, conventional way of thinking. In short, we may say that the reconsideration of ontology brought about epistemology. (ii) Novum Organum of Francis Bacon It was Novum Organum (1620) written by Francis Bacon of Britain that typically represented the new way of thinking. In this book he summarized as four idols the old traditional prejudices or preconceptions which prevented the acquisition of true knowledge. (1) The Idols of the Tribe ... This is a prejudice common to the race of mankind. For instance, man's intellect is apt to think that nature has more regularities than it really has and that heavenly bodies and their orbits are completely round. These are idols or prejudices.
lxxxiii (2) The Idols of the Cave . . . Prejudices brought about by the tastes or inclinations peculiar to the individual persons. For instance, those who are good at learning often ignore physical education or the arts without correctly evaluating their merits. Or those who are sensitive to economic interests are apt to think that all other people are also sensitive in this way. (3) The Idols of the Market Place ... Idols or prejudices which result from the misusage and the confusion caused either by words which are names of things which do not exist or by words which are names of things that exist but which are vague and confused in their meanings. For instance the concepts such as Fortune, Prime Mover and Element of Fire, were created by false theories and even though they do not actually exist, many people believe them as if they really do. Bacon asserted that in order to avoid these prejudices, words should be confined to those showing the concrete individual things. (4) The Idols of Theater . just as people wrongly think that the stories performed on stage really took place in history, they will hold prejudices by blindly believing various philosophical systems, wrong ethical principles, history, traditions or doctrines. Bacon suggests that one should not be deceived by tricks on the stage but should observe things for oneself without believing other people's words. Thus, the characteristic of modern epistemology in recent philosophical circles is that in order to obtain the right knowledge, people must face the truth directly by rejecting the conventional way of thinking and by observing and experimenting for themselves. Section B - Traditional Epistemology Viewed from the Contents of Cognition Recognition is only possible when there is a subject and object of cognition. In epistemology, in the past however, there was a tendency to place emphasis on either the subject or the object. So let us classify the epistemology of the past according to the viewpoints which more greatly stressed either the subject or the object. 1. Epistemology Emphasizing The Object Only a. From the Viewpoint of the Source of Cognition-Empiricism The Source of Recognition is Experience There is a theory in which the source of cognition is thought to lie solely in the object, that is, in experience. This philosophical view is called empiricism. This way of thinking can be found even in ancient times, but it was Francis Bacon who asserted the theory consciously and clearly. After Bacon, Locke (1632-1704) established this theory of cognition in very clear form. Before Locke, according to the Scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages, the concepts of God, moral law and the axioms of mathematics were thought to be innate ideas (idea innata) or naturally carved in the mind of human beings, and even Descartes, who was a founder of epistemology together with Francis Bacon, accepted this way of thinking. But Locke criticized this theory sharply through his psychological and anthropological studies and asserted that man's mind by nature is like a tabula rasa (blank tablet) on which nothing is marked until the first idea is marked on it from the outside. Then from where do such concepts come? They come from man's experience, which may be classified into two groups, that is, sensation and reflection. Sensation is the perception of external things brought to the mind through the five senses, while reflection is perception by the action of man's own mind (in this meaning, this is called internal sense, too). Reflection happens after the sensation since it is based on another intellectual action.
lxxxiv Thus Locke asserted that all concepts held by human beings come from experience, that is, from sensation and internal sense, and he did not admit that elements of cognition on the side of subject, which are called idea innata, reasoning power or the like, are sources of cognition. His opinion was succeeded by Berkeley and Hume (1711-1776), and the great school of British empiricism was formed. Roughly speaking, the logical positivism and pragmatism of today also follow this school. This theory has contributed to the popularization of scientific thought since it denied as groundless the past system of knowledge composed of revelation and speculation and asserted that only knowledge obtained by experience, observation and experimentation is true. b. From the Viewpoint of What Is the Essence of Cognition-Realism In relation to the problem of finding the source of cognition, another important problem is whether the object of cognition, which we see or hear daily, is independent of us, existing objectively, or whether it exists within the subject (sensation, etc.) Some accept that the object of our cognition exists objectively and independently without any relation to our mind's (the subject of cognition) having cognition of it, and our mind also has cognition of the object which is independent of mind. They think that it is possible to grasp the existence of such an independent reality by cognition. This standpoint in epistemology is called realism. According to this theory, cognition corresponds to the object and means the copying of reality (object), in some meaning and to some extent. Within realism, there are the two separate standpoints of idealistic realism and materialism. Plato's "idea" is an example of idealistic realism. He conceived of an immaterial eternal reality which exists without any relationship to human beings (subject) and which transcends time and space. Therefore it is clear that his viewpoint is realism. Hegel also says that the Absolute Spirit, which is the essence of this world, changes into nature through its self-development and lastly reaches self-consciousness or selfcognition in man to become spirit. Here, both the Absolute Spirit and nature, which appears in the process of the self-development of the spirit, are so independent of man that such a view is also a kind of idealistic realism. The philosophies asserting such standpoints as Plato's or Hegel's are generally called objective idealism. Materialism, a typical example of it being Marxism, is of course realism because of its philosophical character. Besides these philosophies, there is the new realism advocated by Moor, Whitehead and Russell, which regards even the spirit as a part of nature. 2. Epistemology Emphasizing The Subject Only a. From the Viewpoint of the Source of Cognition-Rationalism Rationalism, founded by Descartes (1596-1650), stands on an extremely different footing than the abovementioned empiricism when it deals with the source of cognition. Descartes was born into an aristocratic family and educated at the Jesuit College of La Fleche, one of the most famous schools in Europe. However, he thought that apart from mathematics, he could trust nothing that he had been taught. He wanted to make all learning as accurate as mathematics and in order to achieve this solid ground, tried to doubt everything as much as he could (methodical doubt). He did not believe the senses since they may often deceive us. Even if a thing seems to be true when judged from man's reason, some deceitful evil demon might deceive even the reason itself. Continuing his doubt further and further, he at last noticed that; I doubt that I exist begs the question: Who is doing the doubting? Obviously the doubter must exist to do any doubting whatsoever. At least, the doubting doubter must exist: Since I am the doubter, then it follows
lxxxv that I must exist. Doubting is an aspect of thinking, and thinking is a phase of existence; therefore to doubt is to think, and to think is to be. (Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy) He expressed this as Cogito, ergo sum (I think, therefore I am) and decided "that all the things which we very clearly and distinctly conceive are true . . ." [Note: "Clear" is the clear appearance of things to the mind. "Distinct" is the distinction of these things from others without any confusion.] Comparing Descartes' way of thinking with Locke's, we find that the former does not believe in the senses which the latter admits without any doubt, as the source of all ideas. On the other hand, Descartes regards the activity of the rational mind as being the most trustworthy and primary, that is, as being clear and distinct intuition. According to Locke, on the other hand, the activity of reason corresponds to the complex idea which is produced secondarily (reflections), using, as materials, the simple ideas which are directly obtained from the senses (sensation). As stated before, it is a characteristic of Cartesian rationalism that the reason of the subject is trusted more than the sensation and experience coming from the object. Only those things that are derived logically, and are clear and distinct (self-evident, basic principles) are accepted as sure cognition. This school of thought then was founded by Descartes, continued by Spinoza (1632-1677) and Leibniz (1646-1716) and took the lead for German idealism which was started by Kant. Rationalism contributed much to the establishment of mathematical logic which was an important pillar of natural science together with the positive sides of observation and experiment. It- was after Kant that the positiveness of empiricism and the logic of rationalism were philosophically unified. b. From the Viewpoint of the Essence of Cognition-Subjective Idealism Next, there is the problem of what is the essence of the object. While realism explains it as objective reality independent of the subject of cognition, there is also subjective idealism which asserts that all things in the world are the contents of the individual's consciousness and that they are nothing but collections of sensations in the mind of the subject. It was Berkeley (1685-1753) who asserted this theory quite clearly. He said that although it seems that we can usually know at once the distance between two things or their size with our eyes, actually it is only the sense of color that directly reaches us in vision. The distance and size are judged merely by the association by habit of our subjective experiences such as vision, movement of the eyes, touch, and our movement toward the object. It is the combination of vision and the sense of touch (sensation of movement), that gives us cognition. He applied this theory to the solidness, extension, form and movement of a material which Locke regarded as the "primary qualities" belonging to the material itself; he said that all these are nothing but quite subjective conditions (for instance, solidness is only the feeling of resistance which takes place when we touch the material). Material is nothing but a bunch of sensations, and existing is the same as being sensed (Esse est percipl). He said that the so-called matter or corporeal substance, which according to Locke is independent of the subject, is only a falsehood; it is only the idea that actually exists. There is no other philosopher whose opinion is so extreme as Berkeley; however, similar tendencies are seen in the theories of Fichte (1762-1814) and Schopenhauer (1788-1860). Section C - Traditional Epistemology Viewed from the Cognition Method 1. The Transcendental Method Of Kant (i) The Unification of Empiricism and Rationalism
lxxxvi The British empiricism founded by Bacon asserts that our mind is by nature a pure tabula rasa (blank tablet) and that all of our ideas come only from the sensations caused by objects. On the other hand, continental rationalism, founded by Descartes, explains that universally valid and true cognition can be obtained only through rational cognition independent of experience; in other words, only what is conducted logically from self-evident basic principles can be called sure knowledge. Because of its character, empiricism not only denied metaphysics, but also came to doubt the sureness of the cognition of natural science. Thus empiricism fell into the sterile skepticism that there is no sureness in the reason of a human being. On the other hand, because of its closed logical nature, rationalism made it impossible for anyone to increase his knowledge and it became dogmatic since it asserted that things could be known by reason alone. It was Kant (1724-1804) who, using the knowledge of science which was then making great advances, tried to reconcile the differences between empiricism and rationalism, which had fallen into an unfruitful stalemate by both becoming extreme. (ii) Matter and Form Philosophers before Kant were apt to think that cognition took place either by what came into us from the outside or by what existed within us from the beginning, but Kant tried to unify the two ways of thinking by showing that cognition could be composed of both views. Then, exactly what comes from outside? According to Kant, it is the "matter" (content) of cognition. What is it that man has within himself from the beginning? It is the "form" of cognition. The object of cognition is the "matter" which is synthesized and unified by the form. In this case, the "matter" (content) is that which is given as a sensation when we perceive a thing with our five senses. For instance, in the case of a flower, the "matter" are color, pattern and smell. On the other hand, however, when we see the flower, we always grasp it as a thing existing at a particular place (space), and we think about when it bloomed and will wither (time). We also grasp it mathematically; for instance, it has four or five petals. We may wonder whether or not it is an artificial flower, even though it looks like a real one. These elements (frames) of space, time, number and quantity he calls forms. We find that the objects which we recognize are not merely the element of "matter" but are always joined and organized by the above-mentioned forms. From the conventional viewpoint, we may say that both "matter" (content) and form exist in the outer world originally and that we directly see, hear or feel the "matter" which has already been organized by the form in the outer world. However, Kant does not agree with this; he says that only the matter comes from outside while the form exists previously within ourselves and joins the matter to give it some organization. [Note: Kant does not deny the possibility that the matter itself has some unity. But he asserts that for us to think of this unity is meaningless because we can not know in what way it exists since it is beyond our cognition.] That is to say, according to his theory, the already formalized object does not appear before us but we ourselves actively formalize the matter of the phenomena which comes from the outside and thus compose the object of cognition. Then, where has the form of cognition come from, if it does not come from experience? This ability which existed within us before experience manifests itself at the time of experience. Thinking in this way, Kant called that which must have existed in principle before experience "a priori." That which is given as sensation from outside (matter) is synthesized and unified by the a priori form and then, for the first time, it becomes an object of cognition and man becomes conscious of the object. This is the epistemology of Kant.
lxxxvii (iii) Ding an Sich ("Thing-in-Itself') If all this is true, then we recognize not the objective world outside of us itself, but rather the unification of the sensation matter from the outside and the a priori form belonging to ourselves (subject). Then what is the source or true body of the matter (content) sent from the outside as sensation? Does such an objective source exist or not? Fichte said that it was not necessary to think of the existence of such a source, but Kant thought that it really existed and called it Ding an Sich ("thing-in-itself"). The natural result of Kant's way of thinking which is stated above, is that the Ding an Sich is the "Thing that can be thought of but cannot be recognized." Thus his theory is agnosticism. Since this way of thinking is fundamentally different from ours, we are going to criticize it thoroughly later. [Note: For instance, according to Kant, we can imagine space in which nothing exists, but it is impossible to imagine a being without space. We can say in principle, therefore, that the intuition form called space exists before any experience, and that the experience of a thing can be possible only by the utilization of this form. This is called transcendental or a priori; by a priori Kant meant that which is before experience. For instance, the intuitive form of the above mentioned "space" does not exist in ourselves as a thing, perfect from the beginning, but according to Kant, there is, from the beginning, the latent ability of having such an intuition, and it is gradually trained into a perfect ability as experiences are accumulated.] (iv) Cognition Form According to Kant, the process of cognition, which is the unification of outer matter and inner form, is further classified into the two stages of sensibility (sensibilitat) and understanding (Verstand). Man's cognition is composed by the cooperation of sensibility, as the ability of perception, and understanding, as the ability of thinking. If either of them is absent, right cognition can not be obtained. "Thoughts without content are empty; perceptions without concepts are blind." (The Critique of Pure Reason) This is the standpoint of Kant, who tried to unify empiricism and rationalism. Sensibility is the ability to receive ideas through being stimulated by the object. Thus sensation occurs. At this time the forms, that is, time and space which receive the sensation as their raw material, already exist a priori within an apparatus of perception (sensibility). In other words, if we see a thing, without thinking about it at all, we already grasp it in terms of simultaneity, sequence, succession, coexistence, or difference of place. These determinations have meaning only when the intuitions such as time and space exist before them. It is never true that experiences such as sequence and co-existence exist first, and then the concepts of time and space are abstracted later. Thus, the concepts of time and space are said to be a priori. Kant called the forms "intuition forms." By these intuition forms, the sensation matter (content) can obtain a certain composition; however, it is not yet organized into one object (e.g. an apple), but only a mere "variety in intuition." For instance, when we open our hand holding an apple and the apple falls onto the floor, we receive the intuitional idea that the phenomena happened successively, but can not yet judge whether or not there is a causal relation between the two phenomena. Accordingly, we can not yet reach complete cognition of the object. Object cognition can be composed only by using the a priori concepts of the understanding (Verstand). Thinking in this way, Kant called them "categories." Generally speaking, they can also be called thinking forms (understanding forms). These categories Kant systemized into four sets of three making twelve all together. 1. Quantity Unity - Plurality - Totality 2. Quality Reality - Negation - Limitation 3. Relation Substance-and-Accident - Cause-and-Effect - Reciprocity
lxxxviii 4. Modality Possibility - Actuality - Necessity For instance, suppose there is a tree; this is the objective cognition obtained by the category of unity. It is not a plum tree but a cherry tree; this is relating to negation and reality. In the future it will produce fruit; this is the combined use of time which is an intuition form and possibility which is a category. Thus, according to Kant, we recognize things, one after another by applying to the objects the intuition forms and categories, which we hold beforehand. In addition, he admitted the existence of reason (Vernunft) which is a higher thinking ability, relating to ideas. This is a higher faculty than sensibility (Sinnlechkeit) and understanding (Verstand). Thus Kant's classification of man's ability of cognition into three stages was succeeded by Hegel, who developed this view further. This then is the outline of Kant's epistemology. 2. The Dialectical Method Of Marx (i) The Theory of Reflection In order to reconcile the unfruitful stalemate between British empiricism and continental rationalism, Kant established the theory that cognition can be achieved by synthesizing and unifying the sensation matter coming from the outside (assertion of empiricism) by using a priori forms belonging to the subject (rationalism). As a result, the "thing-in-itself" (Ding an Sich) which is independent of the subject could not be recognized and the flexibility needed to comprehend and change the historically developing objective world was lost. Then, protesting against this unifying method of the idealistic school, Marx and Lenin tried to unify the two theories from the viewpoint of materialism. Kant thought that the world (phenomena) appearing in our consciousness is not the outer world itself, but we subjectively compose it by giving a frame to the sensation matter coming from the outside. Marx, on the other hand, admits the reality of a material world independent of the subject and thinks that our cognition (sensation, idea, concept) is the reflection (copy, image) of the objective being. But unlike that of the British empiricists, his reflection is not passive but active and is obtained by working upon the objective world with subjective action (practice). Man can know the state of the world more exactly by such active cognition, that is, through the process of change. (ii) Sensitivity, Reason and Practice Then, how does the process of reflection progress? Marx and his followers say that it progresses through the spiral repetition of the three stages of sensuous cognition, reasoned recognition and practice. For instance, let us take the cause of a lightning bolt. It may rain heavily, thunder may sound and lightning may flash. The sensuous stage is to sense the lightning bolt and other things as they are. But it is not enough for us to merely sense the lightning clearly. Using our reasoning power, we must try to discover the natural shape of the lightning or collect many examples of a lightning bolt or compare it to other similar phenomena. This is the rational recognition stage containing factors such as concept, judgment and inference. Yet to do all this is still not enough to decide whether or not our cognition is the correct reflection of the objective world. To decide this we must, according to Marx, make and demonstrate the same phenomenon as the lightning bolt for ourselves. We can show that the discharge of high voltage electricity is the same phenomenon as a lightning bolt, and make it quite clear that a lightning bolt is a kind of electricity. This is the practice and the cognition of the higher stage obtained through practice. By this practice, it can be ascertained whether the reflection of the objective world formed within us through the action of the senses and reason, is right or not, and at the same time, through practice, a more accurate reflection can be obtained at one higher stage. Thus the form of "practice, cognition, re-practice,
lxxxix recognition" is repeated infinitely in rotation, and after each rotation, the contents of practice and cognition reach a higher stage. (Mao Tse-tung, Theory of Practice) (iii) Absolute Truth and Relative Truth Marxists believe that the objective world is independent of the subject and is governed by absolute truth which has some inevitability. Accordingly, they hold that the infinite circulation of practice, cognition, repractice is the infinite approach to the absolute truth. Viewed from Marxism, the limit of our approach to the objective, absolute truth is historically conditioned. However, the existence of this truth is unconditional, and our approach to it is also unconditional. (Lenin, Materialism and Critique of Experience) The approach can be performed by the unity of struggle and opposition, that is, by subjectively working on the object and changing it (practice). This has been the outline of epistemology based on the dialectical method of Marxism whose basic principle is the "unity of struggle and opposition." Section D - The Basis of Epistemology by the Unification Principle Against the background of the various epistemologies mentioned above which were advocated in the past, we suggest an epistemology by the law of give-and-take based on the Unification Principle. Before stating it, we shall state the basic standpoint of the Unification Principle in relation to epistemology. 1. Everything Is The Object Of Man's Pleasure According to the Unification Principle, God created everything to be man's substantial object. The reason for this is that God wants to give us pleasure, and He thus created everything to be the objects of man's pleasure in order to make man happy. This in a nutshell, is the basic standpoint of the Unification Principle in relation to epistemology. For all things to give pleasure to man means, in other words, that they satisfy man's desire. Then what is man's desire concerning cognition? It is his desire which seeks after value. Accordingly, in order to explain cognition, it is necessary to first clarify the true nature of this desire of man that seeks after value. In order to understand the above-mentioned desire, from the standpoint of the Unification Principle, let us first classify the various desires of man. Sung Sang Desire and Hyung Sang Desire -According to the Unification Principle, human beings consist of two parts, the physical man and the spirit man. (See Divine Principle, pp. 60-64). Accordingly there are two desires, that is, the desire of the physical man and the desire of the spirit man. The former is classified as the desire to maintain one's individual life, the desire for multiplication (sex) in order to maintain the family, and the desire to enjoy life through the five senses. These are, in short, the Hyung Sang desires. As for the desire of the spirit man, there is the desire to seek after values such as truth, goodness and beauty, and there is the desire for love. These latter are the Sung Sang desires. While the Hyung Sang desires are for the maintenance and multiplication of the physical man, which is the basis for the growth of the spirit man, the Sung Sang desire is to become perfect in love (Heart) through the realization of the three great blessings (perfection of the individual, multiplication of children, and dominion over the creation) through the creation of the Four Position Foundation. The Sung Sang desire is also to live eternally in the spirit world, and to enjoy the fullness of God's love even after the death of the physical body. The desire concerning cognition is a Sung Sang desire. Desire to Seek After Value and Desire to Realize Value-The Sung Sang desires are divided into the desire to seek after values such as truth, goodness and beauty and the desire to realize these values for others. These two desires come from the fact that man is in the position of being an object to God and in the
xc position of subject to all things. Being in the position of object means that a human being should realize the values of truth, goodness and beauty, and by demonstrating them, please God or a higher level than just himself, e.g. family or nation (we refer to this as the whole). In other words from this creative purpose to bring joy to God or to the whole, comes the desire to realize value. On the other hand, for man to be in the position of subject toward all things means that a human being has the desire to demand the values of truth, goodness and beauty from all things. This is the desire to seek after value. It is this desire that concerns cognition. We can not say that the desire to realize value has nothing to do with cognition. Because we need to act often in order to have cognition, or even to have joy (cognition) we sometimes try to realize values to serve the whole and to serve the individual. The Purpose for the Whole and the Purpose for the Individual-Since human beings are connected bodies they not only have their own lives but also have a purpose to serve the whole (e.g. family, country and world). These two purposes have an inseparable relationship between them. Therefore, there cannot be any purpose of the individual apart from the purpose of the whole, nor any purpose of the whole that does not include the purpose of the individual. (Divine Principle, p. 42) Moreover, the purpose for the whole has a close relationship to the Sung Sang desire mentioned above and also to the desire to realize values; while the purpose for the individual has a close relationship to the Hyung Sang desire, and to the desire for seeking after value (See Section B of "Axiology"). Although man's cognition concerns all these human desires, it has an especially close relationship to the Sung Sang desire concerning truth, goodness and beauty. Furthermore, man's cognition is most important in relation to the value-seeking desires. These desires come from the fact that man is in the position of being the subject toward all things. Pleasure in the Cognition of Value Since man has this value-seeking desire, he feels pleasure and satisfaction in seeking all things and wants to see and know them further. It is because of this desire that cognition develops. Then, what are the contents of this pleasure like? According to the Unification Principle, it is beauty that brings pleasure to the subject. (See Divine Principle, p. 42). As the essential quality of man is feeling (emotion), in order to express the content of pleasure very concisely we say that the "emotional force (stimuli) returned to the subject by the object", is beauty. (See Ibid., p. 48) However, truth which is an intellectual value, and goodness, which is a volitional value, can also give pleasure to the subject, just as beauty does. For instance, human beings have a desire to know things simply for the sake of knowing them, not as the means for the satisfaction of any other desire. Man just wants to know, and feels pleasure if he knows successfully. We can refer to Socrates as a typical example of such a man. He loved (philos) to acquire wisdom (sophia), and felt the greatest pleasure in acting just as he knew. Thus the word of philosophy (philosophia) was born. Likewise, human beings also have the desire to feel pure pleasure by being good, and minds are moved and satisfied by the simple fact that man's act is good. Thus man feels pleasure by realizing the values of truth, goodness and beauty and by having cognition of them. Such being the case, the real contents of the pleasure which he feels in all things are the values of truth, goodness and beauty, and his pleasure lies purely in his cognition of these values. Thus, we arrive at the following conclusion. God created all things as objects to give pleasure to man; that is, as objects to make man feel or know the values of truth, goodness and beauty. This means that all things are objects of his cognition. But value composes the core of the contents of cognition, and the significance of value is that it brings pleasure to the subject. This is a fundamental aspect of the epistemological theory of the Unification Principle and the most important one for the establishment of Unification epistemology.
