UNIFICATION THOUGHT
description
Transcript of UNIFICATION THOUGHT
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 identity-
maintaining 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 Chung-
Boon-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 Identity-
Maintaining 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-B-
H 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 self-
identity 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 give-
and-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 Identity-
Maintaining (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-and-
take 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 give-
and-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 give-
and-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 Chung-
Boon-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 three-
dimensional 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-Division-
Union) 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-and-
take 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-and-
take 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 G-
T 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 above-
mentioned 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 thesis-
antithesis-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 Being-
Not 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. Sung-
Ih 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- the-
world) 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-the-
world 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 self-
restoration 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 after-
life 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 give-
and-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-and-
take 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 3:16-
17) (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 re-
creation (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 self-
cognition 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 above-
mentioned 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, re-
practice 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, re-
practice 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 sub-
consciousness 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-and-
take 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-and-
take 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 give-
and-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 17th-
18th 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 re-
creation, 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-Boon-
Hap 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 (re-
creation). 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 above-
mentioned 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 11:4-
9) (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 G-
T 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 co-
action 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 [Sam-
Kong-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 family-
like 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 Judeo-
Christian 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."