William Blake, The Good and Evil Angels Struggling for the Possession of a Child, 1795.
Despite the efforts of various scholars
down through the ages endeavouring to provide a tradition for dualist
renditions of the universe, the particular emanations of dualist thought still
remain aloof to biased revisions and broad generalisations that either celebrate
or condemn. Although the term ‘dualism’ denotes the existence of the state of
two parts in the form of binary opposition, the manner in which this idea finds
expression differentiates itself to the extent of both embracing opposing
doctrines and transcending them. The reason for this is due to the fact that
dualism has a different application in philosophical, historical, and
cosmological contexts. The term
‘dualism’, as a distinct area of description for the religious tradition of
Manichaeism, was introduced by Thomas Hyde in 1700 and then further introduced
by Christian Wolff to define philosophical systems that relate to the mind and
body as two distinct entities. However, the use of the term ‘dualism’ in
philosophical discourse differs greatly from its examination within a religious
context with cosmological and historical references. Although many have argued
that dualism within a religious context is the rite of passage from polytheism
to monotheism, or a rebellious outcry against monotheistic cosmology, studies
in individual religious traditions that have and continue to express dualist
tendencies demonstrate that these tendencies exist in polytheistic,
monotheistic, and monistic religious traditions, either as metaphysical
expressions on the margins or inherent doctrines within the core structure of
the religious tradition.
The essence of religious dualism usually
manifests in the cosmic battle between the forces of good and light against the
minions of evil and darkness, which exists as an all-embracing conflict
defining arcane mechanisms of the universe. In some traditions, such as
Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, this cosmic struggle is between two distinct
and coeternal principles, and the battle is everlasting, for it is the very
definition of the universe itself. In more moderate dualistic traditions, such
the Gnostic school of Valentinianism, the source of evil and darkness is
inferior to the principle of good and light, with the former being an extension
of the latter. Some dualist traditions have an eschatological dimension, where
at the end of time a purification of the world will take place and all evil
will be vanquished. A final difference that takes place between various dualist
religious schools is the way in which creation is conceived. In cosmic dualism,
such as Zoroastrianism, the created world is not conceived as evil, but instead
as a creation of the good principle that has been assaulted by the forces of
evil and darkness. However, in more anti-cosmic dualist systems, as presented
in the mythologies of some Gnostic schools, the created world is seen as a
creation of the Demiurge who opposes the good and light principle that resides
within the domain of spirit.
In relation to the diverse types of
dualism that can be found in polytheistic, monotheistic and monistic religious
traditions, Yuri Stoyanov writes:
In certain religious traditions diverse types of dualism could coalesce and appear in torturous combinations with monotheistic and polytheistic conceptions. What is more, within the framework of the development of some religious traditions, there can be detected a transition from dualist tendencies or notions of duality to the dualism of the irreconcilable cosmic opposites or a reversal of this process – a neutralization of the dualist elements implicit or developed in earlier stages of religion (Stoyanov, 2000, 5).
References:
Yuri Stoyanov, The Other God – Dualist Religions from Antiquity to the Cathar Heresy, 2000.
No comments:
Post a Comment