xci 2. All Things Are Objects Of Man's Dominion (Control) Dominion and Practice Although it is a great pleasure for man to know all things or to receive the contents of truth, goodness and beauty, his pleasure is not confined to them alone. Marx says: "Philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." (Marx, Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy.) Thus it pleases man further to come into direct contact with all things, to love them or to realize his ideal in them. According to the Unification Principle, this is called "dominion." just as the Bible reads, "And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (Genesis 1: 2 8) We believe that God created all things not only in order to let man feel pleasure in seeing them but also to let him have dominion over them. What does dominion mean? It may also be called "control" or "subdual." Dominion relates to the will of the subject. It means that the subject moves and rules the object just as it wishes. Thus, to control, or in some cases, to change or manufacture the object-this is the meaning of dominion. Then it seems that dominion has the same meaning that "Practice" does in Marxism. Practice means that the subject works on the object to change it in form or quality and to utilize it for the benefit of man (subject). If this is so, then to say that all things are objects of man's control, means that they are objects of practice. The only difference between control and practice is that the word "control" expresses the idea of subjectivity more clearly than "practice." Here then, is the fundamental ground for treating the problem of "practice" which is in an inseparable relationship with cognition. Cognition and Practice There is not practice without cognition. In the human body, the hands and legs are, as it were, the organs for practice, while the eyes and ears are used for cognition. Can our hands and legs work without the help of our eyes and ears? If we close our eyes and do not listen, then we can do nothing at all. Likewise, cognition and practice can not be separated from each other. Practice is carried out while having feeling, sense or cognition, and cognition occurs while doing, moving or practicing. Always in cooperation with each other, cognition and practice form one inseparable circuit. It is necessary for us to grasp this fact clearly and firmly. 3. There Is Give-And-Take Action Between The Subject And Object Lastly, let me touch on the give-and-take action between the subject and object. As mentioned above, this action is a very important movement in cognition, because cognition always concerns both the subject and object of cognition. Furthermore, cognition is just one special example of the many give-and-take actions between subjects and objects to which the Unification Principle refers. Based on the above-mentioned three facts -- (1) all things are objects to man, the subject, (2) they are also objects of the dominion of man, and (3) there is always G-T action between the subject and object of cognition-the epistemology of the Unification Principle is established Chapter II - Epistemology (part 2) Section E - Unification Epistemology (Epistemology Based on the Give-and-Take Law)
xcii Using the above-mentioned studies as our basis, first we are going to criticize the defects of the traditional epistemologies stated in Sections 2 and 3 and then reveal our epistemology which covers the defects of the others. 1. Critique Of Traditional Epistemologies (i) Why Subject and Object Exist The problem common to all traditional epistemologies is that the basic question of why the subject and object of cognition exist is not answered. All epistemologists treat the object as though it were a mere given datum and seem to think man is born and just happens to notice the existence of the world; they think that the things around us are nothing but the results of mere chance. They are unconscious of the relationship between man and the world around him. Accordingly, the relationship between the subject and object becomes hard to clarify and philosophical chaos has prevailed since they could not judge whether the object exists outside of us objectively or whether it exists within the subject. Viewed from the standpoint of the Unification Principle, the subject and object of cognition exist because of the Creator, who created this world in order to make co-existence possible and who furthermore regarded the co-existence as good. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food." (Genesis 1:29) Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." (Genesis 2:18) The object is not an accidentally given datum, but must be necessary to us. The object must exist for the subject and the subject must exist for the object. However large this cosmos may be, it has significance only when man exists. Accordingly, the existence of the cosmos means the existence of man, while the existence of man means the existence of the cosmos. Without one, the other will lose the significance of its existence. This is the viewpoint of the Unification Principle toward the relationship between the subject and object of cognition. (ii) The Object Must Exist Outside Why must the object exist? Because it must give pleasure to the subject. What is pleasure? It is to find the things that are similar to us in the outer world and to see them correspond to our own Sung Sang and Hyung Sang as if we were seeing ourselves in a mirror. Accordingly, the object is not within the subject; it would be meaningless if it did not actually exist outside of the subject. If it does not reflect the subject's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang outside of the subject, or if it does not stimulate the subject's sensations from outside, it will not bring pleasure to man. (By the same reason, this created world as a whole and also individual elements must exist outside of God.) Thus as to the problem of the position of the object, we deny the standpoint of subjective idealism and affirm realism. However we do not think that the object exists apart from us by chance, but think that it has an inevitable relationship with our existence, and that without it, the significance of our existence would be lost. Therefore, the subject, man, and the object can not but co-exist. (iii) Is the "Thing-in-Itself" (Ding an Sich) Unknowable? Kant holds that the sensation matter (content), the raw elements composing our cognition, are sent from the outside but asserts that the Ding an Sich, or the source of the sensation, is eternally unknowable to man. We think that the opinion of Kant is immature because he does not understand that the subject and object are inseparable.
xciii The object exists for the subject. The object has significance of existence only when all the elements within the object totally appear before the subject. If so, it is utterly meaningless to say that Ding an Szch is unknowable to man. We would have to say that God's creation is a failure. We do not believe that the object has been created in order to exist as a world which has no relation with us and which keeps its independent existence eternally. We believe that it has been created in order to make it possible for the object, as a whole, to completely appear before our senses and reason. We do not think that the object has been formed without any relation to us at all, nor that our senses and abilities have been created without any relation to the object. We think that this cosmos, which exists outside of us, was created with the premise that our senses would be able to know the world so that we may feel joy. In other words, all things were created to give us pleasure and our senses and abilities were provided for us in order that we may feel full satisfaction from the objective world. It is not true that the object, having no relation with our eyes and ears is reflected to them. The wave lengths of light and sound from the object have already been determined so that all things are fully recognized by man. We believe that the objective world has been created in order to let man feel pleasure in colors, sounds and the like. If so, speaking in terms of the Principle, what is recognized is just what God has created. Of course man's cognition is sometimes or often deformed or immature, so that we can not say that what is recognized in such a way is the being itself. But when perfect cognition is achieved the being itself is known. God has not created the objective world apart from, or without any relation to the cognition of human beings. God has created the world such that it could not become complete by itself, but could become complete only in a relationship with man through his cognition. We are of the opinion that through man's cognition the will of God is manifested in actual form. Ding an Sich appears to the subject because the intention of God is to have man know all things perfectly. Accordingly, Ding an Sich is just Ding fur Uns (thing for us). The appearance of Ding an Sich within ourselves is a complete, total and true manifestation which is better than any other appearance. In other words, there is no Ding an Sich that we can not know and that is out of our cognition eternally. The object itself which we see (though some of us see deeply while others see shallowly) is a thing itself, the totality of a thing, the actualization of the true nature of a thing and is just what God has tried to create. From these reasons, we deny agnosticism and regard things of this world, both visible and invisible, as completely knowable. Such being the case, we deny subjective idealism and agnosticism and, just as the Marxists do, affirm realism and the theory that we can know all things. However our standpoint is different from theirs. 2. The Give-And-Take Relation Between The Subject And Object And The Activity Of Cognition Difference of Position between Things and Human Beings Another big problem concerning cognition is to decide whether the subject or object plays the leading role in the formation of cognition. That is, is it human beings or the objective world that plays the leading role? Empiricism regards the mind of the subject as tabula rasa and thinks that the object alone constitutes the contents of cognition. On the other hand, rationalism asserts that we can not get the necessary scientific knowledge from the contents coming from the object, and tries to depend solely on the clear, distinct intuition of the subject and on the inferences deduced from intuition. It is clear from the studies in Section B that these two theories are both one-sided. Therefore, after Kant unified the two assertions, most scholars tried to understand the relationship of the subject and object with a method that justified the two views. Among those attempting to unify the two views, Kant, Fichte and Hegel placed importance on the subject, while Marx stressed the object.
xciv How will the Unification Principle see this problem? Human beings are the subject while all things are the object. The latter gives pleasure to the former, while the former has dominion over the latter. That man is the subject toward all things means that he is not passive toward all things (circumstance) but active and positive toward them. Man, unlike a mirror, does not receive the stimulus from outside passively. In order to recognize the outer world, he must pay attention to it. Without paying attention either consciously or unconsciously, he can not have any cognition even if he sees the object with his eyes. For instance, we are sometimes absorbed in thought while looking at the sky. Nevertheless, we do not "see" the sky even though our sight is in the direction of the sky, because our interest is not in the sky but in thinking. Thus in order to know the object, it is necessary not only to set our sense organs toward the object but also to actively pay attention to it. Of course we may sometimes pay unconscious attention toward the object. For instance, we are often surprised when we hear an unexpected and loud voice even when we are absorbed in reading a book. This is because we were unconsciously paying attention to the outside, even when we were reading. Therefore, cognition can not occur without the activity or positivity of the subject. We do not face the object by accident but pay active attention to it and sometimes even select the object of cognition for ourselves. Thus the object can not be known by accident, but rather the subject recognizes it positively. This is a natural conclusion when the phenomenon is viewed from the action of give-and-take. There can not be unification with only what comes from the object without anything coming from the subject. The unified action of cognition develops only when give-and-take action occurs between the subject and object. At that time, it is the human being that acts as the subject. From their standpoint of wanting to "change the world", Marxists recognize the activity of the subject in cognition. At the same time, however, they cling to the standpoint of materialism saying, "... it is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but on the contrary their social being that deter mines their consciousness." (Marx, Preface to the Critique of Political Economy) They deny man's positivity or activity toward circumstances (things) in cognition. They admit man's activity only in practice which inspects (verifies) the already obtained cognition. We hold that cognition develops by the G-T action in which man is the subject and outside things are the object. Even though the object exists for itself, independent of the subject, it is man, not the object, that takes the initiative in cognition. However, unlike Kant we do not think that man gives form to the sensuous content coming from outside; nor do we think as Hegel, that the Absolute Spirit develops into nature which is the form of expression of the spirit itself, and develops furthermore to reach the stage of the human mind in which the Absolute Spirit recognizes itself, and finally returns to itself. We shall explain in detail our opinion about cognition in part 4 of this section. 3. The Development Of Cognition The Cause of the Development of Cognition Organically combined with practice, cognition develops infinitely repeating "practice, cognition, repractice and recognition." This is what Marxists assert and on this point we agree. However, why in the world does cognition develop so infinitely? According to Marxism, cognition develops in society when practice is necessary or is happening. According to communism, practice means not only deeds such as verification, observation, experimentation, and so on, but also strife, strikes, revolution, etc. Therefore, when the socialist system based on the proletarian dictatorship is established, the contradiction between the productivity and productive relation is resolved and the class strife disappears.
xcv Then is there no remaining room for the development of cognition concerning society? Marxists are silent about this problem. Our opinion about this problem is as follows. The reason cognition develops continuously is that man has the desire for cognition, which is a kind of value-seeking desire. Then what is the desire for cognition? In a word, as stated in Section D-1, it is pleasure. Man has Sung Sang desire and feels pleasure in finding out truth intellectually, beauty emotionally, and goodness in action. Speaking from the viewpoint of quantity, the pleasure and desire of man are infinite. However, even if a stimulus gives a great satisfaction to him, he may well become tired of it and feel no more pleasure when the same stimulus is repeated again and again. Something must be done in order to renew, enlarge and deepen the pleasure. So, using his controlling ability (ability of dominion) and creativity, man tries to change the object, find some new variation, or seek for a new object. Speaking from the viewpoint of quality, even if man recognizes something, he will sometimes feel no pleasure in it when some doubt remains. For instance, suppose you see a lightning bolt with your own eyes. You will not feel pleasure in it if you can not understand the true nature of the lightning bolt. What is a lightning bolt, and why does it fall to the ground? When you solve these questions, you will then feel pleasure. Such a tendency as this can also be seen in the nature of all men. Thus in order to enlarge his pleasure or create new pleasure, man uses his creativity to change or reconstruct the object and ascertain it by practice, such as in experiments. In this way he always tries to get more appealing and more accurate knowledge, and thus feel greater satisfaction. Marx, however, sees the development of cognition only as the means for carrying out practice effectively (in the case of social problems, for carrying out production or class strife). However, he does not notice the fact that cognition itself, or practice itself, gives pleasure to man, and that men always try to enlarge their pleasure which comes from the desire for cognition or desire for seeking after value itself. As a result, Marx speaks of the development of cognition but can not explain why the development occurs. This is the limit of Marxism and at this point the new viewpoint of the Unification Principle appears, to overcome the limitation. 4. The Ground And Method Of Cognition We have so far examined the main problematic and debatable points concerning cognition. finally, we wish to examine the following most basic problems from the standpoint of the Unification Principle. How is it possible to recognize things? What is the phenomenon of cognition? What should we do to carry out cognition effectively and correctly? a. Appraisal an d Correspondence (i) Is the Mind a Tabula Rasa (Blank Tablet) by Nature? How is cognition effected and how is it possible? Locke, Hume and Kant regarded this question as most important and examined it minutely. We too must clarify the true nature of cognition. Is our mind a tabula rasa (blank tablet) by nature? Is experience from the outside added to the tabula rasa mind to engrave various ideas on it? From the standpoint of the Unification Principle, we can not admit such a way of thinking. It is difficult to agree with the tabula rasa theory when we judge it according to the essence of cognition stated in Section D.
xcvi What is cognition? Its final nature or purpose is pleasure. What is pleasure then? It is to find out what is similar to us in the object which is outside of us. So if our mind is a tabula rasa by nature, it is quite impossible to see ourselves corresponding to the object and accordingly there can be no pleasure there. It is not possible that a thing which gives us no pleasure can keep the attention of our mind for long. Even a baby several months old feels a strong interest in the things around him and cries with joy to see things move and to see beautiful colors, forms, or persons. Thus it seems that already in his infant childhood, man holds within his mind something which we call the prototype of truth, beauty and goodness, and comparing the sensations of the objects coming from the outside with the prototypes, man judges whether a thing is right or wrong, beautiful or ugly. According to the Unification Principle, the process of cognition is as follows. Cognition is to unify the subject and object. The unification results when the subject and object are similar to each other. That is to say, a similarity of image (idea) between the subject and object is necessary for cognition. For instance, suppose we see a flower. Is the image of flower reflected in our tabula rasa mind like a mirror so that the idea of the flower is marked in the mind? The Unification Principle does not regard the process of cognition as occurring in this way. At first, there is an original prototype (idea) of a flower within our mind (subject). Then the image of the actual flower (object) is projected onto our mind and coincides with the prototype already there, because the two flowers are similar to each other. At this moment, the two images carry out the G-T action between them giving rise to a new result. This is cognition itself. (ii) There Must Be An Appraisal of Correspondence Let us think of the action of our mind in the action of cognition. We shall surely notice that the action of judgment is always present during the process. When we see a thing and can not know at all what it is, the action of cognition does not take place. There is only the feeling of doubt there; moreover the feeling of beauty is also absent. Only when we feel something similar to us, do we come to open our mind and ascertain more clearly what it is. This is judgment. What is judgment? It is to compare what comes from outside with what we already have in our mind and to see whether the two correspond with each other. Accordingly, judgment may be also called an "Appraisal of Correspondence." Cognition can be classified into intellectual, emotional and volitional types. These can all be achieved when there are intellectual, emotional and volitional judgments respectively. The purpose of cognition is pleasure but there must be judgment before we obtain pleasure. We judge that this is beautiful or that- this is a kind person and through such a judgment, pleasure can be obtained. If judgment is, as stated above, to compare what comes from outside with what we hold in our mind beforehand and to see whether or not the two of them correspond with each other, has our mind known the things that are outside of us already, before cognition? No, of course not. Then why does man hold such universal judgment standards inside of him by nature? In order to clarify this, it is necessary to explain a core theory of the Unification Principle. (iii) Man Has the Prototypes of All Things Within Him The Unification Principle says, "That is, man is God's substantial object with His dual characteristics manifested as "direct image" while all things of the universe are the substantial objects of God with His dual characteristics manifested as "indirect image" (symbol). (Divine Principle, p. 26) Direct image is the philosophical expression of the idea of God's image as expressed in Genesis (1:27) (though, according to the Unification Principle, God's image includes not only Hyung Sang but also Sung Sang) and means that God's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are directly and totally embodied. On the other
xcvii hand, symbolic means that God's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are indirectly and partially embodied just as an artist expresses what is in him symbolically through his works. Therefore, man is the expression of the whole of God while individual things are expressions of parts of God. The whole (human beings) must include all the parts (things), and thus can correspond with any part (anything) and can discover what is similar to him in the universe. This is what the Unification Principle shows about the relation between man and things. Let us take man's body as an example. His characteristics are almost the same as those of other higher animals, and hence he is said to be a Primate. Also, his functions are similar to those of machines. Accordingly, some scholars even advocate that man is a machine. However the similarities do not stop here. Man's lungs are similar to the leaves of plants, his stomach to the roots, and blood vessels to the xylem and phloem. In this sense, man may be a plant. In the human body structure . the skin is covered with hair, blood vessels exist in the musculature, and still deeper lies the marrow within the skeleton." (Ibid., p. 45) In the case of the earth too, "The earth's crust is covered with plants, under ground waterways exist in the substrata, and beneath all this lies molten lava surrounded by rocks." (Ibid., p. 45) Here too we see the similarity between the human body and the earth. Thus man can see himself even in the gigantic earth. More over, man's hands and mouth are, unlike those of other animals, not specialized too narrowly. Using his hands, man can dig a hole, swim, or hold or catch various tools, and using his mouth, he can imitate the voice of any animal. Man's naked body is regarded as beauty itself; all the elements of beauty are contained in it. It is said, therefore, that when an artist masters sketching the human body, he can draw any form. Though small, the human eyes can see the whole universe. Though small, the human brain can think deeply of the whole universe. It is not too much to say that man is the "encapsulation of all things" (Ibid., p. 44) (a microcosm or synthesized substantial body of the whole cosmos). (iv) The Prototypes Exist Deep in the Latent Consciousness Thus all the elements of the universe are included in the human body and the prototypes of all ideas and the representations of all these elements are formed beforehand and kept in the back of man's mind. That is to say, in the latent consciousness of the deepest part of the mind, the prototypes of the ideas of all things in the universe have already been formed before the action of cognition starts. The mechanism is as follows. Living things consist of cells and organs, the action of which comes from the "dominion and autonomy of the Principle itself." (Ibid., p. 55). The "Autonomy of the Principle" means consciousness (latent consciousness) and this consciousness within the cells and organs already carries the image of the cells. This is called "original consciousness." In the case of an animal, the mind of the animal (physical mind) has a give-and-take relation with the original consciousness of the cells and organs of the animal, and communication is established between the mind and the original consciousness. In this way the physical mind already contains the various images of the cells and organs which are the prototypes of the ideas corresponding to all things in the outside world. (However, the prototypes of the ideas can not be realized as actual ideas without the action of cognition, that is, coincidence with the outside world.) This is the same as in the case of the physical mind of man; subconsciously it has the prototype of the idea corresponding to each cell and organ. The spiritual mind of the spiritual body has a give-and-take relationship with the physical mind and, together with this, forms the natural mind as a whole (human mind in the usual meaning). As a result, the natural mind already subconsciously has the direct images of spiritual and physical elements. For instance, in the original consciousness of a cell there are images of size .. circles, globes, movement, and so on which are reflections of the physical part of the cell onto the original consciousness and thus are called "original reflections." These are connected to the physical mind where they are recorded deep in it through the G-T action between the original consciousness and the physical mind. Furthermore, they are transmitted to, and marked in, the depths of the subconsciousness of the natural mind (the mind of man as a whole including his spiritual body) through the G-T action between the physical mind and the spiritual mind. [Note: This kind of give-and-take action is necessarily accompanied by that of the physiological system. All of the processes in living things, especially in the human body, have the two (paired) aspects of
xcviii Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Since the G-T action of original consciousness and mind is the Sung Sang action, it is necessarily accompanied by the Hyung Sang action which is the G-T action between the peripheral nervous system including cells (and organs) and the central nervous system.] Thus, in the mind, there are already the prototypes of the images of all the things of the objective world. So, if an image of a flower comes from the outside, and this image and a prototype within subconsciousness correspond with each other, the two are connected and unified and come to the surface of the consciousness. As a result, one can judge that the unified image is a flower. This is cognition itself. In other words, cognition is an appraisal of correspondence. (v) Cognition is the Unification of the Outside and Inside Let us reach the conclusion as quickly as possible. The advocators of empiricism assert that cognition grows as some impression from the outside and is marked in our mind, which at first is empty like a tabula rasa. This is not true. If it were true, there could be no pleasure, nor excitement, nor sympathy. Besides, the empiricists can not explain why man has such a strong and continuous curiosity. Moreover, the stimulus from the outside itself is scattered and dispersed. For instance, suppose we are looking at a singing bird. The figure of the bird and the sound of singing come to our mind through different sense organs; that is, the figure comes through the eyes and the sound comes through the ears. If the human mind were empty as a mere blank tablet, these stimuli would always be separated and not unified. But we recognize the united totality, the singing bird. Something must act to unify the sensations. It is the mind, including the subconscious, as stated above, that unifies these scattered stimuli. [Note: In the case of the mind unifying scattered stimuli, it is also necessary for a physiological process to be involved, because, as mentioned above, a Sung Sang process must run parallel to a Hyung Sang process. Therefore the unifying action of the mind requires the interactions of many associated fibers and nerve cells in the brain. Without both processes, cognition can not occur.] Before we actually receive some stimuli from the outside, we already have the contents and forms of various latent images or the autonomy of the Principle deep in the mind as our subconscious. The prototypes, not yet embodied, and the reflection (image) of actual things from outside, are connected and unified by the G-T action. As a result, the cognition which can be called surface consciousness, appears. This is knowledge itself. The image existing deep in the subconsciousness is buried and unknown until the operation of cognition begins to act. Until then, we can not know about the image even though it exists within us. We know it subconsciously but not as a concrete thing, just like in the seed of a cherry tree, the cherry exists as life but is not yet an embodied form. A stimulus corresponding with the prototype comes in, and the correspondence between the stimulus (image) and prototype suddenly makes us grasp an idea, because the prototype (idea) is actualized at the moment of cognition. Therefore, cognition never develops one-sidedly. The subconsciousness, or prototype latent beforehand, corresponds with the actual image which comes from the outside. The G-T action between them brings about cognition and there is a thrilling feeling, excitement and sympathy there. Seeking after such feeling and excitement, we become eager to know the natural world to the last detail. With the prototype as the standard, we reunify the stimuli, which come in dispersed, and recreate the natural world in our mind. b. The Similarity of Content and Form The Content and Form of Both the Outside and the Inside.
