Western religious cosmology tells us that for all eternity
there is a “More,” a God or Absolute, and at some point in eternity, this More
gives rise to lesser creatures like us. The
presence of this superabundant being
from the git-go is inexplicable.
Thus, both scientific and religious cosmologies lead us back
to the inexplicable.
Can any reasonable cosmology escape the inexplicable? I don’t think so. But there is an
interesting middle ground between the view of Western Science and Western
Religion on this topic. If we are to
escape the inexplicable at the base of getting more from less, than we have to
posit an eternal something. (Here
eternal can mean either an endless sequence of time or that which exists
outside of, and gives rise to, time.)
But that eternal something does not have to be “a More.” It could be the simplest something capable of
giving rise to more. It could be merely
the potential for being – a potential that inevitably become actualized. This
is the nature of Lao Tze’s Tao.
Western theology posits its deity as grand and splendid. Its predominant analogy is with the earthly
King or Emperor. Its focus is power. The Jews sought power but were constantly
under the feet of conquering forces. The
Christians aligned with the Roman Emperor and became themselves imperial. Islam created its own empire by force. (The best way to beat the devil, it seems, is
to become the devil.)
Old Lao Tze had seen enough of empire to think it the
opposite of the divine. For Lao, the
divine was the lowest and the humblest.
It was the soil into which the seed could be planted and the water which
brought the plant forth. In this
cosmology, the eternally Less “gives” rise to ephemerally More. But the Giver and the Given are a two that is
also One; even less than one, perhaps, but never quite a None.
Inexplicable still, yet humanely so.
No comments:
Post a Comment