“Absolute (philosophy)”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

In philosophy, the concept of The Absolute, also known as The (Unconditioned) Ultimate, The Wholly Other, The Supreme Being, The Absolute/Ultimate Reality, and other names, is the thing, being, entity, power, force, reality, presence, law, principle, etc. that possesses maximal ontological status, existential ranking, existential greatness, or existentiality. In layman's terms, this is the one that is, in one way or another, the greatest, truest, or most real being.

There are many conceptions of The Absolute in various fields and subjects, such as philosophy, religion, spiritual traditions, mathematics, and even natural science. The nature of these conceptions can range from "merely" encompassing all physical existence, nature, or reality, to being completely unconditioned existentially, transcending all concepts, notions, and types, kinds, and categories of being.

The Absolute is often thought of as causing to come into being manifestations that interact with lower or lesser forms of being. This is either done passively, through emanations, or actively, through avatars and incarnations. These existential manifestations, which themselves can possess transcendent attributes, only contain minuscule or infinitesimal portions of the true essence of The Absolute.

The term itself was not in use in ancient or medieval philosophy, but closely related to the description of God as Actus purus (Pure Actuality) in scholasticism. It was introduced in modern philosophy, notably by Hegel, for "the sum of all being, actual and potential".^[1]

Major conceptions of The Absolute

There are three general ways of conceiving the Absolute. The Absolute might be (1) the first and greatest being, (2) not a being at all but the "ground" of being, or (3) both the ground of being and a being.{{citation needed|date=April 2018}}

In conception one the Absolute is the most true and intelligible reality. It can be spoken of and known. For example, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's Absolute Spirit is the most true reality. It is thinkable, speakable, and exists in the objective world by comprehending everything, including people, states, and world history.

In conception two the Absolute might be conceived of as utterly outside of all other reality and hence unintelligible. It cannot be known or spoken about. Plato's Socrates says that "The Form of the Good" is "beyond being",^[3] implying that it is even beyond thought, language, and normal categories of existence.

In conception three the Absolute is seen as transcending duality and distinction. This concept of a fundamental reality that transcends or includes all other reality is usually (but not always) associated with divinity. While this conception initially seems contradictory, it has been highly influential. One way to understand this third conception is to consider the Tao Te Ching.

These opening lines distinguish between two Taos. One is the "eternal Tao" (which cannot be named or explained) and the other "Tao" seems to exist in space and time (and can be named and explained). The eternal Tao is beyond existence and cannot be named or fully understood, while the other Tao exists and can be known. The eternal Tao is infinite; the other is finite. The eternal Tao is formless; the other is formed. The eternal Tao is transcendent; the other is immanent. The other "Tao" is an attempt to describe the "eternal Tao" in human terms; but such effort can never express the eternal Tao fully. He continues:

In these lines, he further discusses the difference between the two Taos. The eternal Tao is "nameless" and is the origin of Heaven and Earth; this origin can be understood as an underlying metaphysics that cannot be described fully. The "named" Tao, on the other hand, is able to describe specific phenomenons that exist in space and time, hence it is the mother of myriad of things; it also can be treated as the humanly conceived concepts in the effort to describe our physical world. Later, he points out that both the "named" and the "nameless" emerge together from the same eternal Tao. This seemingly self-contradictory unity, of course, is said to be the mystery to be understood.

Cross-cultural conception

One or more of these conceptions of the Absolute can be found in various other perspectives. The following is a list of conceptions of the Absolute.

Note that generally the list is ordered alphabetically, but some of the sublists are ordered by historical precedence:

Interpretations

While these conceptions are superficially similar, they admit of multiple interpretations. Some philosophers, especially perennialists and pantheist philosophers, find great significance in the similarities between these different words and argue that various/all cultures past and present have an identical concept of the 'Absolute'.

Other philosophers, however, argue that these concepts are not the same,^[5]^[6] since the Logos is rational and formal whereas Brahman is formless and irrational; and since Plato's Form of the Good is impersonal where the Christian God is personal; since Bradley's Absolute is a conscious experience whereas Brand Blanshard's Absolute is an unconscious, intelligible system.