xcix Kant also admits that cognition is the unification of the inner and outer worlds, but he thinks that only content (matter) comes from the outside, and only form exists within, and that these two are unified. Thus the world of " things-in- themselves" (Ding an Sich) has been regarded as impossible for our cognition to reach; the forms through which we perceive the object are fixed. It thus became difficult to grasp the dynamic changes of the objective world. In short, various contradictions and problematic points have appeared. On the other hand, we think that not only content, but also the form supporting it, exists in the outer objective world (independent of the cognition of the subject) and that the content itself, as well as the form of cognition, exists latent within us. The objective world which has both content and form and which is unified independently of the subject comes into the subject as scattered and dispersed stimuli. These stimuli are then united by the latent content and form which we hold beforehand, and the subject and object are reconstructed and reunified within ourselves. For example, let us take the forms of time and space. As stated in "Ontology", all beings maintain their existence by forming the outer Four Position Base (Outer Quadruple Base) through the G-T action, and producing the forces for action, growth, and multiplication. Accordingly, there must be some distinction between the positions of the subject and object. This is space. The G-T action produces movement and carries out the three-stage development of Chung-Boon-Hap. This is time. Accordingly, the forms of time and space must exist, not only within the cognition of the subject, but also within the object. At the same time, if we consider the inside of man, there is the flow of blood, the operation of the nerves and various physiological phenomena taking place in the cells and organs. These are all results of the formation of the Four Position Base by the G-T action. Accordingly, there are things concerning time and space already within us, and they are transmitted physically to nerve centers through the nerve action and to the mind (physical and spiritual mind) through the subconsciousness by give-and-take action. With these as the grounds of sensibility, the "intuition forms of time and space" of Kant appear. Thus the forms of time and space exist in both the object and subject. We think that they are both existence forms and also cognition forms. It will not be necessary to explain the correspondence of inner and outer worlds concerning content since we studied it minutely in subsection (1) of this section. In short, content and form exist in both the inside and outside. Cognition occurs when and where they correspond to each other. This is our epistemology. Here it is necessary to note that the nerve system is always active in cognition. In other words, the actions of both Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are necessary in the process of cognition. c. Transcendence and Priority (i) The Priority of the Prototype Lastly, we are going to examine Kant's "transcendence" from the standpoint of the Unification Principle. Kant found various cognition forms in man which must exist in principle before experience and he called them a priori (transcendental). That is to say, according to Kant, it is only forms that exist before experience, and in order to make his theory consistent, the forms must already be basically completed before experience. According to the Unification Principle, however, not only the form but also the content of cognition already exists in the human being as a subconscious prototype, though these forms and contents are not yet completed, not consciously known by us, and are not systematized clearly before experience. As soon as the stimulus corresponding to the prototype comes in from the outside, the image (reflection) and prototype are unified, so that the form and content of cognition are both actualized. By repeating such unification (experience), both the content and form of the prototype within the subconscious are clarified
c and completed to become the premise (a priori condition) of the next cognition. In this sense, we call the content and form existing within us subconsciously before experience "priority", which is different from Kant's a priori or transcendence. (ii) The Development of the Prototype Man has the prototypes of the objects of cognition within himself before cognition. Only when he successfully finds the stimuli from the outside which coincide with the prototypes, can he understand the objects, and cognition is composed. He can know the object since he has the prototype of the object within him. If he did not, cognition could not occur. But this does not mean that the prototype is clear from the beginning, nor does it deny that the contents of cognition, including the prototypes, are various and will be developed fully later. Especially when we are babies, the prototypes within us are very ambiguous. Gradually, however, as new experience is added which can settle in our mind as cognition through being compared with the prototype, the experience is accumulated within the subconsciousness, and then acts as a new prototype for the next cognition when we face another new experience. Thus, the prototypes within us are successively deepened, enriched and diversified. For instance, a young child already has a prototype of a flower within himself. But even when he sees a flower, he can not yet tell what flower it is unless he is taught the name of the flower. When we tell him that it is, say, a cherry blossom, the idea of a cherry blossom is formed and then enters his subconsciousness. When he sees a cherry blossom again, he immediately understands that it is a cherry blossom. That is to say, the ambiguous pattern (prototype) of a flower is specialized into that of a cherry blossom, which will become a new prototype at the time of his next experience. Thus the concept of priority (prototype) is always required because the prototype of the object of cognition must exist within us before the establishment of cognition. This means that the prototypes must be prior to the establishment of cognition, but does not mean that all the prototypes exist in complete forms inherently. At first there only may be something like an ambiguous presentiment and it may be so ambiguous that sometimes we first notice the prototype corresponding with the image from outside only when we come across it. With each cognition, the content and form of the cognition, which is clarified according to the quality of the cognition, are accumulated within us, and these become the new prototypes for the next experience, that is, the prior prototypes for establishing the next cognition. Such being the case, we can define cognition as the combination or unification of the prototype, which the subject (human being) contains beforehand, and the image coming from the object, through the give-andtake action between the two. [Note: Not only things, but also man, and even God, can be the objects of cognition. In status (position), God is the subject of man. But so far as cognition is concerned, since the one who recognizes is regarded as the subject, God becomes the object. However, one can not see God as a concrete image; God can only be known spiritually through Heart.] d. Spiritual Cognition Besides all these, there are the spiritual cognitions belonging to the senses of the spirit man such as spiritual intuition, inspiration and ESP (extrasensory perception). In order to clarify the meaning of cognition perfectly we must enter these fields. (In fact, there have been many cases in which inventions, discoveries, and the creation of new theories depended on spiritual cognition.) However, there are so few people who have conscious spiritual experiences that we omit the explanation of this problem at this time to avoid unnecessary misunderstanding. 5. Summary And Conclusion Finally, let us summarize what we have discussed until now, and then reach the conclusion.
ci As to the problem of how cognition is composed, Kant asserts that one can reach cognition through the intuition forms and understanding categories belonging to the subject, while Marx and Lenin advocate the theory of reflection, stressing the objective existence form one-sidedly and wrongly making light of the rich contents, subjectivity, selectivity and individuality on the side of the subject. On the other hand, we think, with the principle of the give-and-take action (the Four Position Base) as the standard, that the objective world independently of the subject must have the forms of existence as well as the contents. (This means the affirmation of realism.) We also hold, as Kant did, that man has the prototypes of the forms of cognition within himself as a precondition for the formation of cognition before the experience. Unlike Kant, however, we think that the form is not originally complete, but that it is gradually clarified as it finds correspondence with the images coming from the outside. Also, we think that before experience, man, within himself, has not only form but also the prototype of the contents of cognition. Cognition is the G-T action between the subject and object, and this action combines and unifies the prototype held by the subject beforehand with the image coming from the object. (Accordingly, cognition is a kind of confirmation or appraisal.) The knowledge gained once can be clarified more by practice, and practice can be advanced by new knowledge (cognition). Thus cognition and practice develop spirally in a close relationship. Content, image and form accumulate in the subconscious and become new prior prototypes for the next cognition. (Therefore, the more experience is accumulated, the richer becomes the contents or prototypes in the subconscious.) Between the subject and object (objective world) or between form and content exists the give-and-take relationship in which combination or unification is accomplished. Epistemology based on this standpoint may be called "Epistemology by the Give-And-Take Law" if viewed in terms of method, and "Unification Epistemology", if viewed in terms of purpose. Chapter III - Axiology Some consistent idea of value should exist at the basis of each aspect of culture, such as politics and economy, for example. This theory of axiology, built on the foundation of "Ontology", tries to clarify the existence of the purpose of creation and the essence of value created through the give-and-take action between relative elements. Thus this theory's goal is to define the structure of value as fundamental principles of standard ethics as well as individual morals. This theory may also offer a great deal to counter the variety and confusion of the present-day view of value. Section A - The Significance of Axiology Axiology is the philosophical field that deals generally with the problems of value: how to judge, evaluate and recognize value. Descartes and Locke systematically pursued the study of epistemology and finally formed one of the most fundamental fields of philosophy. Later, Kant discriminated between the field of theory (Sein, being) and that of value (Sollen, duty), and axiology thus became one of the basic fields of the modern philosophical world. Kant's theory, however, dealt more directly with determining which things are valuable, while the value that is dealt with here, has more to do with ethics, since we consider value as that which decides the goals of man's activities. In the history of philosophy, axiology occupies a very important position. It is interesting that it takes a place in history similar to the place it takes in the process of man's growth from childhood. Children ask the axiological questions such as, "Why do we do this?" or "Why must we do that?" soon after their ontological questions such as, "What is this?" or "How does it happen?"
cii Let us examine both purpose and value according to the Principle. Section B - The Theoretical Foundation of Axiology (i) Dual Being What is value then? Can we expect to find a constant concept or standard of value regardless of the time, place or persons that we encounter? How do material value or personal value come to take concrete shape? Truth is unique, eternal, unchanging and absolute, regardless of time or circumstances. Thus our first step is to theoretically consider the true meaning of the existence of human beings and, based upon this consideration, deal with the true significance of value. We can readily note that man has two sides, both an internal (spiritual) and external (material) side, that is, his Sung Sang and Hyung Sang aspects. Hence, man has two different kinds of desires: the desire to seek after spiritual values such as truth, goodness, beauty and love; and the desire to seek for material values such as the desire for the sensory joys found in food, clothing, shelter and sex. The former desire is called Sung Sang desire, and the latter Hyung Sang desire. [Note: In the Unification Principle view, man not only has the two aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, but also the dual body of spirit man and physical man. Resulting from the action of give-andtake between these two, various kinds of mental phenomena are known to take place.] (ii) Dual Purposes As stated in detail in "Ontology", man exists in a dual position both as God's substantial object, and as the subject of the whole creation. To be God's substantial object means that man is in a position to offer joy to God. In other words, exhibiting his own God-given values, man offers truth, goodness and beauty to God in order to give Him joy and comfort. Since God is such that He contains every being, visible and invisible, He can be considered to be the complete whole, and to serve Him may be called the purpose for the whole. Deep in his mind, man desires to do something or feels he must do something for his greater, wider and higher whole, namely, for his home, his nation and the world in which he lives. From this desire a sense of duty naturally arises which corresponds to "must be thus", "wish to be such" or "must act thus", "wish to act in such a way." The sense of duty or "Categorical Imperative" (Kant) generally comes from this purpose for the whole. The fact that man is the subject of the whole creation means that he influences the creation (has dominion over the whole creation) with love and also he receives from it values such as truth, goodness and beauty which give him joy. This receiving of value corresponds to the purpose for the individual which is indispensable to man as is the purpose for the whole already mentioned. (iii) Dual Desires The dual desires exist in relation to both the purposes for the whole and for the individual. One is the desire to realize value, to exhibit one's value toward God, and the other is the desire to seek after value in order to obtain joy through receiving truth, goodness and beauty from all things. These dual desires form an actual basis for feeling values and for a consciousness or a view of value.
ciii What is the nature and basis of these desires according to the Principle? We can not help but think that the creation of man must have some reason or purpose, because man was created by God. However long this purpose may exist, however, it has no significance unless it is realized. God gave man everything necessary to fulfill his purpose of creation, but this fulfillment was entrusted to man's free will. This purpose of creation can not be achieved if man remains in the state in which he was created. In other words, in order to achieve his purpose, man must grow by himself. This means that man has to be given the ability and impulse to fulfill his purpose. The impulse to fulfill his purpose of creation is the desire for value (both the value-realizing and value-pursuing desires). All the other created beings besides man are also given purposes of creation by God. Even inorganic matter has usefulness and law, and this usefulness and law both can be said to be realizations of the purpose of creation. That is, inorganic matter becomes useful by its law. On the other hand living creatures possess an autonomous nature (plants) and an instinctive nature (animals). By these they grow automatically or instinctively to perfection and realize the purpose of their creation. Besides these laws, autonomy and instinct, man possesses creativity (dominating ability), namely the desire to create values (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang) by which God's purpose of creation is to be consciously realized. The basic factor of the desire to realize and pursue value is the impulse to achieve the purpose of creation. Here we find what the Principle considers the basis of the whole system of axiology. Section C - The Kinds of Value (i) Truth, Goodness and Beauty In order to survive individually man must fulfill his Hyung Sang desires such as his desire for food, clothing, and shelter and he must fulfill his sexual desire in order to preserve his own kind. These desires, however, provide only the groundwork for the achievement of man's purpose of creation and are not enough to completely fulfill the original purpose planned by God. Let us consider, then, the desires (Sung Sang desires) which are directly concerned with God's purpose for creating man on earth. Three kinds of value are usually mentioned first. They are truth, goodness, and beauty. These three forms of value (truth, goodness and beauty) are equivalent to the three functions of man's mind (intellect, emotion, and will). Furthermore they are both what man wants to realize in himself to give joy (spiritual), and what he searches for in others in order to find his own spiritual joy. Truth Man wants to live a true life, not a false one. In other words, according to his purpose of creation, man has a desire to be true, not false. If we live a false life, our conscience begins to bother us. This is evidence that man has the desire to realize truth. Furthermore, man wants to see true things, persons or lives. Man tends to dislike anything false, whatever it may be, even when he just happens to see it. Moreover, man attempts to obtain truth (knowledge) from objects such as nature, social circumstances, history, etc. This is the desire to seek after truth. Goodness Man hopes to dedicate himself to God and the whole around himself so that he may be of value and may lead a good life according to God's purpose for creation. Man has a desire to realize goodness, and he is always eager to see and know good things, attitudes, behavior and to hear good language in the beings around him. This is the desire to pursue goodness.
civ Beauty Man has the desire to realize beauty through his deeds and life by offering beauty to the whole such as family, neighbors, society, nation, mankind and God for their enjoyment. And he wishes to gain joy from seeing or hearing about beautiful countenances or beautiful deeds. This is the desire of seeking after beauty, and the former desire is to realize beauty. This is why there can be both creation and appreciation in art. An artist's creation comes about due to the desire to realize beauty, and appreciation comes about due to the desire to pursue it. [Note: From the standpoint of communism, only deeds which are useful to achieve the purpose of accomplishing revolution and which are useful to the victory of class strife for the side of the proletarian class are considered to be the true, good and beautiful. Thus the communists are limited to a very narrow, one-sided view of value.] (ii) Love Love itself can not be called value in the exact meaning of the word, but love is inseparably related to the already mentioned values of truth, goodness and beauty. These three values are the values offered to the subject from the object as objective value. Love is an emotional force (force of Heart) given to the object by the subject (man or God). For example, God, as the subject, gives man (the object) his purpose of life, and parents as subjects give (teach) their children standards (Principles) of life. This purpose and these standards come from the love of the subject (God or parents). This purpose and these principles then become goals to be realized in order to realize the above stated three values, and thus this purpose and these principles serve as the measuring standards for these values. If the object displays "value" following these goals, the subject is pleased to see it and loves the object all the more. When man, as the object, offers value (beauty, goodness, etc.) to the subject, it is necessary that his heart or his love becomes the basis of the deed, because, for example, beauty is a kind of emotional stimulation to the subject from the object. Suppose that we acted and lived with only love in mind, without any sense of the values of truth, goodness and beauty; nevertheless the subject, observing the deeds done before him would accept the deeds as the three values. In this sense, it may follow that love is both the source of, or motive for realizing truth, goodness and beauty, and yet it is also the base from which the appreciation of these same values comes. In other words, love is the beginning and end of value. If we see people with loving hearts, their deeds appear much more true, good, and beautiful even though their deeds are not consciously done for value and are extremely ordinary. In this sense, love may be called the union of truth, goodness and beauty. In other words, the reason the three kinds of value (truth, goodness and beauty) are all increased by one thing, love, is that love is the union of all values, just as a lake is the union of the rivers. Axiology can not be separated from ethics since the principle of deeds done through love is ethics. (iii) Holiness "Holiness" is often considered as a value along with the other common values like truth, goodness and beauty. The reason for this is that man became separated from God's love and fell into a narrow-minded egoism, and thus came to express nothing that originated from God; that is, nothing holy. In the holy world (the world created by God) all was united with God as one body and the three values were all sacred. It is meaningless, therefore, to emphasize the value "holiness", as only truth, goodness and beauty are dealt with as values in the original world. Section D - The Essence of Value (i) The Essence of Value
cv What is the essence of value? What is the ultimate substance which creates value and makes something valuable? Value includes two aspects: the actual and the essential. The essence of value consists of the factors which fulfill the desire for the values truth, goodness, and beauty (the desire which seeks after value). The actuality of value (actual value) signifies the joy expressed by the subject when it comes in contact with concrete things or actions with such factors. The essence of value consists of the following two factors. (ii) The Purpose of Creation The first factor is the purpose of creation. All objects created by God have purposes. In the case of all the created beings, other than man, God's purpose of creation is straightforwardly expressed. Man, on the other hand, can find this purpose of creation (mission or responsibility) with his free will and must fulfill it himself. Thus, God's true purpose of creation is not always realized by every individual. The same thing can be said about man's actions and the works (products) made by human hands. Thus, behind all existing beings, we find God's purpose for making them. These purposes, however, should not remain hidden or as mere potential but should actually appear as definite purposes of individuals (purposes for the whole and for the individual) so that they might be achieved. Any existing being without a purpose is regarded as worthless. (iii) The Give-and-Take Action of Relative Elements and Harmony The second factor is the G-T action (harmony). Centering on the purpose, the relative elements which are Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positive and negative, movement and quiescence, large and small, strong and weak, and so on, should remain in harmony through their mutual G-T action. Whether natural or artificial, all things necessarily have a purpose of creation and should be in harmony through the give-and-take action between the two elements within each being. This harmony through the give-and-take law is another essence of value. For example, man's highest purpose is to act for the whole or God and to offer joy to the whole (God). When man, centering on this purpose, creates harmony through the G-T action between his spiritual mind (Sung Sang) and physical mind (Hyung Sang), or when he carries on a life of harmony through the giveand-take action with others (for example, brothers or friends), in Unification Thought this harmony is regarded as the essence of value of human beings. In such cases, the man who forms such harmony, even though he is a man, is dealt with as the object, not as the subject of the judgment of value. In other words, the man who is fulfilling his purpose and maintaining harmony must be an object to the subject which is needed to accept the value. Considering the blooming flowers of the natural world, we find that they too have a purpose to fulfill beauty so that they may please human beings. Here again a smooth give-and-take action can be seen between the external relative elements centering on this purpose. This smooth action, in short, is harmony. This harmony occurs, for instance, among a flower's colors, shapes, sizes, positions and so on which are all external elements of flowers. In other words, the relative elements of things' Hyung Sang aspects express differences. Harmony comes from the differences of these external elements. Seeing the external forms of objects, various differences are noticed in their width, size, movements, height, length, color and so forth. When the differences of these relative elements are united into one by a mutual action (union of variety) then truth, goodness, and beauty appear. White clouds against a blue sky, and butterflies or bees flying around flowers are good examples of such beauty (harmony).
