Roberto Assagioli about Panentheism

Roberto Assagioli writes about his belief in Panentheism, where transcendence and immanence, far from being excluded, harmonize admirably in an integral conception of the universe.

Original title: The Manifestation of the Divine in Nature and in the Soul.

By Roberto Assagioli. (Doc. #23611 Assagioli Archives – Florence). Original Title: La Manifestazione del Divino nella Natura e nell’Anima. Translated and Edited With Notes by Jan Kuniholm[1]

See also the article: Psychosynthesis and evolutionary panentheism.

Abstract by Jan Kuniholm: In our tumultuous age, two contrasting trends are evident: a growing majority of humanity is abandoning faith, moral principles, and positive religions, driven by a materialistic and selfish worldview, while a minority is embracing a renewed ethical-religious awakening. This minority is growing, spurred by scientific advancements in chemistry, physics, and biology, which challenge materialistic views, and by the moral crises induced by war. Modern physics, revealing matter to be non-substantial, and a revived spirituality both counter the materialistic outlook.

Yet, this spiritual renewal faces uncertainties and distortions, necessitating clarification, particularly regarding the relationship between divinity, nature, and the soul. Historically, two extreme views have prevailed: the dualistic view of absolute transcendence, separating God from creation; and the monistic view of absolute immanence, equating God with the universe. Both are inadequate. A synthesis, panentheism, acknowledges God as both transcendent and immanent, unifying all creation and embodying divine presence in every aspect of life.

This balanced view satisfies both rational and spiritual needs, fostering a profound respect for all beings and recognizing the divine within and beyond the universe. This ancient and widespread conception, evident in Eastern and Western philosophies and mysticism, harmonizes spirituality and intellectual inquiry, urging a life of deeper communion with the divine.

In our agitated and tumultuous age, we can observe two opposite and contrasting facts. The majority of humanity seems to be losing all faith, all higher principles, and all moral restraint. It is rapidly abandoning positive religions on a vast scale, loosening all restraints imposed by family and social traditions, and has launched itself hopelessly into the conquest of material things. It wants to enjoy — to enjoy in every way without worrying about anything else. Basically, the great majority of humanity today has a purely materialistic and selfish conception of the world and of life; but it is applied and lived practically in every case with a consistency or conviction that is truly worthy of a better cause.

I consider it entirely unnecessary to give examples of this. In every moment of our social life, we come in contact, and quite often in collision, with obvious and often unpleasant manifestations of this state of affairs. Many people who are shocked by all that they observe around them, go so far as to believe that all mankind is now hopelessly caught up and overwhelmed by the current, and therefore allow themselves to be overcome by discouragement, making the most pessimistic predictions for the future, even for the near future.

But these pessimists do not realize that, fortunately, the opposite is also happening; that there is a minority who are proceeding in another and better way, and this minority is growing and asserting itself more and more clearly and resolutely.

The first and strongest reaction has occurred in the field of knowledge. The progress of scientific investigations in chemistry, physics and biology have together demonstrated in many ways the absolute inadequacy and unsustainability of the narrow materialistic conception of the universe, which has had the upper hand in the field of culture for some time. With the arrival of nuclear theory, matter itself has been shown to be nonexistent as a substantial and objective reality. In fact it is well known that modern physics has shown that what appears to us to be solid, tangible and real matter consists instead of a myriad of minute charges of electricity — a marvelous and extremely rapid dance of ions and electrons.

Alongside and together with this scientific revolution, another of a more distinctly ethical-religious nature has occurred and is continuing. The harmful practical, individual and social consequences of materialism have troubled and then awakened many consciences; and the terrible sufferings, inner crises and moral shocks produced by the war have revived and aroused a sincere and fervent religiousness in many souls.

The proofs of the existence and importance of this state of affairs are less apparent than the outward prevalence of materialism; however, the evidence is plentiful and obvious to those who have paid some attention to recent events in the field of culture. An extensive examination of all these events would be very interesting, but it is not possible to do so on this occasion.

However, even though the idealistic renewal mentioned above is very extensive, lively and promising, it is not free — in my opinion — from uncertainties, confusions and even distortions. And these could be truly dangerous, to the point of compromising some of the beneficial effects of the human betterment and regeneration, toward which today’s spiritual revival is directed and which so urgently needed.

It seems appropriate for me to attempt this work of clarification and warning; not in a comprehensive way, for which a long and complex discussion would be needed, but by examining a specific theme: that of the relations between divinity, nature and soul.

* * *

The relationship between God, nature and soul have been conceived primarily in two extreme and opposite ways. The first (represented by traditional philosophical-religious spirituality) can be called that of absolute transcendence. It is based on a rigid dualism, on a clear and substantial separation between nature and spirit, between man and God. According to this conception, nature comes from one or more different acts of creation by divinity; after which all direct and continuous relations between creature and creator cease, and they remain separated by a radical disparity, by an insurmountable gulf. The same applies to the relations between the Soul and God. It has been asserted that with an infinite being there is not, nor can there be, any “process.” God remains unchanging in his Heaven, while down here the life of nature unfolds under strict laws. Man is dominated by evil and is powerless to work out his own salvation without the external gift of grace, which is either bestowed or denied for reasons that are unknowable to him.