Perennialist philosophers such as John Hick argue that even if the concepts vary slightly, the reality of the Absolute reality behind the varying concepts is the same.^[7]

Within religious traditions

Philosophers such as Adi Shankara denied the Absolute any personal sense, whereas philosophers such as Ramanuja and Madhva, tended to identify the Absolute with a personal God. The Traditionalist School, via Frithjof Schuon, admits:{{quote|It is true that God as creator, revealer, and savior is not to be identified with the Absolute as such; it is likewise true that God in Himself, in the full depth of His reality, is not to be reduced to the creative Function.^[8]}}Early Hinduism identified Brahman with Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. The same immortal spirit was conceived of as functional in the world in three ways: creation, preservation, and destruction.^[9] There was therefore no real contradiction between love of a personal God and an impersonal Absolute, although the latter was sometimes conceived of as "purer."^[10]

Shaivism, and most monotheistic Indian religions, gave God five functions: creation, preservation, destruction, concealment, and revelation. Shiva, as Brahman, would therefore act in the world as a personal God. Yet this distinction between the Absolute and Infinite, or Transcendent and Immanent is not entirely, in itself, absolute. Philosophers like Shankara believe that upon doing away with maya the entire universe disappears, including the notion of a personal God. Philosophers such as Madhva and Ramanuja, tend to propound an identification of the Absolute with God, whereas later philosophers such as Nimbarka and Caitanya, tended to identify the Absolute with a personal form of God (Krishna). Either way, all these claims, taken in context, tend to prove non-contradictory.

The quote above, via Schuon, is actually fully represented within the Hindu tradition. Brahma, the creator god, is not worshiped within Hinduism. The only deities that are worshiped, are Shiva, and Vishnu. Both Shiva and Vishnu, by their respective devotees, are represented as having power over the following five functions: creation, preservation, destruction, concealment, and revelation. However, a further distinction is made by Shankara: God is not Brahman (the Absolute). Rather the appearance of God is still via the power of Maya. So there are in effect, three levels, which Schuon himself observes: Brahman (the Absolute), God as creator, revealer, and savior (AKA, Shiva or Vishnu), and finally God as creator (AKA, Brahma). Incidental reasons are given for Brahma's lack of worship, a Hindu myth attributes this situation to a curse by Bhrigu. Devdutt Pattanaik, an Indian author, gives some philosophical reasons. Ultimately the reason is actually inherent ("inherent" in the Absolute) and theological.

Relation of humanity to the Absolute

Laozi taught that the Tao was not only the ultimate reality but the ideal of human life. Another conceptual similarity between various conceptions is that the ultimate reality also somehow reveals to humans the way to live. For example, Plato taught that the Good was both the source of reality, the highest object of knowledge, and the ultimate end of desire.

Similarly, the Hindu Taimni describes the Parabrahman as unknowable by the human mind and unthinkable but the highest object of realization and the most profound object of philosophical enquiry.^[14]

Experiencing the Absolute

Philosophers and religious adherents who aim to pattern their life after the Absolute reality sometimes claim to have experienced the Absolute. They report mystical experiences, feelings of oneness, transcendence of their everyday personality or of personhood altogether.

Representing the Absolute

The Absolute is conceptually defined as something inexpressible and perhaps unthinkable. This concept creates special problems for expression in words, poetry, mythology, and art. Writers, painters, storytellers, filmmakers^[16] often use paradox or contradiction because of the "contradictory aspect of the ultimate reality".^[17]

According to Mircea Eliade, the Absolute can be mediated or revealed through symbols.^[18] For Eliade the "archaic" mind is constantly aware of the presence of the Sacred, and for this mind all symbols are religious (relinking to the Origin). Through symbols human beings can get an immediate "intuition" of certain features of the inexhaustible Sacred. The mind makes use of images to grasp the ultimate reality of things because reality manifests itself in contradictory ways and therefore can't be described in concepts. It is therefore the image as such, as a whole bundle of meaning, that is "true" (faithful, trustworthy).^[18] Eliade says :^[19]