cvi In these examples the former things show movement and the latter quiescence, and all the differences of color, size and shape including movement present a harmonious state. Beauty is not perceived strikingly in the monotonous but rather in stirring variety and difference, because harmony appears only among variety and differences. Nature is beautiful by itself, but if man, the subject, appears in it, he makes it more beautiful; he makes the harmony even more striking, because by man's presence, more variety (difference) has been added. However, when existing beings fulfill their actual purpose of creation and also produce harmony through the give-and-take action between relative elements, this does not yet mean that they have created actual value. Actual value appears to the subject as a judgment while the give-and-take action between the subject and object occurs. A judgment is a subjective view. To realize a value, therefore, a subject must exist as the active judge of the value. Section E - The Decision of Actual Value and the Standard of Value (i) The Decision of Actual Value How is value realized and actually decided? Generally, it is decided by the mutual action (give-and-take) conducted between the "objective conditions" and "subjective conditions." Objective conditions are the essence of the above-mentioned value, that is, the purpose of creation and the harmony brought about through the give-and-take action of the relative elements in the object. (This harmony corresponds to that created by the law of give-and-take of the relative elements in the subject.) The subjective conditions are mainly the subject's internal conditions- thoughts or conceptions, views of life or of the world, his God-given personality and so forth. For example, man feels joy as a creator only when he has an object; that is, when he sees the product of his work, whether it be painting or sculpture, in which his plan is substantiated. In this way, he is able to feel his own character and form objectively through the stimulation derived from the product of his work. (Divine Principle, p. 42) In this way the three values-truth, goodness and beauty-all come to be perceived and the subject, above all, can feel his own Sung Sang in the object. Then, what is the Sung Sang of the subject in this case? While perceiving value, the Sung Sang consists of the thoughts, conceptions and views of the world based on the thoughts, individual character, feelings and so forth of the subject. Namely all these compose the Sung Sang (conditions) of the subject. Value is decided by the give-and-take action between these conditions of the subject and the objective conditions (the purpose of creation and the harmony of the Sung Sang elements). For instance, the actual value (e.g. beauty) of flowers is decided by the reciprocal relationship between the objective conditions such as the purpose of creation of the flower (the harmony of colors and size, etc.), and the subjective conditions (such as the thoughts, tastes, artistic feelings and the view of nature and so forth). (ii) Subjective Action The fact that the subjective conditions are important in the decision of value means that the subject sometimes projects his own thoughts, conceptions, feelings, views and so on onto the object. Such a projecting action of the subject is called "Subjective Action." When poets view flowers or the moon, for instance, they add a variety of imaginations and ideas to it and put forth new meanings, different from those of scientists. Thus the flowers and the moon are seen differently by poets and scientists. When one has a sorrowful heart, the moon often looks lonely. Even the same flowers, according to our different feelings, whether we feel good or uneasy, display different beauties. Thus, the subjective elements greatly influence the decision of value. In deciding beauty (appreciating beauty) this projection of subjectivity onto the object is called subjective action. At any rate, attention should be paid to the fact that the process of the realization of value is not a passive reflecting of the objective world to the subject but is the active recognition and pursuing activity of the subject.
cvii (iii) The Importance of the Subjective Conditions The importance of the subjective conditions can be clearly understood when we see historical remains, cultural assets or other relics of the past. As we gain wider knowledge about these historical things, they take on new meaning and display deeper beauty. Likewise in the case of art, for example, through special knowledge of music and sculpture, we can perceive more value (beauty) in them. Thus it is by forming a correlation, namely it is by the give-and-take action between the subjective condition and the objective condition, that the actual value is decided. The decision of goodness is the same as that of beauty. Since "the kingdom of God is in the midst of you." (Luke 17:21) when love fills in our spirit, we can honestly tolerate all the faults of others. Thus if the thought and feeling of the subject were reformed, the object would acquire new meaning, the dark side of him would be hidden, and new value revealed. To state the above briefly, both the objective and subjective conditions are involved in the decision of value, but the subjective factor is more decisive. (iv) The Standard of Value What is the standard for the decision of value? As already stated the subject factor plays an important role in the decision of value. So the "self" (subject) becomes very important. Self and others both have common objective elements (elements separate from the subject) like thoughts. The purpose of creation and the relative elements which the object includes, are also considered objective elements. But even though there are a number of common, universal, objective elements in the conditions of both the subject and object, they can not become the complete standard of value. Each person is a unique individual truth body expressing an Individual Image of God. Individuals, therefore, have their own peculiar ways of accepting value, which is quite natural for men. The standard for the decision of value is the union of both the universally common, objective side and the peculiar, individual side. Neither of these two sides should be ignored. (v) Relative Elements and Absolute Elements Thus, the value of the object is decided by the relationships between the object, which has established a harmony through give-and-take action of relative elements centering on the purpose of creation, and man's desire to seek after value. The value of these relationships [may be] merely temporary and of a relative nature [or eternal and absolute, depending on the degree to which the purpose of creation is fulfilled.] Then how can we acquire eternal absolute value? The purpose for which God created this world was to be filled with joy at seeing created beings (namely men) express values of truth, goodness and beauty and exchange love among themselves. God's purpose of creation is absolute. Accordingly, the purpose of existence of each created being is also absolute. The created beings are all individual truth bodies, so they contain God's Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, or positive and negative elements (relative elements). These polarities of God are absolute, too. Therefore, if man completely perceives the purpose of creation of the object (all things) and the relative elements of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and if he fully understands God's purpose of creation for himself (mission) and completes the give-and-take action with others, then the values which he seeks and realizes become absolute. Embracing the whole creation, Christ fell into great grief and sorrow but yet perfectly fulfilled the mission given to him (purpose of creation) and conducted the give-and-take action (love) with his neighbors most completely. He did his best for the salvation of mankind even when he was crucified on the cross. So the value realized by Christ is absolute. To live in such a way is man's absolute
cviii standard of value. Every man has such a standard of value as a possibility (dynamis). As his purpose of creation is absolute, and as man is created as the substantial object of God (the absolute), his standard of value can not but be absolute. Section F - Present Day Life and Value (i) The View of Purpose and Value Finally, let us consider the relation between present-day life and value in view of today's serious mental and material crisis. Today, we live in material plenty, but, on the other hand, the true purpose of our life is not clear at all. Since value is decided by purpose, once a clear view of purpose is lost then value also naturally loses the foundation on which it stands. Then all of life becomes worthless and hollow. Without purpose, creativity and duty (the standard of ethics) will also vanish. Kant explains that it is by practical reason (reason used for practical action) that the will to do good is grounded and decided. By practical reason the duty (standard of our actions) is established and man is directed toward this obligation by good will. This is ethics and morality. In this case, the purpose is set up by practical reason. Thus practical reason becomes the lawmaker of man's will. But Kant regarded the law as an inevitable, unconditional order and soundly refused to regard it as a means of realizing some purpose. But is there meaning in deeds merely done by "duty" without a purpose? Even if there is some meaning, it would be difficult to perceive the deeds as valuable and to feel joy without a sense of purpose. Why did Kant say that there is no sense of purpose guiding man toward ethics and morals? Is it not because he did not have a clear understanding of God's purpose for creating man? Today, people are not clear about the purpose of creation. As a result, they have many various views of purpose, all different from one another-this is the cause of the present collapse of the view of value. (ii) The Necessity of a New View of Value This problem of value has been dealt with simply by traditional religions. Buddhism, for instance, starting from the study of human suffering, tries to develop the inner human spiritual powers and by individual practice, accomplish the true human nature, which is the highest ideal of their doctrine. It preaches that to reach this goal (ideal), man must have mercy on all living creatures as well as on other human beings, and, founded on this merciful heart, moral practices and meditation are required. But in relation to Buddhism's attitudes toward society, it just generally refers to an individual's success in life, and does not clearly indicate the way that families, nations and the world ought to be. Christianity also has a basic teaching in its doctrine, that one must love God and his neighbors. But within this doctrine, individual morals are emphasized too, and the purpose for the creation of the whole world, this purpose which links the world, nations, families and individuals together, is not clearly explained. Traditional Christianity can not give a distinct answer to the complicated social problems such as how a nation should be and how struggle should be solved. For this reason people today can not completely depend on the existing religions, philosophies and thought systems. They are, therefore, remarkably inclined to be skeptical about these ideologies and a disuse of ideology appears. In spite of this men are desperately groping for the real view of value, a unified and dependable view, since they find their lives worthless because of this loss of their mental support and this collapse of value. The life led by hippies is a good example of this.
cix In the fields of politics or economy, as they are also based on human relationships, the establishment of a view of value naturally becomes necessary. In conclusion, we consider that since this world was created by God, there is no other way to find the true view of value than to perceive exactly what God's purpose for creation is. Chapter IV - Ethics In the future, the establishment of an unshakable ethical system will be of paramount importance. Unification Thought holds that the ethics of the family is the basis of all ethics. In this Chapter the basic questions of the establishment of a view of ethics will be answered, and the defects of traditional ethical theories such as those of Bentham, Kant, and Moore will be pointed out. Section A - The Necessity of Unification Ethics and its Origin in the Unification Principle a. The Necessity of Ethics The ideal of the Unification Principle in the future is to found an ethical society centering on God's love. Accordingly, the problem of ethics is sure to be one of the most important social questions of the future society, just as it is already considered a great problem in the present society. judging from the present tendencies of the weakening of community consciousness and the collapse of the perception of value, nothing is more urgently required than the establishment of a new ethical viewpoint and system. In this situation, Unification Thought will try to establish a new ethics, namely an ethics that reveals the goal for the future and satisfies the urgent need of the present society. b. The Basis of Ethics in the Unification Principle The following are the ethical bases which are closely related to the establishment of a new ethics according to the Unification Principle. God -- God, whose essence is love (Heart), is the ultimate subject of love and goodness from the viewpoint of value and practice. Therefore God should be the ultimate basis of ethics. Family -- God's love is actualized through the Four Position Base of the family centering on God's love (God, father, mother, and children). In other words, the family is the base for the realization of the love of God. Consequently ethics should be established on the basis of the relations of Heart among family members. Love -- The source of the values truth, goodness, and beauty is love, so love is the core of ethics. The Purposes of the Triple Objects and Triple Subjects-Every position of the Family Four Position Base has both the purpose of triple objects and triple subjects. In other words, as both subject and object, the children have relationships with God, their father, and mother; the father with God, his wife, and children; and the mother with God, her husband and children; and of course, God relates to the father, mother and children. Unification ethics will be established on the basis of these four factors mentioned above. Section B - The Definition of Ethics What does ethics mean? According to Unification Thought, it is referred to as the norm for human conduct based on the family. Ethics, in Principle, is the ethics of the family which is the basis of all ethics. Though there may be social, national, business, and world ethics, the basis and core of all of them is family ethics. In other words, all of these ethics are expanded forms of family ethics.
cx Social ethics is the social expansion of family ethics, and national ethics is their national expansion. Ultimately, all ethics originate from family ethics. Therefore where there is ignorance of family ethics, there can be no hope of establishing any social ethics. This is the definition of ethics based on the Unification Principle. Section C - Ethics and Morality Here the difference between the concepts of ethics (Sittlichkeit) on the one hand and morality (Mortalitat) on the other, will be made clear. They generally seem to be considered as having the same meaning, but a strict distinction is made between them in Unification Thought. Viewed through the Unification Principle, ethics is the standard of conduct of a family member based on the family, whereas morality is the standard of conduct based on the internal "duty" (Sollen). Accordingly, ethics is the objective standard, whereas morality is the subjective one. To express this in ontological terms, ethics is the standard which a connected body observes, while morality is the standard which an individual truth body follows. Man forms an Outer Quadruple Base as a connected body with a family, and the standard of action which mutually connected bodies observe is ethics. Morality is the living standard of action which individual truth bodies maintain, according to "duty" (Sollen), through forming the eternal Inner Quadruple Base. Thus ethics is objective (norm) and morality is subjective (volition). However, they are not completely separated. Though morality is subjective, its form is ruled by ethics, the objective norm. Section D - Family Four Position Base and Ethics a. God's Ideal of Creation and the Family Four Position Base According to the Unification Principle God is the subject of love and His ideal of creation is the fulfillment of love. For God's love to be actualized, the family Four Position Base, the base of love, should be established. Since the Four Position Base is a relationship of position, God's love comes to appear through positions. The love that appears through each position is called "Divisional Love", namely parental love, conjugal love, and children's love. God's love itself is unified and absolute, but His love is actualized divisionally and relatively through the family base. Love is divided because man was created to be the heir of God's Heart, and this succession of heart is possible only through physical life. Therefore throughout their lives as children, husband and wife, and parents, man and woman practice love in order to experience God's love. b. The Actualizing Process of Love As love is emotional, it is necessary to establish its purpose by emotion and its direction by will. Namely, first the direction and goal of love are decided, and then mind moves toward the goal. That is will itself. It is emotion that moves the will. Where there is will, there is naturally emotion. Purpose is also set up by this emotion. Thus for God's love to be manifested in the divided expressions of man's love in the family means to manifest love directing toward a definite goal. For instance, a son loves his father, a husband his wife, and a mother her son. Thus there is direction in love; without direction, actual love can not appear. This is a necessary factor in the establishment of ethics. Concretely speaking, every position of the Four Position Base actualizes love in three directions, that is, as a triple subject and as a triple object. Children face God, their father and mother; the father faces God, his wife and children; and the mother faces God, her husband and children. Every position of the Four Position Base has the purpose of realizing love toward three objects as a subject. Therefore, love becomes will which has a direction and moves toward three objects. This direction of will is the very form of will. Accordingly, in actualizing love, form is required. The standard of conduct that regulates this form of will is ethics. In this respect, there is an indivisible relationship between the family Four Position Base and ethics. Next, each position of the Four Position Base also loves the other three positions from the standpoint of being an object. This is referred to as the purpose of triple subjects. The loving action which the object
cxi returns to its subject is beauty, and in the manifestation of this beauty, three forms are needed. According to these three forms of will, the basic forms of three actions are formed. These basic forms are nothing but the norms of conduct and also ethics. From the basic forms mentioned above appear loyalty, filial piety, and obedience, which are the traditional oriental ideas of morality. Filial piety is the form of action denoting the beauty which children return to their parents; obedience is the manifestation of beauty which the wife offers to her husband; and loyalty is filial piety expanded to a social and national scale. Loyalty is the form of the love of the people for their nation, of a servant for his master, and of a subject for the king. Thus all ethics are standards (norms) of action which fulfill the purposes of the triple objects and triple subjects. Thus there can be no doubt that family ethics is the basis of the ethics required in social life.* All the love that man manifests is applied, changed or combined family love, and all the beauty that man feels is also the applied, changed, or combined beauty of the family. It may also be mentioned that all ethics, or standards of goodness, are applied, changed, and mixed family ethics: the expanded value systems of the family. The regulations (norm) of the family are called family rules and these family rules alone become the basis of all rules (laws). [Note: There are two kinds of concepts in the purpose of triple objects; one is the broad meaning and the other is the narrow meaning. The relationships mentioned above are the purpose of triple objects in the narrow meaning. The broad meaning of the purpose of triple objects contains both the relationships of the narrow meaning and the purpose of triple subjects. In the Unification Thought, only the purpose of triple objects in the broad meaning is recorded.] Family rules are the ultimate standard for the basis of national or constitutional law. There are also norms and laws in the spiritual world, and these are also based on the family rules. Consequently he who maintains a harmonious family through household regulations can also observe national law or heavenly law. c. The Principle of Order in Ethics Since ethics is based on the family Four Position Base, this Four Position Base is a manifestation of the basic mutual relationships of the different positions. Therefore ethics also has a principle of order, for order means the arrangement of positions, and is the norm of the clear arrangement of the positions of God, father, mother, children, brothers and sisters. The Unification Principle contains the principles of order and love. Their basis lies in the manifested norm and principles of family life. There can not be a norm without order, and where there is no order, no principle of love can be actualized. The peculiar feature of modern society can be said to be its loss of order which has resulted in the present state of chaos. The positions of upper and lower, before and after, and left and right have all been broken down. This collapse of the ideas of value and ethics is due to the loss of the arrangement of positions, that is to say, order. In families today, the parents, husband and wife, children, brothers and sisters do not keep their proper positions. There is an increasing tendency for children and wives to treat their parents and husbands as strangers. All this comes from leaving their own positions, and it has finally brought about a lack of ethics. Accordingly, in order to reform the collapsed idea of value and ethics, order must first be established. For that purpose, it is first necessary that the family Four Position Base be established in one's place of work, to say nothing of the home. For example, the teachers of a school should teach the students from the standpoint of parents, the young students should face their teachers as they do their parents, and should face the older students as they do their elder brothers. From ancient times, family ethics were formed in the Orient under Confucian influence, and because of this background, students have been respectful to their teachers, in the same way that children are respectful to their parents, and teachers have assumed the leadership of the students as though they were their own children. But now this ethical system is falling down everywhere causing modern society to be thrown into confusion. The establishment of the ethical system based on the family Four Position Base is the most urgent question in the present day society. Then how shall the family Four Position Base be established? We need to remember that the ancient traditional family ethics were based on the Confucian religion. In other words, a sort of "modern Confucianism" is indeed needed in order to establish family ethics, since ethics can not be established without a religion.
cxii This "modern Confucianism" need not be like the traditional Confucianism, but a religion which can set up family ethics is necessary in order to try to rectify the value system which is collapsing. In this meaning, as far as its relationship to the establishment of family ethics, the Unification Principle may be likened to a sort of "modern Confucianism." d. Order and Equality The word "equality" is so charming that everyone likes it. But in the strict sense of the word, there can be no equality. Equality originally means no discrimination, but there can not but be the discrimination between ages, sexes, and occupations. Also since the capabilities, characters, and hobbies of people are different, there can hardly be an expectation of equality in economic life. Furthermore, as every person in charge of certain levels of posts, organizations, nations, or the world is to be given appropriate rights, neither can there be equality of rights. Thus equality can not exist in the realms of biology, occupations, economy, and rights. Man is only equal before the law. Though man is equal before the law, this is far from complete equality. Nowadays, many people in the democratic societies feel inequality even though they are supposedly equal before the law. In a certain sense, the capitalist contradictions and defects may be said to have been aggravated under the shadow of "equality before the law." Then is equality eternally unrealizable? No, it can and should be realized. How can it possibly be done? It is possible only within order. Genuine equality is in love; there is true equality only in God's love, and God's love is manifested only through order. Where there is no order, God's love can not appear. Love is the flow of heart and where an orderly system centering on God is established, heart flows and love is realized. This creates equality. Equality is an equality of the effect of satisfaction and joy. In other words, it does not mean a mere equality of economy and rights, but an equality of "feelings" by which all people are thoroughly pleased-feelings of freedom, value, and happiness. Therefore, without heart and love, equality can not exist. When order centering on God is established, true equality can be expected because love, the flow of heart, is fully realized. Consequently true equality is not realized in the external world through an atheistic destruction of order, but in the internal world through a theistic established order. Yet this does not mean one should ignore the external world. According to the Unification Principle, Sung Sang is accompanied by Hyung Sang. Thus as inner equality is externally developed a reduction of material differences is automatically realized. That is economic equality in a genuine sense. Thus equality is realized only within order and love, and the basis of order and love is the family. Therefore when the family order, namely the family Four Position Base is formed and family ethics are established, the basis will also be formed on which complete equality can be realized. Section E - Critique of the Traditional Theories of Goodness a. Critique of the Modern Viewpoints of Goodness (i) Bentham's Utilitarianism With the sudden rise of the economy-centered modern culture based on individualism, which followed the collapse of the religious social order of the ecclesiastical medieval world, the viewpoints of ethics and goodness have changed considerably. Bentham is one of the typical new ethical thinkers.
cxiii He advocated the principle of utility as the basic principle for judging the right and wrong of public and private actions. This means that whatever promotes pleasure is good, whereas whatever promotes pain is evil. Finally, Bentham considers, the greatest happiness of the greatest number as the ultimate standard of good and evil. He attempted a mathematical calculation of the quantity of pleasure and pain. The Unification Principle has no objection to putting the basis of good and evil as the quantity of happiness, because, according to the Unification Principle the ultimate purpose of this world is the joy of God and man. The question is, however, what are the contents of this happiness? Happiness does not mean a mechanically totaled amount of pleasure. True happiness is far beyond the passive pleasure which comes from material conditions. The feelings of freedom, worth and satisfaction which come when a man has realized truth, goodness and beauty and is living within God's love; these are happiness. For men to live within God's love, means they convey God's love to others. Therefore the man who lives within God's love feels joy and loves others even amidst persecution. Many martyrs lived happy lives, loving all people as their own. This however does not mean one should disregard material conditions in relation to happiness. A more exact view according to the Unification Principle is to say that original happiness is realized only through the combined conditions of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. However, since the subject element of the two is the Sung Sang, where nothing is made of the Sung Sang love there can be no realization of happiness. Accordingly there can be no happiness without God who is the source of love. Bentham's scheme to disregard the relationship with God and seek happiness not in the love of God and ethics, but in material pleasure, is an inadmissible and anti-ethical thought according to the viewpoint of Unification Thought. Reacting to these defects of Bentham, J. S. Mill said, "I would be a dissatisfied man rather than satisfied swine. I would be a discontented Socrates rather than a contented dunce." Emphasizing the conscience and moral feeling of man, John Stuart Mill tried to complement the defects of Bentham's Theory. (ii) The Categorical Imperative of Kant Thus Bentham tried to make "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" the standard of good and evil. But Kant advocated that it can not be moral in the genuine sense of the word to regard the means to accomplish a purpose as a moral act. If a man is honest in order to be popular, this can lead to the conclusion that a man who does not want to win popularity need not be honest, and it also leads to the conclusion that once a man had gained popular favor, then he could lie. Then honesty itself can not become an absolute law for everyone to observe. If it is right to be honest, it should be right regardless of popular favor. Namely what is right should be absolute. Kant meant that morality was absolute. To give absoluteness to moral rules, Kant said that morality should not be an action done by the hypothetical imperative of gaining popular favor, but there should be a form of categorical imperative which can instruct one to be honest unconditionally. Kant, furthermore, advocated that everyone must act such that his "maxim" of will may be true to the universal legislative principle. Kant maintained that when one governs his actions in relation to a moral principle such as to "be honest" rather than as the means to accomplish worldly profit, this is a genuine moral act. Kant's assertion seems to have appeared in order to counter the potential selfishness of the utilitarian moral viewpoint, and to establish an absolute norm of human conduct which is impartial to individual gain. It is just like Jewish legalism to treat only the form of conduct as absolute, disregarding the purpose and usefulness of the act. These aspects become an issue in the viewpoint of the Unification Principle. Can anything which is not a means to any purpose be valid as the universal legislative principle? How can there be action without a purpose?