Such a conception, albeit with various tempering and accommodation, has dominated Western nature for many centuries. It is, however, strongly repugnant to the modern consciousness, which has risen resolutely, and often violently, against it.

Actually it is not difficult to see the various philosophical objections it raises, and the great ethical-spiritual drawbacks which it raises.

On the theoretical side, the idea of separate creative acts — from nothingness or an ill-defined chaos — is at odds with the modern scientific conception of the fundamental unity and coherence of the cosmos and the continuous evolutionary flow of life. Furthermore, one cannot understand the meaning and purpose of creation, nor of the mode of action, that is isolated and separate from the Creator, nor the justice of unmerited grace. The result is likely to be a sense of helplessness and self-doubt in people, and a tendency to frantically and slavishly plead for external help instead of bravely facing life, advancing one’s own and highest possibilities in vigorous struggle.

A distant and inaccessible God, with whom there is no possibility of vital, intimate and direct relationship, inspires more fear than love, and tends to lack any uplifting effect in daily life. The extreme consequences of such a rigid transcendentalist conception are to be found in the dark and inhuman [versions of] Calvinism, with their desperate doctrine of absolute predestination.

One can therefore understand how necessary and opportune was the reaction that occurred in the modern consciousness.

This reaction to “absolute transcendence,” which went through various stages and ways on which I cannot linger now, has countered with “absolute immanence.” Thus it has reaffirmed the fundamental and inseparable unity of reality in opposition to rigid dualism. According to this conception, one and the same life animates the whole universe and pervades it. Various doctrines have variously named and conceived of it as matter, force, vitality, substance, spirit or Deity; but all have unanimously reaffirmed the great unity of the whole.

The “immanentist” tendency, which was at first more or less rigid or tempered, has become more and more pronounced in modern times, especially through Hegelian philosophy, and has reached its most absolute and extreme position right here in Italy, with “neo-idealist” philosophy.

However, even “immanentism” does not recognize a spirit that is beyond its manifestations; that is, according to it, there is no reality nor any being above man and physical nature. The only reality is becoming, and the highest consciousness that exists in the universe is the consciousness of man.

According to this philosophy, therefore, there would be a becoming without anything that becomes, a historical unfolding that takes place according to certain laws, without any higher principle that established these laws and provided the initial impulse. This philosophy therefore in no way explains the origin of reality. It does not explain how consciousness could have arisen and developed. In it the “spirit” is completely and necessarily embedded in its own particular concrete manifestations and loses the character of spirituality.

As we can see, this philosophy does not satisfy our rational needs at all and constitutes the negation of all religion. For there is no place for God in it, since its so-called “spirit” certainly cannot be called God, because it becomes self-consciousness only in man. All truly religious life would be abolished; the Soul’s love for God, its impulses of adoration and prayer, its aspirations toward a higher and more conscious communion with Him — all these would no longer have any reason to exist. Man could only love and worship himself. Obviously, this is far from the spirit of Christianity.

From the ethical point of view then, immanentism appears highly questionable and dangerous. A doctrine that places man at the summit of the universe can only foment conceit and pride, abolishing all sense of one’s personal weakness, all healthy sense of humility, and every reason for repentance and contrition.

So how should we conceive of the relationship between nature, Soul and God?

I will answer succinctly, “In a way that takes into account the elements of truth that are as much in the transcendentalist conception as in the immanentist one, avoiding the one-sidedness and exaggerations of both.”

This is not an extrinsic eclecticism, nor a deliberate and artificial conception, but a real completion and synthesis. Transcendence and immanence, far from excluding each other, harmonize admirably into an integral conception of the universe.

Thus the existence of a supreme and transcendent Being, of an absolute Principle that is eternal and exists prior to every limited and concrete manifestation of beings and things, in no way excludes the living presence and continuous action of His Spirit in the bosom of nature and the Soul of man. The origin of things and beings from God can be more satisfactorily conceived if we accept a continuous influx of Divine life, which through manifold transformations gives rise to all things and all creatures that exist in the cosmos. Thus God is transcendent and immanent at one and the same time: He is transcendent because He exists prior to manifestation and is not exhausted in it; He is immanent because nothing exists outside Him and He is present in every movement of life and in every glimmer of consciousness.

Thus the soul of man, while it must recognize that it is only a tiny and particular manifestation of the Infinite and the Eternal, and thus must feel profoundly humble before It, can also know and feel that its essence is the very essence of God and that therefore wonderful possibilities of development and glorious achievements of wisdom, love and power are open to him.

Finally, man, recognizing the presence of the Divine in every thing and in every creature, learns to respect every aspect of matter, even the crudest and coarsest, and every manifestation of it, even the most fearful and seemingly hostile to nature, and to feel an intimate sense of brotherhood for all living beings.

