RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Pantheism
ent but pantheism is more evident, in spite of his objection to the name. The self-development of the absolute is the self-development of 7. Hegel and God. The absolute reason external- Schleier- izes itself in nature; but this self-esmacher. trangement, this becoming other, which is in a sense a declension, is a necessary stage to the return into itself in spirit. The divine idea is distinguished into three forms: (1) being eternally in and with itself, the form of universality, God in his eternal idea in and for himself, the kingdom of the Father; (2) the form of manifestation, of particularization, Being-for-other in physical nature and in the finite spirit, the eternal idea of God in the element of consciousness and mental representation, the kingdom of the Son; and (3) the form of return out of manifestation into self, the process of reconciliation, the Idea in the sphere of the religious community or the kingdom of the Spirit. It is easy to see from this how the followers of Hegel split into right and left wings, the former regarding theism as supported by his teaching and yielding more or less assent to Christian doctrines, while the latter laid stress on his conception of God as the eternal and universal substance, coming first to self-consciousness in humanity, and thus followed Hegel as a pantheist. The next speculative philosopher with a pantheistic trend is Schleiermacher, who, like Spinoza, finds the infinite (God) in the midst of the finite, to which he attributes objective reality. The totality of all existing things is the world; the unity of the universe is the Deity. He is not identical with the world, but can not be separated from it. In contrast with Spinoza, Schleiermacher emphasizes the dignity of the individual, which weakens the effect of his pantheism, and acknowledges a living God instead of a lifeless and immovable one, though he does not reach the conception of a personal God.
A marked distinction exists between the doctrine of Evolution (q.v.), which characterizes the materialistic pantheism originating with the hylozoists and the later followers of the Eleatic school, and the doctrine of Emanation (q.v.). 8. Evolu- In the former the whole principle is tionistic, included in the development and a Emanation- progress from less to more perfect is istic, and usually assumed; in the latter, the Scholastic principle remains unchanged in its Pantheism, unity and allows the universe to stream forth from it, becoming in successive stages less perfect. But the emanationist systems are to be called pantheist in so far as they assume that all things were originally contained in God. A brief survey of them is therefore in order. Such pantheism as is found in India is mostly connected with the idea of emanation. The expressions of the Upanishads as to Brahma, the only absolutely existing One, The Atman, the nucleus of all being, are distinctly pantheistic, but are not brought into relation in a logical system. Among the Greeks the Neoplatonists taught emanation definitely, regarding the highest principle, the One, as over-full, so that it is forced to overflow without any breach of continuity. In their doctrine of reabsorption into
the One as the highest goal of human endeavor a pantheistic tendency is clearly visible. Following out Neoplatonist ideas, the pseudo-Dionysius, while he does not definitely teach emanation, is distinctly pantheistic; and, influenced by both these sources, Scotus Erigena reached a still more complete pantheism. His twofold process, first of analysis; or the descent from the universal to the particular, the proceeding of all things from God the highest principle, and then of reversion or deification, the return through the assembling of individuals into classes until the simplest unity is once more reached in God, shows a wide departure from the doctrine of the Neoplatonists, especially Proclus. In Proclus the end of the process is the extreme of distance from the source; in Erigena God is not only the beginning but the middle and the end. Yet he remains unmingled in his own essence, at once immanent in the world and transcendent. Numerous pantheistic ideas run through the heresies and the mysticism of the Middle Ages, largely drawn from Erigena (see Scotus Erigena, Johannes), who specially influenced Amalric of Bena (q.v.), the teacher of the identity of the Creator and the creation. David of Dinant (q.v.) taught that there was only one substance of all bodies and all souls, God himself. The Church took strong measures against such teachings, and condemned a large number of propositions from the writings of the famous mystic Eckhart (q.v.), tending in the same direction. There is much in common between him and Nicholas of Cusa (see Cusa, Nicholas of), who combined the most various ideas and interests and contrived to hold the doctrine of the creation of the world together with pantheistic beliefs, such as that God comprehends all things in himself, even opposites, and that God with his being and his power is everywhere present in the animate, ordered totality of the universe, so that everything in its species has a certain perfection. Nicholas had no slight influence on the development of philosophy, though not so much as Giordano Bruno (q.v.), who depended on him in numerous points. Traces of Bruno's influence are found in both Spinoza and Leibnitz; but he was too much of an eclectic to put together a well-rounded and consistent system. Although he allowed individualism its place, his pantheism is a good deal like that of the Stoics. Space fails for the examination of theistic views with a partially pantheistic coloring, among which might be named those of Plato and Aristotle in the earlier time and of the occasionalist school in the later. Even in Leibnitz (q.v.), thorough individualist though be was, there are traces of the same thing — as when he calls God the " center everywhere " and conceives the single monads as an effulguration of the Godhead. This only shows how difficult it is, without going into avowed dualism, to exclude pantheism altogether; and in fact, while complete pantheism may not be tenable, the deeper Christian consciousness can not forget the two propositions that in God we live and move and have our being, and that God is in us.
(M. HrciNZEf.) While a thorough-going pantheism has been precluded among English and American thinkers by a
Pantheism Papal States