cxiv There are no human actions which do not try to accomplish some definite purpose. Both active and passive actions have some purpose. This can be seen to be true just by common sense, but how much more evident it is when one recognizes God's purpose of creation. No matter how absolutely and universally valid a moral action may be, there is without fail some purpose to it. It is a suicide of action to exclude purpose from moral principles. In order to have moral action not be meaningless, the purpose of action should first be established, for purpose alone can be the standard for the universal validity of moral action. Kant considered that pure reason, which recognizes the principles of the objective world (sensory, phenomenal world), is quite different from practical reason which gives moral principles to man. Here a question arises. According to Kant, human moral action itself is "duty" and purpose, and this purpose is established only through practical reason. If this occurs without involving pure reason, the purpose (motive) established before the deed may, in a sense, attain universality by obtaining the consent of all people; but after the deed is done following that particular purpose, there can Be no guarantee that those people who didn't know of the purpose beforehand will objectively perceive and agree that the deed was just. If there is no assurance of objectivity and actuality in the purpose, there is no assurance of objectivity in the norm of conduct (maxim in Kant's conception). This norm of conduct comes to have significance only through its relation with purpose. To put it in plain terms, Kant's categorical imperative may have ideological coherence and validity, but there is no way to identify any actual contradictions in or the continuity of actions while using his theory. However, in the Unification Principle, the purpose of ethical actions, or the norm deductively derived from the purpose, is concrete, objective and actual. In the first place, ethical actions have the purpose of the triple objects and triple subjects. These purposes are to establish love relationships with concrete beings in the phenomenal world, such as one's father, mother, brother, sister, spouse and children as well as the actual love-relation with God. Since this purpose is objective and concrete, the norm of loving one's parents, brothers, spouse and children can also be objectively and concretely determined. The Unification Principle does not ignore the particular positions within the Four Position Base and does not present vain and abstract standards such as maxims for everybody to observe, regardless of time and place. Even in the love one person gives, differences exist in the manner of loving according to the object being loved. For example, one expresses love to his parents, spouse and children in different manners. Different attitudes are also required according to each position and standpoint. Even the same action may be regarded as evil if its direction, time and quantity break away from the purpose. Thus the purpose is established first; and the good and evil of one's actions are determined in relation to the purpose, and one's conduct norm differs according to his position. If this is all true, then where can the universal and absolute assurance of the moral principles be found? Here an important question arises. Is the standard God or man? If man becomes the standard of moral action, no matter how honest and sincere his actions may be, he may find himself unhappy, because if he does not act to gain popular favor, people may not be able to understand his actions as moral actions. But when God, the Absolute Being, becomes the moral standard, there can never be this kind of misjudgment of human value. Also, even though man may ignore God's purpose of creation, the purpose never disappears, and each man will be rewarded or have to pay indemnity according to his actions. Therefore, if the evaluation of the good and evil of human actions is made according to the degree of fulfillment of the purpose which was set up by man's own free will, this evaluation will become relative, as Kant pointed out. But when God's own purpose of creation becomes the standard, the evaluation will not be relative. The moral principle loses its absoluteness not because it becomes merely the means to accomplish a particular purpose, but because it becomes the means to fulfill only human purposes which oppose (or have no regard for) God's purpose of creation. If a moral principle is for the realization of God's own purpose of creation, it does not lose absoluteness, but rather it will be guaranteed absoluteness.
cxv The second question which arises here is that of the misunderstanding which occurs due to confusing the Sung Sang purpose with the Hyung Sang purpose. According to the Unification Principle man is God's substantial object as a direct image created by the development of God's duality. Thus man has both Sung Sang and Hung Sang purposes. "To give love to the triple objects" is the Sung Sang purpose (purpose for the whole) of man, so it is eternal, unchangeable, absolute. Meanwhile "making money" and "becoming the divisional chief" are Hyung Sang purposes (purposes for the individual). The purpose for the whole is fulfilled only through the purpose for the individual, and the significance and value of the purpose for the individual are determined only through the purpose for the whole. Yet, because God bestowed freedom on man, He gave man only the purposes for the whole and the individual and left the methods and forms for fulfilling the purposes up to man himself. For example, though the purpose to give love to the triple objects is absolute and unchangeable, the way and process of doing this are left up to man's free will. Therefore if we separate a method or means from the absolute purpose, and if we judge the good or evil of any action only by this separated method or means, our judgment can only be relative. The means or form itself, separated from the purpose, can not be the standard for judging good and evil. Accordingly, from the limited viewpoint that "the standard of moral judgment should be laid on the action as a means or method regardless of purpose", Kant's assertion may be right, but if the action is connected to a purpose (especially the purpose for the whole) Kant's assertion must be wrong. After all, to judge morality by actions which fulfill the purpose for the individual regardless of the purpose for the whole, or by actions as mere means in themselves is wrong, and to determine good and evil in relation to the purpose for the whole (Sung Sang purpose) is right. There is another point of Kant's assertion which should be criticized. He said that the determining factor of good will is neither God's purpose nor His command, but one's own practical reason which regulates moral principles with the categorical imperative. According to Kant it is practical reason which gives direction to the will. We regard Heart, namely love, as the ultimate incentive to moral action. Love moves will through a norm and then determines the form of good will. Although one comes to have the will to act due to reason, what moves reason itself is love, for love is Heart. Purpose itself comes about through the Heart (desire), and it brings about the voluntary action which brings about moral action. Therefore, good will does not really come about to actualize reason, but to realize love's purpose. Of course, reason is needed to concretely form and examine the purpose, but the motive itself and purpose itself of ethical behavior is not reason but love. Only in this case does true joy appear. Thus, the norm necessary for realizing purpose is not felt as a restraint but rather as an assurance of actualizing the purpose which is to feel joyful and thankful. Though a world consisting only of duty, as Kant contends, may exist, it would be a mechanical world where only inhumane cold principles would rule. Because this kind of world is one of inconvenience and restraint, where duty alone is forcibly required, there is no room for joy in it. The world created by God is not one based on restraint like the army, but one of harmony which is maintained through the order of family love based on desire and purpose. b. Critique of the Current Viewpoints of Goodness Reflecting on, and reacting against, the medieval ethical viewpoint established by Scholasticism, new ethical theories such as utilitarianism (Bentham) and the categorical imperative (Kant) appeared in the modern age. These modern rationalistic ethical theories reached their zenith in the German idealism from Kant to Hegel. After that, due to the class struggle which arose in capitalistic society, and the brilliant progress of science, optimistic modern rationalism has come under severe criticism. As a result, current philosophies such as Marxism, existentialism, vitalism, analytical philosophy (logical positivism), pragmatism and the like have appeared. Communism, A Critique and Counterproposal criticizes Marxism in detail, and "The Original Human Nature," in this book criticizes existentialism. Here only the ethical theories (theories of goodness) of logical positivism and pragmatism will be criticized.
cxvi (i) The Intuitionism of Moore (1873-1958) Analytical philosophy developed in connection with the progress of natural science at the beginning of the 20th century. It tried to make philosophy a scientific study by expelling all the unscientific concepts not verifiable by experience. This was accomplished by logically analyzing philosophical terminology. Moore, one of the advocates of this school of thought, said that ultimate good in itself can not be derived from a scientific judgment of the fact, but rather by moral intuition. He contended that, in principle, the judgment of a fact should be distinguished from the judgment of value. This is called Intuitionism. According to Moore, the concept of good is simple and indistinguishable just ' like the concept of "yellow." Accordingly a general definition can not be given through language but only through intuition. He contends that good, as meaning bringing about good, can be objectively known only by reducing it to an intuition of the good through the medium of scientific cognition. But this way of thinking can not be sustained from the viewpoint of the Unification Principle. Goodness is never undefinable. In goodness, there are the precise purposes of the triple objects and the triple subjects, and a clear standard (norm) can be defined corresponding to purpose. By means of this norm the forms of good will and good action are settled, and the entire process of action becomes the object of logical and positive cognition. (ii) The Emotive Theory of Logical Positivism What made Intuitionism even more radical is the emotive theory of Schlick (1882-1936) and Ayer (1910- ) According to Ayer, an ethical proposition, such as "to steal money is bad", is nothing but the speaker's own feelings and mood of moral disapproval. Thus it is a pseudo proposition, and is neither true nor false. Accordingly, no objective character of good can be intuited or expressed, and finally no study of ethics can be formed. From the viewpoint of the Unification Principle such a theory of ethics is absurd. The concept of good has a clear basis of existence, namely the family Four Position Base, and the clear purposes of the triple subjects and triple objects. This is a scientifically definable concept. To steal money is bad because it breaks one's heart relation with the person from whom the money was stolen and thus makes the love-relation between brothers hard. Goodness is a clear and objective concept, which originates from God's purpose of creation. It is not merely one's feelings or mood. The critique of the rest of this theory is the same as that given to Moore's theory. (iii) The Instrumentalism Theory of Pragmatism Pragmatism appeared in America right after the Civil War (1861-1865). The changes in traditional Christian thought due to the technical progress of science was its main motive. Instrumentalism is the outcome of a harmonization of the conflict between Christianity and science. This theory was advocated by Pierce (1839-1914) and clarified by James (1842-1910) and developed to Instrumentalism by Dewey (1859-1952). The fundamental thought of the theory was to apply the scientific experimental method to the analysis of ideas and concepts. According to this theory, the significance of an idea or concept is determined by the practical results derived from the idea or concept. For example, the meaning of "something is heavy" is that "without a force to support the matter, it will fall." Pierce, the advocator of this standpoint, called it Operationalism. He contended that the meaning of an idea is nothing but the contents of the actions which result from the idea. Making this assertion more radical, Dewey said that general concepts are hypotheses and experimental plans developed in order to interpret each situation. The authenticity of these concepts is determined by the effectiveness of the result of the actions based on them. Accordingly all the laws and the intelligence guiding them are merely the means, methods and instruments needed in order to deal with things effectively. Consequently, reality can be recognized only through the means of natural science. Dewey
cxvii denied the existence of anything transcendental; in this, however, his standpoint is quite different from that of William James who recognized the religious view of the world and tried to give appropriate coordinates to it. Is pragmatism right? Before criticizing it, let us explain the relationship between purpose and means in view of the Unification Principle. It goes without saying that a purpose needs a means. We know that there was a purpose for creation when God created the universe. Accordingly there is no need to say that means are necessary in order to fulfill the purpose. Yet there are purposes for the whole and the individual in the purpose of creation. To fulfill the purpose for the whole, the realization of value is required, whereas to realize the purpose for the individual, values are sought after. There are Sung Sang values such as truth, goodness and beauty, and Hyung Sang values such as treasures or commodities. All of these values are the means necessary to fulfill the purpose mentioned above. Accordingly, Sung Sang values can be called the Sung Sang means for the fulfillment of purpose, and Hyung Sang values can be called the Hyung Sang means for the fulfillment of purpose. Strictly speaking, even natural laws may be seen as the means to achieve the purpose of creation, while the spiritual laws such as the law of indemnity can also be regarded as such means. In this case, the spiritual laws can be called Sung Sang laws whereas the natural laws can be called Hyung Sang laws. The natural world is ruled over by the Hyung Sang principles, and spirit world is ruled by the Sung Sang principles such as those of indemnity and restitution. There can be no doubt that these principles are also the means to realize purposes. Thus we can see that there are both Sung Sang means (Sung Sang values and laws) and Hyung Sang means (Hyung Sang values and laws) for accomplishing purpose. But the means (tools) for "dealing with things" which Dewey advocated are Hyung Sang means, and to him these means alone can be the means for "dealing with things." (This dealing may relate to the purpose for the whole or the purpose for the individual.) Dewey's mistake is that he considered even the Sung Sang means (truth, good, and beauty, morality, justice, ethics, love, etc.) merely as Hyung Sang means for "dealing with things." This mistake originates in his overlooking the existence of the everlasting spirit man, the spirit world, and the existence of purpose which contains Sung Sang contents such as truth, goodness, and beauty in human life. [Note: In the above, even law and value were dealt with as "means" ("Hyung Sang means" and "Sung Sang means"), but only to effectively criticize pragmatism by the Principle. To avoid confusion, law, value and the like should not be regarded as means in the common sense.] Chapter V - Theory of History (Part 1) Human history is the history of re-creation and restoration. We may say that most historians in the past have not been successful in grasping the essence of history even though they have come close to it. In this chapter the basic standpoints and the principles of the Unification view of history are briefly explained. Section A - The View of History by the Unification Principle How should we grasp the meaning of history? First, let us think about the significance, character and direction of history. (i) The History of Sin As to the origin of history, the Unification Principle holds a clear viewpoint. We think that because of the fall of man a sinful history began. This is the basic premise and starting point of our historical philosophy. No problem can be solved until the basic question about man's sin is answered. In history, there have been many statesmen and people who were called righteous men, sages or saints, men who tried to make people as happy and free as possible. But without clarifying the essence of sin, why sin has spread, or, in short, without a systematic solution to various social problems through the clarification and ascertainment of the origin and content of sin, there can never be a fundamental settlement to history. This is the viewpoint of the Unification Principle concerning history.
cxviii (ii) The History of Re-creation and Restoration Viewed from another standpoint, the human fall means that God's creation is not yet completed. If so, we may say that God has to re-create fallen men and accomplish the original purpose of creation. Accordingly, human history is also the history of re-creation. If, throughout human history, men have to come back to their original positions, the history of re-creation may, in other words, be called the history of restoration. Thus the Unification Principle regards human history to be the history of sin, the history of re-creation and the history of restoration. This is the basic way of thinking contained in the Unification Principle concerning history. Section B - The Character of History According to the Unification Principle 1. Re-Creation By The Logos "In the beginning was the Word (Logos)." John 1: 1) After man fell, since God's word (Logos) was lost, people fell into ignorance. Accordingly, the re-creation of man must be started by recovering the lost Word. Then what was the process of the re-creation of the Word? The prophets, sages, and the Messiah were providential people who were entrusted with God's Word so that the Providence of re-creation was realized through them. Although, viewed from the standpoint of the Unification Principle, the value of the prophets, sages, the Messiah and other righteous men in the development of history is very great, most historians are apt to ignore the raison detre of these people. But we greatly appreciate these men, because they are the very men who have re-created history. 2. The Goal And Direction Of History As mentioned above, we regard human history as the history of re-creation. Re-creation being a kind of creation, it must have a goal like any other creation, and where there is a goal, there is naturally a direction. Accordingly, we think that human history has always been marching toward a certain goal. This continues today. The view that the goal and direction of history are fixed from the beginning may be a kind of determinism. But this determinism is a little different from that of Hegel or Marx. When history is viewed from the standpoint of determinism, there are two aspects: the goal or direction toward which history is marching and the process through which history is marching. The Unification Principle adopts determinism in reference to the goal or direction of history but thinks that the process of history is not always predetermined. In other words, we adopt the view of indeterminism in that we say the course toward the final goal of history depends upon the will of man, and setbacks take place along the way. It seems that many people are concerned about and discuss this problem, so let us further examine the determinism and indeterminism of history. (i) Hegel's View of History Hegel (1770-1831) held the following view of history. The substance of history is "Spirit" or "Reason" and the goal of history is the realization of freedom. In other words, the goal of history is that the spirit of freedom manifest itself through the subjective spirit in the spirit of the nation or the times, thus being elevated more and more. Therefore, in Hegel's theory, world history may be called the process in which the spirit (Absolute Spirit) seeks for self-cognition. According to Hegel, the spirit is shown especially in the history of the nation.
cxix Then, what is an individual's role in this history? How can the individual concern himself in this process in which the Absolute Spirit realizes itself? Hegel says that the individual takes part in the direction of reason through his interest, passion and absorption. When he is absorbed in something, he becomes endowed with a spirit higher than himself. That is to say, he becomes one with the spirit of the nation or of the times; his actions and the manifestation of his character take part in the development of history. In the meantime, irrational men, having no relation with the spirit of the times, are weeded out through war and strife. Hegel calls this the "Trick of Reason" (List der Vernunft). Though Hegel does not deny the role of the individual in history, he emphasizes the Absolute Spirit which is the master of history and regards the individual as a mere tool for the realization of the goal of history. Moreover, he thinks that not only the direction of the spirit, but also the process is fixed beforehand. This process is the dialectical logic of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. In this sense, we may say that Hegel's historical philosophy is deterministic. (ii) Marx's View of History Marx (1818-1883) held a view of history very similar to that of Hegel; he merely adapted Hegel's dialectic view of history to materialism. According to Marx, the development of history is caused by the contradiction between the productive forces and the production relations of society. At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production, or-what is but a legal expression for the same thing-with the property relations within which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an epoch of social revolution. (Marx, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, p. 182) That is to say, the contradiction between the productive forces and production relations necessarily brings about class struggle. The struggle develops into revolution, and after the revolution, the communistic society will take over without fail. Thus, like Hegel, Marx thinks that each individual is a mere tool for the development of history and that both the goal and process of history are fixed by the logic of the dialectic. In this sense, Marx's view of history is also deterministic. (iii) Spengler's View of History Spengler (1880-1936) denied the historical view of progress asserted by Hegel and Marx, and advocated a cyclical view of history. However, his way of thinking is also deterministic. According to Spengler, the various civilizations in the world rise and come to an end, like living beings which have a cycle of four rhythms, namely birth, development, maturity and decline. Western civilization is no exception; he asserts that this civilization has entered the period of decline or downfall. (Der Unterdang der Aberlandes, The Decline of the West) (iv) Toynbee's View of History Stimulated by the pioneering achievements of Spengler, Toynbee (1889- ) doubted Spengler's historical determinism and tried to grasp the meaning of world history as a whole from the viewpoint of civilizations. He regards the history of civilizations as a process of challenge and response. Placed in a difficult situation, man tries to respond to and overcome the challenge without yielding to it. Thus a civilization begins to grow and develop. If man fails in his response, decline and dissolution take place.