See also

Notes

1. ^{{CathEncy|wstitle=The Absolute}}
2. ^{{Cite book|title=The Perennial Philosophy|last=Huxley|first=Aldous|date=2009-01-01|publisher=Harper Perennial Modern Classics|isbn=9780061724947|location=New York|language=English}}{{Cite book|url=https://www.amazon.com/Systematic-Theology-Vol-Paul-Tillich/dp/B000HHSNBE/|title=Systematic Theology. Vol. I.|last=Tillich|first=Paul|date=1951-01-01|publisher=University of Chicago Press}}
3. ^Plato, Republic, Book VI, 508.
4. ^{{Cite book|url=https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Works-Saint-John-Cross-ebook/dp/B00V21HZ8G/|title=The Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, Volume 1 of 2|last=Cross|first=St John of the|date=2015-01-16|publisher=Waxkeep Publishing|language=English}}
5. ^{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=c6aHAgAAQBAJ|title=Philosophy of Religion: A Contemporary Introduction|last=Yandell|first=Keith E.|date=2002-01-22|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781134827237|language=en}}
6. ^{{Cite journal|last=Moser|first=Paul|date=2009-01-01|title=Exclusivism, Inclusivism, and Kardiatheology|url=http://philpapers.org/rec/MOSEIA|journal=Philosophia Christi|volume=11|issue=2|pages=293–308}}
7. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/hick/|title=Hick, John {{!}} Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|website=www.iep.utm.edu|access-date=2016-04-27}}
8. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.studiesincomparativereligion.com/Public/articles/browse_g.aspx?ID=261|title=Form and Substance in the Religions|last=Schuon|first=Frithjof|date=1974|website=Studies in Comparative Religion|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=}}
9. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03270.htm|title=The Mahabharata, Book 3: Vana Parva: Draupadi-harana Parva: Section CCLXX|last=Ganguli|first=Kisari Mohan|date=|website=Sacred Texts|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=|quote=The Supreme Spirit hath three conditions. In the form of Brahma, he is the Creator, and in the form of Vishnu he is the Preserver, and in his form as Rudra, he is the Destroyer of the Universe!}}
10. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.mahavidya.ca/2015/03/04/nirguna-and-saguna-brahman/|title=Nirguna and Saguna Brahman|last=Rodrigues|first=Hillary|date=2015|website=Mahavidya|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=|quote=Until this occurs, "the world...even including Isvara (the Lord), is not ultimately true or real, but that ultimate reality belongs only to the infinite, eternal, unchanging, pure bliss consciousness that is Brahman...all that we see with our senses, even our private thoughts, Advaita claims, are not ultimately real" (Betty 216).}}
11. ^{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TLRLoWGgWqYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=abolition+of+man&q=rta|title=The Abolition of Man|last=Lewis|first=C.S.|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1943|isbn=978-0-06-065294-4|location=United Kingdom|pages=17–18}}
12. ^The phrase "core of our being" is Freudian; see {{Cite journal | author = Bettina Bock von Wülfingen | year = 2013 | title = Freud's 'Core of our Being' Between Cytology and Psychoanalysis | journal = Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte | volume = 36 | issue = 3 | pages = 226–244 | doi = 10.1002/bewi.201301604 }}
13. ^{{Cite book|title=The Perennial Philosophy|last=Huxley|first=Aldous|publisher=Harper & Brothers|year=1945|isbn=978-0-06-172494-7|location=United States|pages=2}}
14. ^I. K. Taimni Man, God and the Universe Quest Books, 1974, p. 1-2
15. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/plotinus/|title=Plotinus - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|author=|date=|website=www.iep.utm.edu|accessdate=28 March 2018}}
16. ^Cf. Terrence Malick's Tree of Life and Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey are two good examples (one religious, one atheistic) of the use of contradiction to convey the Absolute in the final sequences.
17. ^Dadosky, 2004. p. 86
18. ^¹Dadosky, 2004. p. 85
19. ^Dadosky, 2004. p. 100
20. ^See George MacDonald's The Golden Key