cxx A group of people called creative individuals or the creative minority play decisive roles in the history of civilizations. These people shoulder responsibilities, try to solve all the problems of their age, and educate other men to enable them to also respond to the difficulties. By doing so, they overcome the challenge. Therefore, growth or decline does not come necessarily; both depend upon the appearance of creative individuals or minorities who hold a "self-deciding ability" even under difficult conditions. The fate of world history depends on whether these people perform their responsibilities or not. Thus, Toynbee's view of history is indeterministic. But, according to the Unification Principle, the aim and direction of history are already determined absolutely due to reasons that will be stated in detail in the next section. The processes through which the goal of history is realized are varied however, and are not determined beforehand. In other words, the process of history depends upon the fulfillment of responsibility by a providential person. Such a view of history is called the "Theory of Responsibility" ("Responsibilitism"). 3. The Laws Of History If human history is the history of re-creation by God as stated already, there should be laws of history as well as a goal and direction. We look at the history of mankind from a Christian viewpoint. In the past, Christianity successfully took a wide view of history by declaring that human history is the history of the Providence of God. This Providence began by the fall of our ancestors and comes to an end by the appearance of the Messiah. However, this theory has not yet defined the objective laws that are at work in every nook and cranny of history. As a result, communism has held a certain superiority over Christianity by attacking the latter's weak points. The Driving Power of Historical Development Communists regard the development of history to be the same as the development of nature and treat the two in the same way. Thus, the history of mankind is developed by natural forces alone, namely by the contradiction between the productive forces and the production relations. There is no room in Communist theory for the working of supernatural powers such as God or any spiritual power. So long as history is grasped merely as a social science, unscientific concepts whose existence can not be clearly ascertained, such as the Providence, should all be neglected. This is what communists asserted, and they widely attacked Christianity with science as their shield. They attacked so violently that Christianity could not resist. However, we want to counterattack and overcome the philosophy and historical view held by Marxists by presenting the rules of God's re-creation and Providence more scientifically than they propound their historical philosophy. Then, what are the laws of re-creation? We are going to explain them briefly. Section C - The Laws of Re-Creation in History 1. The Laws Of Creation Since the re-creation of history is naturally a process of creation, it must be carried out following the principles of God's creation. If so, what are the principles of God's creation on which the movements of history should be based? We have already studied these in detail in the chapter on ontology; however, let us explain the principles which have an especially close relationship with historical laws, referring to their connections with actual developments in history. (1) The Law of Relativity
cxxi One of the most important laws of creation is that of relativity. This law concerns the fact that all things in the cosmos are created in relativity. That is, nothing can exist by itself; all things are created so that they can exist only by forming some relationships with others. Examples of this are man and woman; male and female animals; the stamen and pistil of plants; the positive and negative ions of molecules; the proton (nucleus) and electron of atoms; the spirit man and physical man or mind and body of individuals; the land and sea, mountains and plains, sky and ground, and sun and earth of the natural world; the governor and the governed; the society and the family; city and village of a country; the parents and children; husband and wife, and there are countless other examples. In these examples the former are subjects and the latter objects. Such relationships are not confined to created things alone. Relativity is also seen in the position and status of individuals, e.g. upper and lower, front and behind, left and right, high and low, strong and weak, long and short, large and small, wide and narrow, etc. Thus created things and the created world are all relative. That is, all things can exist only by connecting the relative positions of subject and object with each other. This law of creation is called the "Law of Relativity." This is because the creation is one of similarity. That is to say, all things have been created in polarity (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity). These are God's relative attributes, and thus all things have similar relationships with each other. (2) The Law of Give-and-Take If an individual forms a correlative standard with another individual by the Universal Prime Force, through this base made by the subject and object, a phenomenon of giving and receiving occurs. This phenomenon is called the give-and-take action and by this action, the subject and object become inseparable and united. This relation or condition is called the correlative base and only when there is a correlative base can these individuals maintain their existence. Accordingly, the correlative base is the existence base for each individual. If the subject and object form the correlative base by a harmonious G-T action, they become similar to God as a harmonized body of polarity. When there is an ideal union, all the various phenomena of life, multiplication (growth, development, etc.) and the various operations (movement, change, etc.) occur. All phenomena such as growth, movement, development, change and extinction happen in the natural world as a result of the G-T action between numberless individuals. [Note: All things come from the ultimate source which is common to them all, so that all things are involved in the process in which subject and object combine with each other or carry out multiplication by the give-and-take action, namely, the Four Position Base (origin, subject, object, and multiplied body), and the three stages [cause (origin) subject and object (division)-multiplied body (union)]. If the progress of time is especially taken into consideration, the G-T action may be called the action of Chung-Boon-Hap (origin-division-union).] Now let us look at some examples of the G-T action. By the G-T action between the sun and the earth, the phenomena of the rotation and the revolution of the earth occur, and by G-T action, the multiplication of creatures on the earth is carried out. By the G-T action between husband and wife, their home is maintained and they produce offspring. In the human body, the physiological functions are maintained by the G-T actions between the arteries and veins and the sympathetic nervous system and parasympathetic nervous system. The functions of plants are maintained by the G-T action between the xylem and phloem. In the case of molecules, the necessary chemical reactions occur by the G-T action between positive ions and negative Ions. In atoms, movement occurs through the G-T action between the proton (nucleus) and the electron. By a smooth give-and-take action between the government and people, industry is developed and the country prospers. In school too, ideal education is achieved and the school will develop by good G-T action between the teachers and pupils. In the case of business companies, they will become prosperous, bringing about common welfare, if the G-T action is carried out smoothly between the employers and employees. Moreover, animals and plants maintain their lives by receiving and exchanging carbon dioxide and oxygen. Flowers and bees co-exist and propagate by their mutual G-T action. Such examples of G-T action are countless.
cxxii When this law works in the development of history, relationships between leading persons and the social, material conditions are formed in one age or society (nation, state). At the same time, history develops by social G-T action. In the formation of the action, the will (desire) of the leading person is the subject factor while the public, representing the social and material conditions, is the object factor. By the G-T action or its opposite operation (opposition and strife caused by different interests) between these two factors, progress or retrogression have been repeated, thus forming history. What we must also explain here is that not only the above-mentioned mutually harmonious G-T action, but also the phenomenon of mutual repulsion appears in the natural world. For instance, positive electricity and positive electricity (or negative electricity and negative electricity) repel each other; also water and fire repel each other. At first sight, such a mutually repulsive phenomenon appears to oppose G-T action. Actually, however, it is an additional phenomenon which strengthens the G-T action between the subject and object. In other words, by the mutual repulsion between positive electricity and positive electricity (subject and subject), the G-T action between positive electricity and negative electricity (subject and object) is further strengthened. Fire and water have their respective purposes, but they are the same in the fact that they are indispensable to man and other things. However, if they are present in excessive quantities, they will cause damage to man and other things. This damage done by fire or water can be prevented or at least minimized by utilizing their mutually repulsive natures. That is, if there is too much water, we dry it up with fire (heat); or if a fire is burning things up, we pour water on the fire to extinguish it. By doing this, the G-T actions between all things can be correctly maintained. The repulsion phenomenon does not violate the law of the give-and-take action; instead, it is an additional and accessory phenomenon for supporting or completing G-T action. Furthermore, it goes without saying that man, who is the ruler of all things, can better his living environment by utilizing these mutually repelling phenomena. Thus in the natural world there are mutually responsive G-T actions, and to help these actions there are mutually repelling phenomena too. This accompaniment of the mutually responding phenomena with repelling phenomena is called the "Law of Response and Repulsion" or concisely the "Law of Response." (3) The Law of Dominion of the Center All things have centers. For instance, the center of an atom is the proton (nucleus); the center of a cell, the nucleus; the center of the solar system, the sun; and the center of the cosmos, man. The center is also the subject. That is, the proton which is the center of an atom is the subject of the electron; the nucleus which is the center of a cell is the subject of the protoplasm which in turn is the object; parents, who are the center of a home, are the subjects of the children who are the objects; the sun is the subject of the earth and other planets. Moreover, man, who is the center of the created world, is the subject over the created things which are the objects. Thus the center is the subject and is created to control the object. In other words, the object, which belongs to the center, is controlled by the center. In some cases, the object revolves around the subject. In this case also the object is controlled by the subject. This is the "Law of Dominion of the Center." If man, who was the center of the cosmos, had not fallen he would have had dominion over the whole cosmos. However, he has fallen and can not take dominion. Accordingly, the Providence of Restoration is to make man regain his right over all things which he lost by his fall. Therefore, if the ideal world of creation is recovered by the Providence of Restoration, man will be able to execute complete dominion over all things. Marx says that if the communist society comes, man will become the ruler of nature for the first time and control and remodel it at last. But he does not clarify why man can become the ruler of nature. While his materialistic view of history underestimates the roles of special persons, the Unification view of history emphasizes their roles because among them there are many leading providential persons set up by the law
cxxiii of dominion of the center. Society has developed by the G-T action with these persons as the subject and the public as the object. Nevertheless Marx did not ignore the roles of such unique persons in the development of society. He admitted that the direction of historical events depended on the guiding ability of the leaders of that time. But he denied the decisive roles of these persons, saying that the basic direction of historical development is determined not by the individual's ability but by class movement (class struggle) and that the specified persons only play their roles as leaders or representatives of one social class. Needless to say, we can not agree with his view. In the creation, God created things first and man last. Similarly, in the Providence of Restoration, which is recreation, God first formed the social environment at a certain stage of historical development, and then He established a center of control, the subject, who could take control over the circumstances. By the law of relativity of the subject and object, there can be no environment without a central person nor a central person without an environment in which he acts. The leading person is not a by-product of social conditions but a providential person who was set up by the desire of the people and by the Providence. When there are suitable social and material conditions at a certain stage of historical development, God sets up a central person to arrange the circumstances according to the law of the dominion of. the center. Moreover, only people who have specific qualifications or competence can become such leading persons. (4) The Law of Shared Responsibility The growth and development of all things is carried out by the autonomy and self-control of the Principle itself. In the case of the growth of man, however, his spontaneous, creative effort or share of responsibility is demanded besides the autonomy. That is, man becomes completed only when both God and man share their respective responsibilities. This is the "Law of Shared Responsibility." Needless to say, man's sharing of responsibility is demanded in not only his growth, but also in the Providence of Restoration. In other words, the Providence of Restoration is accomplished by the combination of both God's and man's share of responsibility. Accordingly, in case man does not carry out his own responsibility, the restoration will necessarily be delayed. It is for this reason that the history of sin has been prolonged until today. Carrying out his responsibility, God supplies the providential time and place and then a providential central person of that time appears as the subject to deal with the circumstantial conditions. Historically speaking, however, many central persons standing on the side of good (Abel) were not able to correctly fulfill their responsibilities. (5) The Law of Completion (Development) Through Three Stages Nothing is created perfect from the start, but everything reaches completion only through a gradual growth process which is carried out through three stages. This is the "Law of Completion Through Three Stages." This law, of course, also applies to the providential restoration of re-creation. As recorded in Divine Principle, or in the Bible, which is the record of the Providence up to the days of Jesus Christ, there are many examples of the providence of the number three, such as the three sons in Adam's and Noah's families, three kinds of offerings of Abraham, Jacob's three periods of toil, Moses' three courses of 40 years, the three temptations of Christ and his three disciples, etc. After Christ too, the number three providence has continued. The representative examples are the Renaissance movement and the movement of the religious Reformation. As is widely known, the Renaissance was a humanistic movement while the religious Reformation was a theological movement. These two movements both passed through the developmental process of three stages. The first stage of the humanistic movement was the Renaissance mentioned above; the second stage, the Enlightenment; and the third stage, the communist movement, based on materialistic thought. The first stage of the theological movement was the religious Reformation started by Martin Luther and John Calvin; the second stage, the new movements of religious reformation which took place in the 17th18th centuries. The movement of Pietism started by Spener of Germany, Methodism by the Wesley Brothers of Britain, The Quakers (Society of Friends) by George Fox, the spiritual movement of Swedenborg, the New Light School of Jonathan Edwards of the United Stages, and the idealistic
cxxiv philosophy of Germany at that time-these are all the second stage of the theological movement. However, the third stage has not yet developed. The movement of this stage will develop soon on a world-wide scale. This will and must happen. (The humanistic movement is the Cain-type movement or Hellenistic movement of Greek thought, while the theological movement is the Abel-type movement originating in Hebraism.) In the future, by the theological movement of the third stage, or the new religious reformation, the Cain-type thought will be absorbed into the Abel-type thought and all religions and thoughts will be completely unified. The World Wars are also good examples of the number three providence. World wars are the wars between the powers on the side of Abel and the powers on the side of Cain; they inevitably happen in order to make the human history of sin come to an end. Here too we can see the process of three stages, that is, three world wars. Mankind has experienced the first and second world wars but the third one has not yet occurred. World war does not necessarily mean that there will be a bloody war on a world-wide scale. After all, the important thing is to make the Cain or evil powers yield to the powers on the side of Abel or good. Therefore the third world war need not be a hot war but could be a cold war or local war. (6) The Law of the Period of the Number "Six It took a period of the number "six" for God to create the. cosmos. That is to say, in order to create Adam, God began by establishing six periods beforehand. Therefore, in the Providence of Restoration or recreation, God also established six periods beforehand. That is, God's Providence of Restoration entered a new stage at the start of the number six period before the advent of Christ or the Second Adam. This Providence will be completely fulfilled at the advent of the Third Adam, who comes after the establishment of another number six period. Concretely speaking, this happens as follows. Six centuries before the advent of the Second Adam (Christ) God led the Israelites into exile in Babylonia in order to give them many trials. At the same time, He developed Greek civilization to restore the environment, and made Confucianism and Buddhism appear in the East in order to form the foundation for man's restoration (foundation of conscience) on a world-wide scale. If the foundation of restoration of the environment and the foundation of the restoration of man had actually been established, mankind would have been completely saved by the advent of the Messiah. Six centuries before the Third Adam (Lord of the Second Advent) the Pope became a prisoner, thus forcing Christianity to be renewed. Meanwhile the Renaissance took place to restore the environment, and the religious Reformation also began in order to form the foundation of the restoration of man. It was about the 14th century that the movement for religious Reformation started. This is the "Law of the Period of the Number 'Six'." Among these rules of creation, it is the law of shared responsibility that seems to be the most important in thinking about the character of history, especially in examining whether history is deterministic or indeterministic. The progress of history depends upon the extent of the achievements of a comparatively small number of leading people who stand at the center of the Providence and who take on their share of responsibility. If they successfully perform their responsibilities just as God expects them to, history continues smoothly along the program which God has planned and it moves toward a new stage of Providence. If they are not successful in performing their duties, the duties must be taken over by the next generation and thus history is delayed. In other words, the aim and direction of history are absolute and decided since they are fixed by God, but the concrete developmental process of history is shortened or extended depending on whether the providential people leading it perform their duties perfectly or not. The process depends on human acts. In this sense, we think that the process of history is indeterministic. Such being the case, our view on the development of history is not fully deterministic nor completely indeterministic. That is, the goal of history is predetermined while the process of history is not. In order to emphasize that history is not based on mere determinism nor mere indeterminism, we may call this view
cxxv the theory of shared responsibility, or concisely, "Theory of Responsibility." It may also be expressed as "Responsibilitism." 2. The Laws Of Restoration The re-creation of history is indeed a kind of creation, but the process of re-creation can not be the same as that of creation since it involves the process of the restoration of fallen man. Suppose we have overeaten and become sick. If the stomach is still functioning, the sick stomach is still governed by the general physiological laws similar to those of a healthy stomach. However, another process which can restore the damaged part to the original state must be added to the general rules and functions. Since the stomach problem was caused by an abnormal force which went beyond the normal strength (quantity) due to overeating, the normal force of the stomach alone is not enough to restore the stomach to its original, healthy state; an abnormal force (e.g. fasting or medicine) must be added to help in the restoration. In the case of history also, since man fell by an abnormal force which went beyond the normal strength and against the normal direction, an ordinary force is not enough to accomplish the restoration; it is necessary to have a special force (power of good) beyond the common standard. This is expressed in Divine Principle by the words "Restoration by Indemnity" (Tang-gam-Bokkwi [Korean] ). Let us state the general laws concerning restoration by indemnity. (1) The Law of Indemnity The fall was when man lost his original position and state, and the restoration is the regaining of this original position and state. Since the loss of the original position and state had a certain motive (reason) and process, in the case of restoration as well, there must also be a certain reason and process. Thus to set some condition for the restoration to the original position is called indemnity (Tangam). The condition is called an "Indemnity Condition", the process through which the condition is set is named "Process of Indemnity", and the restoration of the lost original position is called "Restoration by Indemnity." Man fell because (1) he did not keep faith in God's commandment which was an indispensable condition for him to fulfill, and (2) he yielded to the temptation of Satan. He fell both spiritually and physically. Therefore, the indemnity conditions which must be set by fallen people are (1) to form the "Foundation of Faith" spiritually by dedicating offerings (things in place of God's words), and (2) to set up the "Foundation of Substance" by obediently following the words of the prophets and saints in the daily life of the physical body. If these conditions are fulfilled, the "Foundation for the Messiah" is established. However, ordinary people belong to the satanic society and do not listen obediently to the teachings of the leaders on the side of good (prophets, sages). Instead they usually persecute them. Therefore strife was necessary to awaken the people to what was good. Thus by the law of separation (which will be stated next) God has separated persons of good from the world of sin in order to let them confront the powers of sin (powers of Satan guiding the public to the side of evil). Thus the way of suffering is inevitable for righteous or chosen people, and up to today many saints and righteous persons have suffered from hardship, persecution and have sacrificed themselves. This is because the way established before them is that of restoration by indemnity. This suffering becomes an offering and a condition by which the people in the satanic world can be led to the side of God. God has successively repeated this kind of providence in order to make people leave the world of sin. Because of the unbelief of the Israelites, to our great regret, Christ was crucified. However, with this as a condition of indemnity, many people have come to believe in Christianity. The Christians under the Roman Empire were also persecuted miserably, but with this as an indemnity condition even the Roman Empire could not help yielding to Christianity. Thus, without knowledge of the law of indemnity, we can not understand history correctly.
cxxvi (2) The Law of Separation Since God is the only Creator, man should have maintained a relationship with God alone. By the fall, however, he has come into contact with Satan too; thus he has had relations with two masters. As a result, if God tries to communicate with a man, Satan also tries. But the Providence can never be realized with such human beings. God could not help but separate out men whom He could contact from those whom Satan could contact. Cain and Abel were examples of this separation. Cain was a person whom Satan could contact while Abel was a person with whom God could communicate. At the starting point of history, Cain was the representative of evil and Abel the representative of good. But Cain killed Abel and human history started as the history of sin. Therefore, in order to develop the Providence of Restoration, God could not help but separate out Abel-type persons from the world of evil, and He has carried on the Providence through these persons. This law of Providence is called the "Law of Separation" and it was through this law that the many prophets, righteous men and sages who appeared in history were people on the Abel side. If people in the world of sin had faithfully followed the teachings of these Abel-type men, the foundations of faith and substance would have been laid; the Messiah would have come to earth, and mankind would have already returned to its original position. Here an additional fact should be mentioned. That is, in the process of the Providence of Restoration, the powers on the Abel side have been separated out on various social levels. In the days of the Old Testament, individuals, families, tribes and nations were separated out (Noah, Abraham, Jacob's family, the twelve tribes of Israel centered on Moses, the Israeli nation before the advent of the Messiah, etc.). In the days of the New Testament, nations and a world on the Abel side .have been separated out (Christian nations in Middle Ages and today's free nations centering around Christianity). These separations have been made in order to weaken Satan's powers in the satanic world in preparation for the time of the Second Advent of the Messiah, and to widen the foundation of faith. The communist bloc and free bloc today are also in the positions of the Cain and Abel sides respectively. All the advanced free nations were at first Christian countries (England, the United States, France, etc.). In spite of Marx's prophecy, no proletarian revolutions have occurred in these countries; instead, because they were countries established on the Abel side by the law of separation, they have become more prosperous. Today, however, we see the Providence changing from a bipolar separation to a multipolar separation. We think that this is God's way of decisively weakening the powers of evil which govern the world of sin. It may be a providential occurrence which foretells the coming of the Messiah. (3) The Law of the Number Four Restoration When we consider the already-mentioned G-T action from beginning to end, it is called the Chung-BoonHap action. Since all things have a purpose of creation, the process through which the united bodies or multiplied bodies are produced by the give-and-take action between the subject and object centering on the purpose comes to have four positions and three stages. All individuals must occupy one of these four positions in order to exist or grow. Thus the Four Position Base (Quadruple Base) is not only the base for things to be united or multiplied, but is also the base necessary for things to exist. The most important of all these Four Position Bases is the family one. It is the standard of all Four Position Bases and the ideal of creation. It is the ethical system composed by the parents and their children centering on the purpose of creation of God. It is the base of life on which human morals centering on God's love are established and carried out. The love of parents, between couples, and the love of children can be realized only within this Four Position Base as the base of life. Thus the ideal home can be formed and at the same time the ideal society based on such homes, that is the heavenly kingdom, can be realized. To our great regret, however, this family Four Position Base has been stolen by Satan through the fall of man. As a result, all created things entered the sphere of Satanic dominion. Therefore, the central aim of God's Providence of Restoration is to restore this family Four Position Base.
cxxvii Since God's Providence has to go through the symbolic and conditional process first (see "Law of Conditional Providence" to be stated later), God carries out the providence to restore the number four (40 or 400, etc.) which can be restored by setting up periods of time. According to the Unification view of history, the number four period is called the "Period of Separation from Satan." Thus many number-four periods such as 40 days, 40 years and 400 years have appeared in history. On the other hand, Satan has done everything in his power not to be deprived of those number-four periods by God's side. Throughout history, God's providence to restore the number four and Satan's anti-providence to break the providence have continuously repeated. That is, when the powers on God's side restored the number four, Satan again invaded and broke it. Thus in the history of God's Providence, the numbers such as 40 and 400 appear very often. The historian Arnold Toynbee also admits the existence of such periods in the development of history, saying that surprisingly, the period of the breakdown of a culture is often 400 years. Toynbee, A. J., The World and the West) Forty years after the establishment of Russian Communism (1919), an ideological dispute took place between the Soviet Union and Communist China so that a fissure grew in the communist bloc. In 1945, forty years after Japan annexed Korea in 1905, the Korean people were liberated. These may also be examples of the number-four restoration providence. (4) The Law of Conditional Providence As stated already in the law of indemnity, a certain condition of indemnity must be set up for fallen man to restore his Original Nature. In other words, God does not make fallen man restore his original position immediately, but makes him set a certain symbolic condition to achieve God's will gradually. When Adam fell, God did not save him immediately, but separated Abel from Cain and, with their offerings as a condition, intended to send the Messiah. In the case of Noah, God had him make a condition by building an ark, which was the symbol of the whole cosmos. In the case of Abraham, God had him make offerings of a dove, sheep, and cow as a condition. In the process of the Providence of Restoration there are many more examples of the conditional providence than the ones mentioned above. In carrying out the affairs of the conditional providence, some providential leaders have without fail, been set up to take charge. Had these men performed their responsibilities and fulfilled the conditional providence just as God wished them to, the Providence would have moved on to the next stage. To our great regret and sorrow, however, they did not perform their duties and fulfill all the respective affairs correctly. As a result, the Providence of Restoration has been delayed time and time again. For instance, Moses should have struck the rock once but instead struck it twice. The realization of God's will was delayed, and Moses could not enter Canaan. The providential conditions always correspond to the respective times but there were many conditions foreshadowing the events that were to happen at the time of the advent of the Messiah. For instance, Moses struck the rock because in his actual situation he had to bring forth water, but his action also had fatal consequences on the providence at the time of the advent of Christ. That is, by striking the rock twice, a condition was made by which it was possible for Satan to strike Christ who was the second Adam. When Christ did appear, the infidelity of the Israelites and the betrayal of Judas Iscariot were thus possible and they directly brought about the sorrowful event of the crucifixion. Marx says that human history necessarily developed from the primitive communal society, to the socialistic, communistic society passing through the stages of the slave, feudal and capitalistic societies. If Christ had not been crucified but had completed his mission as Messiah, the Roman society of that time (what Marx called the "slave society") would have directly become the earthly Kingdom of Heaven. To our great sorrow, however, Christ was killed and the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth was not realized. Thus the conditional providence has had such a great influence on the development of history that we can not correctly understand history without knowledge of its contents.
cxxviii (5) The Law of the False Preceding the True In human history, many nations have prospered and then declined. Among them were those that for a time realized great unity and brought about peace and wonderful culture. Examples of these are the Roman Empire, the kingdom of Egypt, and the Han and Tang dynasties in China. The emperors, kings and other leaders who established these great countries were all unique and uncommon, and without their above average activities, the unification and creation of cultures would have been very difficult. What significance do these facts have? The Unification view of history sees them in relation to the "Law of the False Preceding the True." This is the rule that, in the development of history, false men appear before true men. The false men are the satanic or Cain-type people who are on the side of evil, while true men are those on the side of God, Abel or the good. The final aim of the Providence of Restoration is to realize a great and unified country in which the ideal of creation is realized. Centering on God, the whole world would be unified into one country. This is the Divine Country whose sovereign is God, the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth which can be created only by the advent of the Messiah. However, since Satan knows the providence of God well, he has tried to establish his country before the advent or re-advent of the Messiah. He set up leaders, whom we call antichrists, to have them establish unified countries. However, as such persons and countries belonged to the world of sin, they prospered for a time but then declined. The law of the false preceding the true appears very clearly just before the advent of the Messiah. An example is the Roman Empire. Around the time of the birth of the Messiah, a peaceful, prosperous and great empire was established, maintaining great territory centering on its emperors. Satan imitated the realization of a unified world full of love, peace and prosperity before the advent of the Messiah. Even in the modern world there are such examples. One of them was the unified communist world centering on Stalin. Before the Second Advent of the Messiah, Satan tried to have Stalin realize his ideal world. That is to say, the false ideal world. Stalin was a false-Messiah-type person (antichrist). Thus by the appearance of this phenomena we can feel the approach of the Second Advent of the Messiah. Also the present situation in which the providence is changing from a bipolar separation to a multipolar separation gives us an especially strong impression of the approach of the Second Advent. (6) The Law of the "Horizontal" Reappearance of the "Vertical" This is the law which lets something "vertical" develop itself "horizontally ... .. Vertical" means the flow of time while "horizontal" means the breadth of space. In other words, "vertical" refers to the actual world. Accordingly, the "horizontal reappearance of the vertical" means the reappearance of all the providential events and persons of history in the present age, in order to realize the providence. For instance, the offering of Adam's family, the loyalty of Noah, the belief of Abraham, the 21 years hard work of Jacob, the guidance of people by Moses; all these persons and events in the providential history reappear at certain times. Why does God do this? He is trying to finish the whole Providence of Restoration at one time at the terminal stage by simultaneously resolving all the providential events, which were not resolved at various points in history. It is certain that the history of any nation is God's providential history. It is especially the history of Israel, however, that composes the center of the Providence. "Israel" originally meant the Jewish nation but according to the Divine Providence, after the crucifixion of Jesus, it has referred to the Christians. In history, God selected many persons through many generations to develop many providential events. However, almost every time, trouble occurred and in many cases these events were not resolved. This is because human beings have not faithfully observed the rules of the Providence of Restoration (recreation). Such being the case, God lets these historical events and persons reappear at the terminal stage, on a world-wide scale, and tries, at one time, to completely rectify all the failures of history. The method in this case is the "Law of the Horizontal Reappearance of the Vertical." Such a providential law as this was applied in the days of -Christ, and will again be applied at the time of the Second Advent of Christ. In other words, God lets the whole past providential history reappear in the latter days and tries to complete the Providence of Restoration by simultaneously indemnifying all of it on the level of the whole. As a result, at the terminal stage of history, unexpected and complicated incidents
cxxix appear one after another and make people fall into great chaos. The nearer one comes to the present days, the less Marx's prophecy concerning social development hits the mark. This is because the abovementioned law has begun to work gradually and broadly, bringing a different effect from what Marx predicted. However, there are other reasons too. (7) The Law of the Providence of Parallel Periods This law means that in case the realization of God's Providence of Restoration is delayed by men neglecting their duty, a providence similar in character and type to that of the past generation is repeated in the new generation. just as the four seasons of spring, summer, autumn and winter are repeated in the same forms every year, so, if the realization of the Providence is delayed, God's Providence is repeated in forms similar in period, persons, events and contents, to those of before. For instance, the 2000 years from Adam to Abraham, the 2000 years from Abraham to Christ, and the 2000 years from Christ to the present are similar ages from the viewpoint not only of period but also of contents of providence and similarity of persons. [Note: Among these kinds of similarity, the most important one is the period. If we compare the New Testament age with the Old Testament age, we can perceive similar parallel periods. So the providence of this similarity of periods is called "the Providence of Parallel Periods" or "the Parallel Providence."] For example, Noah's ark, Moses' stone tablets and the Arc of the Covenant, and Augustine's "City of God" are similar to each other. The revelation of Malachi, which took place about 1600 years after Abraham, and the religious Reformation of Martin Luther, which developed about 1600 years after the Messiah, are also examples of the providence of parallel periods. Also, the Greek civilization, which began six centuries before the advent of the Messiah, and the Renaissance, which began six centuries before the second advent of the Messiah, are similar. Furthermore, the lives of the Israeli people in exile in Babylonia and the life of the Pope as a prisoner in France also show the providence of parallel periods. Because the providence of parallel periods is at work in human history, we can foresee the contents of the parallel providence which will occur in the next stage by drawing analogies from the parallel providence of the last stage. Chapter V - Theory of History (Part 2) Section D - The Unity, Individuality and Difference of Historical Development In what form has history, with these laws of creation and restoration as the bases, been developing as a whole? To answer this question, let us state the view based on the Unification Principle. (i) The Unity of Historical Development If man had not fallen and history had not started with sin, history would have continuously developed with unity. However, it is now broken into pieces. Jaspers says, "Since Adam is the ancestor of mankind, we human beings have all come from the hands of God and have been created in the form similar to that of God." (Jaspers, Origin and Goal of History) What he says is true. If human beings, at the first formation of a family, had established an ethical system with the Four Position Base as the center, and the system had further been applied to the tribe and nation or state, there would have been no disruption or opposition at all. If man had not fallen, he surely would have established an organic hierarchical system, similar to the human body. This system, formed through the principles of creation, especially the laws of the dominion of the center and of similarity, would have had leaders, such as the head of family in the "Age of the Family" and chief of tribe in the "Age of the Tribe"; and people would have had an inseparable relationship of Heart, that is, an ethical relationship with the center of every respective society. Thus a great family-type
cxxx state would have been established with a leader, appointed by God, at the center; and when the number of human beings had greatly increased, the state would have been further enlarged to a world-wide scale. Because of the fall, however, the emotionally harmonized relationship was broken. Due to the shortage of love and many egoistic motives, a center different from what God had intended was established, the norm of love (Heart) was broken and contradictions, disruptions and quarrels appeared. (ii) The Individuality of Historical Development In order to save mankind from such a hopeless chaos, God tries to separate an Abel-type person from the chaos, and centering on him creates a group of people who believe in and love God. They are the so-called chosen people. In the meantime, God breaks into pieces the arrogant groups who reject Him and act as if they themselves were God. Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; and nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel. (Genesis 11:49) (Note: Babel means "stain" or "soil." Its meaning is the same as that of Babylon.) As a result, the unity of historical development was lost and individuality appeared. This is the reason that individual histories, such as national histories have come to appear. [Note: Even if man had not fallen, individuality might have appeared in different tribes, nations and states because man is the manifestation of God's individuality. However, this individuality would have been based on unity, not individuality separate from unity which is full of contradictions, oppositions and quarrels.] Yet we do not say that unity in history disappeared altogether. For instance, the history of the United States of America has a relationship with that of Britain, the history of Britain has a relationship with that of Western Europe, which in turn has a relationship with that of ancient Greece and Rome. Although the countries are now separated from each other, there are some historical contents common to them all. We think, therefore, that history has individuality as well as unity. This is the application to history of the ontological standpoint by which we regard all phenomena as the unification of universality and individuality by the give-and-take law. The traditional views of history were apt to emphasize the individuality of the units of the nation or state (dynasty). On the other hand, modern views have come to regard history as a world history with unity. Especially those historians like Toynbee, who in trying to see world history from the perspective of culture, regarding history as cultural history, are rather apt to ignore the individual aspect of history by paying too much attention to its universal aspect. However, we look at history from the viewpoint of the unification of these two aspects by the G-T action law. (iii) Differentiation of Historical Development There is also a differential aspect in the development of history, because human history is the history of the providence of salvation or re-creation. In all cases, creation starts from one. According to the Unification view of history, one human being named Adam was created at first, and if he had not fallen, he and his spouse would have formed one family, which would have developed gradually into a nation and then a state.
cxxxi Since the providence of re-creation after the fall of man is also a kind of creation, one man, one family, one tribe, one nation and one state have been separated in turn from the world of evil, and then the providence has been carried out centering on this nation or state. According to Christianity, the people of the nation so set as the center, are called the chosen people. The providence for these chosen people is called the "Central Providence", while the providence for other peoples or states is called the "Peripheral Providence." Concretely speaking, the Central Providence before Christ was the providence for the Israeli people, and the providence after Christ was that for Christianity (or the Occident). The words "central" and "Peripheral" may sound discriminatory in value; however, as the Bible says, "And do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham." (Matthew 3:9) According to the Principle of Creation a "center" must be set up somewhere in order to completely save all mankind and to create the innocent new world at the end of history. In short, this discrimination is only a means to an end. Because of this differentiation in the Providence, the differences between the history of the center and the history of the periphery come about. The laws of historical development (laws of creation, laws of restoration) are applied very precisely to the center but not as precisely to the periphery (See Section F, "The Pattern of Historical Development"). This is what differentiation in the development of history means. The differentiation can be said to refer to the degree of application of the historical laws. The reason such differentiation appears in history is that history is fundamentally the history of creation (re-creation) or the providence of the salvation of mankind, which begins from one person. For salvation, the Messiah is needed, and the nation to which the Messiah is sent naturally can not help but become the chosen people. The Israeli people were chosen as the center for the Providence; however, since they did not accept Christ as the Messiah, the Providence was transferred from them to the Western peoples, and the history of these peoples became the central history for the acceptance of the Second Advent of the Messiah. In the meantime, the histories of other countries have become peripheral histories to which only sages have been sent. Thus beliefs have been established centering on each of these sages to wait for the final salvation which will come from the Central Providence. Section E - The Laws of Historical Development and the Method of Studying History (i) The Basic Laws of History We have previously stated the various laws and factors which influence history. Here let us think about the most fundamental laws that are applied to the whole of history. We take the standpoint that the laws of existence are similar to the laws of cognition. Accordingly, the basic laws that are applied to history are not only the base for various objective laws of historical development but also the grounds for the method of our historical study (cognition). As stated above, various laws have influenced the development of history, and of them, the most important are the G-T action, the repulsion action and the action of will (see below). (ii) History and the Give-and-Take Law (G-T Laws) First, we are going to explain G-T action. In both the natural world and human society, it is necessary to carry out G-T action between the subject and object beings to bring about development. In the development, which is the content of history, the G-T action between man and his material conditions and the G-T action between the countless people who compose societies, have of course
cxxxii stimulated the development of society. But the most important factor for development is the G-T action between the leaders (subject) and the public (object). If the leaders, including the sovereign, govern correctly and the public heartily follows all their policies, the society will without fail become prosperous. It is because of this G-T action between the subject and object (leaders and ordinary people) that the culture of mankind has made such remarkable progress during the past several thousand years. We can not ignore the fact that the development of productivity was also a great factor in the development of society. Since the development of productivity is also a kind of development, we think that there must be a G-T action between a subject and object in its development. Concretely speaking, this is the mutual GT action between human desires and the material conditions. This is regarded as the cause of the development of productivity (Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal, published by the International Federation for Victory Over Communism). These are all give-and-take actions. It is the law of G-T action, then, that lies at the base of historical development. According to the Unification Principle, this law is called the "Law of Give-and-Take Action." Another important law closely related to the G-T action law is the repulsion law. This phenomenon of repulsion between the subject and subject or object and object is also a very important factor for the understanding of history. (We shall deal with this issue in detail in the "Historic View of Struggle Between Good and Evil.") (iii) The Law of Will-Action Human desires are also very important for our understanding of the laws of history. After all, man's basic motives in social life result from desire. We have many desires in social life, but the basis of our desires (we call them basic desires) are classified into two kinds; that is, material desires seeking for food, clothing and housing, and spiritual desires seeking after truth, goodness and beauty. According to Unification Thought, the former are called Hyung Sang desires and the latter Sung Sang desires. Based on these basic desires, countless actual desires have developed (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal), and in order to satisfy these desires, man acts with a concrete will. Designing, planning, determination, decision, invention, etc. are all concrete expressions of the will-action. Thus, if we analyze the flow of history, we find that the above-mentioned G-T action and repulsion laws come from the mutual action or repulsion action between the mutual wills of man (desires). The mutual coaction between the will of the subject (desire) and the will of the object (desire) is G-T action, while the mutual repulsion between the will of a subject and the will of another subject is repulsion action. (See "Historic View of Struggle between Good and Evil") Communists regard the part of will in social development as secondary or derivative, and assert that the primary factor of development is the material conditions such as the "contradiction between productive forces and the production relation." However, there would be no development of the productive forces or of the production relations if man had no original desire. Social development has not been brought about by material conditions alone; it is correct to think that the resultant of the G-T action between human will (desire) and the material conditions has brought about development. For example, the invention of the steam engine (productive forces) was the product of the give-and-take between Watt's desire for invention and the social and material conditions in England at that time. Watt's desire and knowledge were the subject conditions, whereas the social and material conditions in England, where capitalism was growing, were the object conditions; that is, the G-T action, brought the invention of the steam engine.
cxxxiii Thus the will of the subject is the decisive factor when the G-T law and repulsion law work in the development of history, and the combination of this will factor and the object factors produces development. This "Law of Will Action" we sometimes concisely call "Will Law." (iv) The Historic View of the Struggle between Good and Evil Repulsion Law Communists say that the history of man is the history of class struggle. We do not contradict their assertion that history has been a history of struggle, but we do not think that the struggle has been between classes alone. We can not deny the fact that struggles of non-class character such as those between individuals, nations, states, alliances and religions were even more numerous than those between classes. (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal) What is the universal element common to all the struggles of man? It is the struggle between good and evil. As stated in the Section on the Law of G-T action, all beings can maintain their existence only by carrying out a mutual give-and-take action between the position of subject "+" and object and their growth, development and multiplication only become possible by this. In order to further strengthen the G-T relation between "+" and there is the phenomenon of repulsion. This seems to be quite opposite to the G-T action. For instance, positive electricity "+" and positive electricity "+" repel each other. However, this repulsion itself is not the aim of nature, but the true aim is to strengthen the G-T action between the subject and object through this repulsion. Thus, harmony by the G-T law is the foundation of the natural world with the exception of man. In the case of man, the repulsion phenomenon which should be only an additional means for strengthening the G-T action, has come to suppress the true G-T action. This is the struggle of man, which comes from man's evil mind brought about by his fall. For example, two men centering on one woman often fight with each other; and two women centering on one man are apt to hate each other. In the society where there is no sin, people would not quarrel with each other over one person of the other sex, since single people would regard their companions as their own brothers or sisters. (The original society is a great family in which all members are brothers and sisters to each other, regarding God as their parents.) Many struggles in history which have disrupted true G-T action have been struggles between two subjects, in other words between men of power. Struggles are the expression of the repulsion phenomenon, which should be an accessory to G-T action, but which has changed to become a hindrance to the G-T action. The struggles themselves have no power of development; instead, they rather disturb true development. (v) Development by the G- T Action or by Struggle? Here the following objection may be raised. Is it not because of war, the wildest of all struggles, that science and technology have rapidly progressed and atomic power developed? Actually, the results of scientific research have been obtained by the G-T action between the desire of scientists for study, their objects of study, and the social conditions which make the study possible. Successful results would not have been obtained if these elements repelled each other. Even though the purpose of the invention of the atomic bomb and H-bomb may have been for its use in war or defense, the process of the invention or manufacture is not struggle but close cooperation; it is the process of the G-T action. The weapons so produced are used for struggle or destruction. Of course struggle can become the stimuli for a certain series of G-T actions (e.g. special study in science such as in the case of the atomic bomb). Even though this may be so, the assertion that we need war in order to stimulate the development of science does not have a leg to stand on, because we can find as much impetus for scientific development as we want, even aside from war. War does not promote progress and development but thoroughly disturbs them. Mankind has made progress not by wars, but regardless of wars. If there had not been the disruption and opposition of emotion and will, much more remarkable progress would have been brought about.
cxxxiv (vi) The Essence of Struggle Why does a relation which should only express the G-T action change into struggle? Originally God made all human beings for the giving and receiving of love and beauty between each other in the relative positions of subject and object. This was in order to bring about harmony based on the Four Position Base. However, if the subject becomes arrogant and does not love or persecutes the object while the former and the latter interact with each other, there grows an emotional disagreement and opposition between the two; then another subject will appear, because the object comes to need a new subject. In the phenomenon of electricity, if complete electrical negativity appears, then complete electrical positivity will surely appear. Likewise, if the people who are in the object position come to hold a certain condition (rejection of an old leader or governor and wish for a new leader), a new leader will surely appear and come to oppose the old leader, with the support of the people. Since these two subjects have different respective purposes, or their interests differ, repulsion and struggle take place. (However, a challenge by violence is always initiated by the power of evil, while power of good responds to the challenge.) Thus those on the side of good (we call them Abel-type persons or the Abel-type groups) and those on the side of evil (Cain-type persons, or Cain-type groups) develop historical struggles. This is the repulsion phenomenon or the struggle between good and evil. However, men are fallen and there are no people who have completely good characters, so that if we consider man alone, the "good" and "evil" in the struggle are only relative concepts. But God himself wishes to realize final, complete salvation through struggle. Viewed from the side of God, therefore, the difference between the side of good (God) and that of evil is very clear. [Note: Of course there have been neutral standpoints belonging neither to the good side nor to the evil side. (See Communism: A Critique and Counterproposal)] Who is the subject set up by God? This question can not be answered by looking at who is in power. God does not select a person by his position, but selects him as the center on the merits of the deeds of his ancestors and his faith. Examples of this are Joshua who was selected as the successor to Moses, and David who was selected as the successor to Saul. Moreover, even if a person was selected to become the center, he is rejected if his acts are against God's will. Examples of this are Saul who was destroyed, and the Israeli people who were destroyed by Babylonia and sent into exile. As minutely stated in detail in Sub-Section (2) of Section B ("The Goal and Direction of History") God's goal to complete the Providence is absolute, but the position of the central person of Providence selected by Heaven for the completion of the aim is not absolute. If he performs his given duty perfectly, he is given the predestined position, but if he does not do so, the predestination is changed and another person takes his position. The reason revolution sometimes takes place is that the central person does not completely fulfill his duty so that God allows a revolution by another central person to occur in order to promote the providence of salvation. On the other hand, if the existing person performs his share of responsibility no revolution will take place. In short, human history is not the history of class struggle but of the struggle between good and evil. This is the Unification view of history. Let us summarize what we have stated so far. The development of history results from the G-T action between the subject (sovereign) and object (public). Development does not occur through material necessity, but occurs by the G-T action between the will of the subject and the will of the ordinary people who respond to the former, or by the resultant (G-T action) between human will and the material social conditions (action of will). Lastly, generally speaking, struggles in history happen by the repulsion action between the subject on the side of good and the subject on the side of evil (Repulsion law-The Historic View of the Struggle between Good and Evil). These three are the basic viewpoints and methods for understanding history by the Unification Thought. Chapter V - Theory of History (Part 3)
cxxxv Section F - The Pattern of Historical Development Using the methods of history stated clearly in Section E, let us examine in what pattern human history has developed. However, in order to make for easy understanding, we shall only explain the central history of the Central Providence to which the typical historic laws have applied. 1. From The Providential Viewpoint (i) The History of God's Words As stated in Section B, human history is the history of restoration and re-creation. Creation occurs through God's words. Therefore history can not but be a history created through words. "But he answered, 'It is written, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." ' " (Matthew 4:4). What is it that conveys God's words of truth to the public? It is religion. Accordingly, we who regard human history as the history of re-creation, think that it is most important to look at history from the standpoint of religion. (ii) The Providence of Parallel Periods What is the pattern of history if we analyze history from a religious viewpoint? Period of the Providence of Restoration The Period of the Prolongation of the Providence of Restoration Period of Slavery in Egypt (400 years) Period of Persecution under the Roman Empire (400 years) Period of Judges (400 years) Period of Church Patriarchs (400 years) Period of the United Kingdom (120 years) Period of Christian Kingdom (120 years) Period of the Divided Kingdoms of North and South (400 years) Period of Divided Kingdoms of East and West (400 years) Period of Jewish Captivity (70 years) Period of Papal Captivity (70 years) Period of Return (140 years) Period of Return (140 years) Period of Preparation for the Advent of the Messiah (400 years) Period of Preparation for the Second Advent of the Messiah (400 years) If we take the Judeo-Christian history as the example, we find, as already stated in Section C, Subsection (2)-7, "The Law of Parallel Providence", that special features of the division of the time periods, characters, and roles of central persons of the Providence, correspond with each other in 2000-year cycles. The following are examples of this. We can compare Moses, who appeared at the end of the 400 years of the Israelites' slavery in Egypt with Augustine, who appeared after the Christians were terribly persecuted by the Roman Empire for four hundred years. Saul became king when judge Samuel anointed him with oil. This was after the 400 years of the judges (chiefs of the tribes who were prophets, officiating priests and kings). Saul can be compared with Emperor Charlemagne who was given the crown of the Roman Empire
cxxxvi by Pope Leo III the Patriarch, after the age of the Patriarchs. Like the judges, the Patriarchs had held the "three positions" and had lasted for the four hundred years since Christianity was authorized as the state religion of Rome. The prophet Malachi, who renewed the Israelite faith after the Israeli people, having been prisoners in Babylon for 70 years and then liberated by Persian King Cyrus, may be compared to Martin Luther. Luther started the religious Reformation after the Pope, who had been imprisoned at Avignon in southern France for a similar 70 years (from 1309-1377), returned to Rome but failed to stop the corruption. These people's missions in their respective times were like two peas in a pod. Comparing these facts, we classify the Judeo-Christian history into the following three stages: (1) The Period for the Foundation of the Providence of Restoration (from Adam to Abraham). (2) The Period of the Providence of Restoration (from Abraham to Jesus). (3) The Period of the Prolongation of the Providence of Restoration (from Jesus to today). Comparing (2) with (3), that is, the Israelite history after Abraham with the Christian history after Christ, we find that they show very similar periods which are parallel to each other. The numbers written in the parentheses in this table are the theoretical number of years deduced from the Principle of Restoration (See Divine Principle, p. 392). The theoretical years in the age of the Providence of Restoration do not always correspond with the number of years adopted by common opinion in historical science but generally correspond with the number of years written in the Bible. In the case of the age of the Period of the Prolongation of the Providence of Restoration, the actual historical number of years and the theoretical values by the Unification Principle generally correspond with each other very well. This is another basic attitude of the Unification Thought; that to establish an historical view one must look at the history of mankind from a religious viewpoint, as the "Providence of Restoration." 2. From The Viewpoint Of Religion And Politics (i) The Law of Dominion of the Center However demoralized human society may become, there always exists a leader who manages the people by the law of the dominion of the center mentioned in Section C. Particularly in the Divine Providence, God sets up a leader as the center and lets him rule his society directly and lets him influence the various surrounding societies. This aspect of the domination of the center is politics. We therefore think that we should, as a next step, also observe history from the religious and political perspectives. (ii) The Four Types of Society It should be thought, from the viewpoint of politics, that human society has passed through the following four types: clan society, feudal society, monarchic society and democratic society. (It should actually be five types, including the society of co-life, co-prosperity and cojustice, that is the "tricoistic" society [SamKong-Chui], which we believe will come about in the future). Taking the Judeo-Christian history as an example, during their period of hard toil in Egypt, the Israeli people lived in tribes, which came from the 12 children of their ancestor Jacob. They thus formed one of the typical clan societies. The Christian society, during the period of persecution under the Roman Empire, was formed as a familylike group of believers with the 12 Apostles and 70 disciples of Jesus as the central figures. This is also regarded as a clan society (Christian clan society). Next in the Jewish history, Moses, the liberator, escaped from Egypt leading 600,000 Israelites who formed a society in Canaan with the judges as central figures. This was a feudal society. When Christianity was the national religion of Rome, they accomplished a Christian society administrated by the Patriarchs. This was also a feudal society.
cxxxvii After the period of judges, Saul was crowned and the United Kingdom of Israel came into existence. In Christian society also, after the period of the Church Patriarchs, the Roman Empire was revived by Charlemagne with Christianity as its central spirit, forming a Christian monarchical society. The United Kingdom of Israel was divided into two, due to the impiety of the kings, and was successively annexed by Babylonia, Persia, Syria and Rome. Thus during this period they had no king of their own. However, looking at this society from the viewpoint of religion and politics, it can be said to have been a kind of democratic society in that there were no prophets or kings. In the Middle Ages, the hierarchical Catholic society was demoralized, and this brought about the religious Reformation in the Modern Age. Accordingly, Protestantism was propagated widely, bringing a democratic tendency into religious life. In those circumstances, after several revolutions in Europe, parliamentary democratic order came to take a major part in the political field, largely replacing monarchy. We understand that all these things happened by the same providence as that in the period of the Old Testament. (iii) The Reasons for the Formation of the Four Societies What reasons did these four societies, which can be distinguished religiously and politically, have for coming into existence? Generally speaking, these four societies were due to the struggle between God's Providence and the power opposing it (the struggle between good and evil mentioned in Section E). The Providence seeks to establish God's sovereignty and enlarge His dominion in order to bring man back to God and relieve the miserable lives of those living in immorality and in separation from God. The reasons for these changes of social forms will be mentioned in terms of the direct providence of God, the Central Providence. (1) Clan Society This society came about due to the providence to increase beyond a certain number those people who would be the basis for establishing the sovereignty of heaven. God always appoints a central figure by the law of dominion of the center whenever He carries out the providence of salvation. In the period of the Old Testament, this central figure was Abraham, and then his grandson Jacob whose descendants then increased in Egypt. God intended to make 12 tribes from Jacob's 12 children and to let Jacob's descendants become the foundation of the future state. Accordingly, this period can be said to be the period of preparation for the establishment of the sovereignty of God. The reason for the establishment of the Christian clan society centering on Jesus' twelve Apostles, is the same as this providence. (2) Feudal Society This society was formed, on the basis of the numbers (tribes) in the clan society, in order to establish the foundation of faith and the foundation of substance (i.e. complete obedience in heart to the prophets and judges), by centering on these prophets who brought God's words. During the period of the clan society, because faith was the main concern, land had not been provided. However, in this feudal society land was allotted as their base of living, and each tribe held its own decentralized area of land independently. The judges and parish priests, the central figures, took on the three duties of heaven: the duty of prophets, the duty of priests, and the duty of kings. (3) Monarchical Society This society came at the last stage of the foundation to receive the Messiah which was formed on the base of the foundation of faith formed during the period of the feudal society. It was a unified society of all or several tribes under one king. This society was in the last stage of God's providence of salvation. This type
cxxxviii of society is evident in the United Kingdom and the society of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms in the days of the Old Testament; and in the period of the New Testament, this period corresponds to the Christian Kingdom (religiously) and the monarchical society (politically) of the modern age. However the kings, the leaders, were not completely dedicated to God and turning their power to fulfill their own will, they turned to Satan. Therefore this society had to be abandoned. Accordingly, the democratic society came next. (However, in the New Testament period, the religious monarchical society does not occur simultaneously with that of politics-we will discuss this later.) (4) Democratic Society The Christian monarchic society was provided by God as His last step in preparing for the Messiah. However, when the leaders lost their faith and became selfish and greedy for power, their societies obstructed the way to God. When this happened, God destroyed the kingdoms and then prepared the way for all people to seek after the Messiah by their own subjectivity (original mind) and responsibility. This is the democratic society. In respect to religion, Protestantism, which can be called democratic faith, was brought about by the Reformation. In respect to politics, parliamentary democracy came about through the opportunity created by the civil revolutions. (However, in this case also, the times of these two forms of democracy are different ... this is to be dealt with later.) Summarizing the above, religiously and politically, in the days of the Old Testament the four types of society consecutively appeared-the clan society, the feudal society, the monarchical society and the democratic society-and at the final stage they received Jesus Christ. However, because the Israelites did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, the Kingdom of God was not realized on the earth but only a spiritual kingdom was left. Therefore, since then, the history of Christianity has progressed centered on Jesus, with the purpose of the realization of the Kingdom of God spiritually. As a result of that, very unfortunately, they repeated the same failures that the Israeli people had made. Accordingly the four types of society-clan, feudal, monarchical and democratic society have again appeared in the history since Jesus. 3. From The Viewpoint Of Economy (i) Mutual Relationships of Religion, Politics and Economy Since the history of mankind is the history of recreation, the words of God are naturally of utmost importance as well as the development of the spirit such as heart, personality and individuality, which are raised by words of God. However, it is not reasonable to say that the problem of bread, i.e. the problem of economy, can be ignored. Man is the union of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang; therefore the problems of the spirit are never independent of the physical or material problems. A state, which is an assembly of human beings, is just the same. The spiritual source of a state is religion, but at the same time the economy can not be ignored as the source of state power. Looking at history, we can see that politics is what combines and harmonizes these two important factors, neither of which can be ignored, i.e. religion-the life of the Sung Sang of man, and economy-the life of the Hyung Sang of man. In the Unification view of history, we understand history from the three perspectives of religion, politics and economy. (ii) The Developmental Steps of Economy How can we understand history from the perspective of economy? Economical developments are also explained in relation to the providence of God. (1) Slavery Society
cxxxix This society is the economic aspect of the clan society, which was the first form of society to be separated out for God's side. Economy can not be of importance in this stage, because at that time, the situation was entirely occupied by the power standing in opposition to God. The clans on God's side were slaves during the Egyptian period, and in the period of the New Testament age, they were also very poor people who were persecuted terribly by the Romans. This was the economic situation of the slave society, the primitive age when God's side had no power in this world and people were ignorant of the words of God and did not know the real value of man. (2) The Economic Aspect of Feudalism However, as time passed, the people on God's side escaped from the domination of the Egyptians and Romans and became independent. Land was distributed as the basis of the economy. Accordingly, they came to have land (the manors) under the lords and parish priests, and they made it their base of living. This is the economic society of feudalism. After this period the mutual relationships of economy, religion and politics were rather complicated, so this point should be clarified before explaining the next step of economic development. (iii) The Inequality of the Development of Religion, Politics and Economy in the Period of the New Testament In the period of the Old Testament, the economy depended entirely on the land due to the fact that industry had not yet developed. Therefore the field of economy had never stood out independently from politics. In relation to the economy, the monarchical society of the Old Testament days was only an enlarged feudal society with the monarchs replacing the position of the feudal lords which had been previously occupied by the judges. In the period during the Babylonian Exile and also in the period after Malachi when Israel was under the dominion of other countries, the people on God's side were again living in a slave economic society. On the other hand, the relation between the monarchical society and the economy in the age of the New Testament is fairly complicated. (iv) The Development Stages of the Economy in the New Testament Age (1) Co-existence of the Christian Monarchical Society, the Feudal Society and the Feudal Economic System (Manor System) With the establishment of the Empire of the Franks by Charlemagne (the restoration of the West Roman Empire), Western Europe entered a monarchical social system in the religious field. This also happened with the establishment of papal power. However, in the political field the Emperor could not establish the absolute power and after his death his state was soon divided into three parts (or two, roughly speaking). The feudal social system could not be dissolved and the manor system also remained unchanged. Accordingly, from the coronation of Charlemagne (800) to the religious Reformation of Luther (1517), monarchical society in the religious field and feudal society in the political or economic field co-existed. In other words, the social development was disproportionate. (2) Co-existence of the Religious Democratic Society, the Political Monarchical Society, and the Economic System of Capitalism With the corruption of Catholicism, a religious monarchy, the way to God was obstructed. Thus the religious Reformation was started by Luther and Calvin, and Protestantism, which is religious democracy, became the main stream of history. However in the political field, the religious Reformation stimulated national consciousness and as a result, the kings of the nationalistic states destroyed the feudal system and established absolute monarchies. They cooperated with the owners of industries who had become
cxl economically rich and powerful because of the development of the productive forces. In other words, the change in the political field came one step later than the change in the religious field. It should be noted that the initial stage of capitalism, in which the new bourgeois personally increased their private possession of capital, is the phenomenon which corresponds with the feudal age in which the lords similarly increased their private possession of land. In other words, the capitalism of the initial stages, can be called a "feudalism of capital. (3) Co-existence of Political Democracy and Economic Monarchy (Imperialism) Following the period explained above, the monarchs became so rigid that freedom of belief and the development of the economy were disturbed. Thus democratic revolutions (bourgeoisie revolutions) took place here and there. Accordingly, the monarchical system changed to the democratic system in the political field. However in the economic field, monopolies developed so remarkably that the capitalistic economy changed rapidly to become an imperialistic, that is, monarchy-like system of economy. This follows the law of historic development that a monarchical society always comes after a feudal society. Since early capitalism was "a feudalism of capital", the "monarchy of capital", or imperialism, which was the monopolistic stage of capital, came as the next stage. (4) From Economic Monarchy (Imperialism) to Economic Democracy (Socialism) However, imperialism collapsed because of the World Wars and the world economy began to move toward economic democracy, that is, the socialistic system. Thus not only communistic socialism but also democratic socialism, Catholic socialism, Protestant socialism, neo-capitalism, nationalistic capitalism and the welfare-state, came to occupy the mainstream of economy as well as economic thought. These phenomena also show that history followed the order of social development, that is, it went from feudal society to monarchical society to democratic society. In other words, socialism, which is a "democracy of capital" came after imperialism which was a "monarchy of capital." (We should note however, that here socialism refers to an economic democracy which is completely incompatible with communism which is a dictatorship.) Since the foundation to accept the Messiah at the time of Charlemagne failed to be established, it became impossible to integrate society. It is interesting that the change in the religious society was followed by the change in the political society one step later, and the change in the political society was followed by that in the economic society one step later too, and each change in society was similar to the other changes in the characteristics of each stage. (See Figure 20, "Historical Changes in the Christian Cultural Sphere") The first reason for this is that in the days of the New Testament, unlike those of the Old Testament, the scope of the Central Providence had been enlarged to the whole of western Europe so that it was difficult for the providential central person to control the whole area. (This was the co-existence of the religious monarchical society and the political and economic feudal society.) The second reason is that although there is no nationalism in religion, politics and economy have been greatly influenced by national consciousness. (This is the co-existence of religious democracy and political monarchism.) The third reason is that the great development of the productive forces made capital (money and machines) more important than land. (This is the co-existence of political democracy and economic imperialism.) Standing on the mutual relations of religion, politics and economy mentioned above, let us explain the latter half of the stages of economic development. Capitalistic Society ("Feudalism of Capital") This is the economic basis for the period of political transition from the feudal society to the monarchical society. The reason this kind of economic system developed is that, as mentioned above, the main property of individuals changed from land to capital due to the development of the productive forces and the private possession of capital. In other words, this feudalism of capital developed due to the development of individualism. The feudalism based on land ownership changed to a feudalism based on capital ownership
cxli
Fig. 20 Historical Changes in the Christian Cultural Sphere Imperialistic Society ("Monarchy of Capital") This is a further developed stage of the above-mentioned capitalistic economy; as the private possession of land was monopolized and unified by the monarchs, so the private possession of capital was monopolized by a few financial capitalists to bring about the stage of monarchy of capital. At this stage, struggles for colonies took place among the imperialistic powers. It should be noted here that Western European society is composed of the countries of the Central Providence, which have the great mission of the propagation of Christianity. Thus when we view economy, it should not be separated from the developments in politics and religion. The political and economic struggles for the colonies were evil in the sense that they brought about monopolies of capital and the undeveloped countries were victims of aggression and exploitation.
cxlii However at the same time, it is also possible to think that through these struggles, God has propagated Christianity all over the world and unified a large area of the world into the Christian cultural sphere. In this way, the struggles for the colonies have providential significance. Socialism ("Democracy of Capital") However, since contributing to the propagation of Christianity, imperialism has not contributed to the Providence at all. Furthermore, because it continued to exploit the people and smaller nations, God finally destroyed this economic system (imperialism). We think that the appearance of various social systems and the emancipation of colonies after World War II are expressions of God's will. What kind of economic society will appear after the present socialistic society (including Keyne's revised capitalism)? Is it the communistic society that communists assert? Absolutely not. Soviet communism, which is the most developed one today, shows on the one hand many evils and is gradually retreating from economic liberalism, and on the other hand it adopts a political dictatorship. Then what will the future economic society be like? At least one point is sure. The future society will be a society brought about by God's Providence, a society of good and a society which is harmonized politically and economically based on peaceful order and equality. Such a society is the "Heavenly Familial Society", which is also the society of co-life, co-prosperity and co-justice. In other words, it is the familial society expanded to a world-wide scale. As to the concrete details of this society, we plan to write supplementary volumes on its political and economic aspects after further studies have been completed, Section G - History and Culture History is the history of culture. Man must first construct a culture in order to form a society. Accordingly, to live a social life means to construct a culture. The process of the change of this culture is history. So finally, let us discuss the relationship between history and culture. 1. The Central Providence And Peripheral Providence In Cultural History (i) The Central Providence of Cultural History All the creation is governed by the law of dominion of the center and the law of creation from one. Therefore, cultural history is also divided into central and peripheral cultural histories. Viewed from the Principle of Restoration, the center of history is the cultural history of the Israeli people. The Israeli cultural history, which starts from Abraham, is the so-called Hebrew culture or Hebraism. This culture moved to Rome to become Christian culture. Geographically, the Christian culture is the culture of Western Europe which as a result, we believe to be the center of world cultural history. (ii) Peripheral Providence On the other hand, the Oriental and Islamic cultures are regarded as peripheral providence. Therefore, the changes of history in those areas are not as regular as those in the Judeo-Christian cultural area. However, although they are peripheral, the Oriental and Islamic cultures are the same as the JudeoChristian culture in the fact that history is the history of re-creation by the Word. Hence, various sages, wise men and righteous persons have appeared to show the way to the people. In the peripheral providence also, the laws of creation are working just as in the Central Providence in the West. Also, though not as strictly as in the Central Providence, the law of indemnity and the law of separation can be seen to be in operation. Since culture centers around the Word (thought and religion), we can say that cultural history corresponds with religious history (history of thought)
cxliii 2. Sung Sang Culture And Hyung Sang Culture Like any other phenomena, history has two sides: Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Originally the two aspects should have been unified, but by the fall of man, the two were controlled by different subjects (different peoples or states) which often were opposed to each other. (i) Hebraism and Hellenism In the Central Providence, the Hebrew culture (Hebraism) is the Sung Sang culture and Greek culture (Hellenism) is the Hyung Sang culture. Why so? Because Greek mythology is based on polytheism which does not admit the one and only God and as such is almost the same as atheism. Moreover, the Hyung Sang aspects of culture such as science, art and mathematics concerning natural circumstances were developed greatly in Hellenism. On the other hand, these were not as developed in Israel, but the Israeli people have the Sung Sang culture centering on the religion of and literature about the sole creator, God. Originally these two cultures should have been complementary to each other, and eventually a complete culture will finally be developed through the G-T action of the two. Even though on the one hand, these two cultures have interacted and depended on each other, on the other hand, because of the fall, they have struggled with each other until today. Christian culture based on the Hebrew culture moved to Rome, where it interacted and unified with Greek culture to become Roman culture. In the Middle Ages, the culture stemming from Israel became powerful in western Europe and formed Christian culture, while the traditional culture of Greece, which lost favor in Western Europe, was propagated in the Islamic world and greatly influenced the life there. In modern times, the Renaissance emerged out of the culture stemming from Hellenism and the Reformation came out of the culture stemming from Hebraism. Today, the tradition of Greek culture (Hellenism) has led to the communistic culture via the Enlightenment, while the Hebraic culture has flowered into the Christian culture. At present, these two cultures are opposed to each other. (ii) The Sources of the Two Cultures As stated above, if we seek for the source of western culture, which is the Central Providence, we will reach the two cultures of Hebraism and Hellenism. Why then were these cultures born, and why do they still oppose each other without harmonization? In order to clarify this, let us go back further to the origins of these two cultures. Before Greek civilization, there was Aegean civilization and before this, the Egyptian and Syrian civilizations. Between these two, the Egyptian civilization had greater influence on the Aegean and Greek civilizations. When we investigate who was leading the civilization of Egypt, we find that it was the Hamitic people who had created it. On the other hand, before the Hebrew civilization there was the Syrian civilization in which Abraham lived. Pushing further back chronologically, before the Syrian civilization there was the Accadian civilization, and before that, the civilization of Babylonia which was preceded by that of Sumer. It is not too clear where the Sumer people came from but it seems however, that the Semitic people contributed to their development. If so, it becomes clear that it was the Hamitic and Semitic peoples respectively that were closely connected with the creation and advancement of these two civilizations.
cxliv According to the Bible, both the Hamitic and Semitic peoples are descendants of Noah, namely of Ham and Shem, who were the sons of Noah. Thus in our search we have unexpectedly entered the world of Genesis in the Old Testament. The Unification view of history based on the Unification Principle starts its work by clarifying the historic laws hidden in the Old Testament. The key for clarifying the problem of opposing cultures lies in the theory of the fall of man, but there is not time now for introducing this theory philosophically. In later publications however, the studies for which will soon be completed, we shall explain this question in detail. Here we only suggest the whereabouts of the source of the problem. (iii) The Termination of History is a Unified Culture To conclude then, history is divided into Sung Sang and Hyung Sang cultures. These two cultures are generally opposed to each other though there is some interaction or interchange between the two. How can we reson the opposition? For this purpose, religion and science must be unified to become a unified culture by the combination of both truths, namely religious truth and scientific truth (see Divine Principle). The Unification Principle and Unification Thought have been established to solve this problem. Since human culture is based on thought, it will be possible to form a unified culture, in which both the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are combined, only when a unification of thought is established. History has now advanced to the point where it is possible to realize this unified culture. We now face a wonderful new cultural age which is beyond our imagination. We firmly believe that the two opposing trends which have not been able to cooperate with each other for several thousand years will be united with each other in the new age and form the reality of this culture. Furthermore, not only the cultures stemming from Greece and Israel, but also the Oriental and Occidental cultures will surely be united. There will, without fail, in the not too distant future appear a movement which will unify those cultures, namely the movement of the "New Renaissance" or "Unification Renaissance."