This conception, which stands in opposition to both the rigid theism of the dualists and the Dantonism[2] of the immanentists, has been called “panentheism;” that is, “All In God.” It is a spiritual conception capable of satisfying the demands of reason and of feeling in the most complete and harmonious way. We are therefore not surprised to see how ancient and widespread it is, and how in various eras and civilizations men have come to that same conclusion, by various ways and often unaware of each other. Indeed, we find it as far back as the oldest philosophical speculations of India, expressed simply and solemnly in the Isa Upanishad:

Those who seek only the knowledge of the finite go into the region of darkness, and into greater darkness go those who seek knowledge of the infinite. He who masters the knowledge of the finite and the knowledge of the infinite in one knowledge passes beyond death through the knowledge of Infinity.

Those who pursue only what is transient go into the region of darkness, and into greater darkness go those who pursue the eternal. He who unites the transient and the eternal in one Reality passes over the thresholds of death by means of the transient and attains immortality by means of the Eternal.[3]

We then find this conception again in that admirable synthesis of India’s spiritual philosophy that is the Bhagavad Gita, where it is amply expounded and then succinctly expressed in the memorable formula of Krishna, who represents the embodiment of the Supreme:

Having pervaded this whole universe with a part of Me, I abide.[4]

But the great modern Indian philosopher and poet, Rabindranath Tagore, again profoundly and convincingly developed this conception in the essays in two books, Sadhana and Personality, and sang it in his magnificent poems, bringing out its beauty and spiritual value.

In the West we find the panentheistic conception first of all in Neo-Platonic philosophy, in such statements as “The One is eternally with His manifestation, which eternally proceeds from Him”[5] and “God is not foreign to any, but is present in all things, though they ignore Him.”[6]

And in Christianity, although dualism and transcendentalism have prevailed, we find a strong current that admits the immanentist aspect, a current that began with the origin of Christianity and continues to the present day.

If a saying attributed to Jesus and found not long ago on a papyrus in Egypt were proven to be authentic, that current would even date back to the founder of Christianity himself. The words attributed to Jesus are:

Split a piece of wood; I am there.

Lift up a stone, and you will find me there.[7]

Such words, even if they were not uttered by Jesus, are nonetheless highly significant regarding the existence of the immanentist conception from the earliest days of Christianity.

In St. Paul the intimate union between man and God repeatedly affirmed: “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me,” (Galatians, 2:20) and “He who is united with the Lord becomes one spirit with Him.” (Corinthians, 6.17)[8] And elsewhere we find the most admirable expression of panentheism: “In Him we live and move and have our being.” [9]

In various Church Fathers, but especially in many Christian mystics, we find it often and clearly said that God is at once transcendent and immanent in the world and in man.

Later Meister Eckhart says, with the boldness and efficacy peculiar to Him, “God is nearer to me than I am to myself; He is just as near to wood and stone, but they do not know it.” [10]

And St. Teresa: “I understood how our Lord was in all things and how He was to the Soul: and the illustration of a sponge filled with water was suggested to me.”[11]

Even in the most distinguished representative of the dualistic conception, St. Thomas Aquinas, we find some expression of an immanentist character, for example: “Since God is the universal cause of all being, in whatever region Being can be found, there must be the Divine Presence.” [12]

And St. Francis, not by writings or doctrines, but by his sublime life and the outpourings of the heart expressed in his canticles, attested to the presence of the divine in nature and creatures and taught us to love them more intimately and deeply, to feel our brotherhood with the elements and animals.

Numerous other testimonies of mystics could be cited, and such consensus should not surprise us. In fact, the very raison d’être of mysticism lies in the possibility of finding God in the depths of the Soul, of coming to a conscious communion, a true union, between the purified soul and God. But we shall return to this later.

In modern times the immanentist current has become more pronounced even in the Christian field, and one of its best and most balanced advocates was the noble figure of Gratry.[13]

I hope that I have succeeded, even with these brief and incomplete notes, in showing how the panentheistic conception is both the most satisfying from the philosophical side, and at the same time truly spiritual and Christian. But it is not enough for the soul to understand and recognize a truth; it wants to feel it and act it out, for spirituality is not speculation or intellectual belief, but above all it is LIFE.

* * *

Let us see how we can truly feel and realize the presence of the Divine in nature and achieve communion with the “living God” in the sanctuary of our own soul.

Actually we could see the Divine in every movement of life, in every particle of matter, but there are certain natural spectacles that more easily and intensely than others give a sense of the infinite, of the Eternal.

Among these the most striking and the most powerful is the contemplation of the starry sky. It moved even the prosaic and dry philosopher of Königsberg, Immanuel Kant,[14] inspiring him with the well-known exclamation:

Two things give me a sense of the sublime:

The starry sky above me and the moral law within me.”[15]

Yes, truly, the spectacle of those myriads of suns scattered in space, around which revolve planets, each bearing its humanity; the intuition that all those suns, those planets and that humanity derive from one and the same Source of Life, move according to the same laws, and are headed toward the same glorious and mysterious end, fills our souls with admiration, love and peace. We feel how the greatest and the smallest are one before God, indeed in the very bosom of God. We truly feel that we participate in the universal life, and in those moments of contemplation we purify ourselves of all our vain fears, pettiness and conceits, and we abandon all our personal limitations.

So let us on clear nights leave our narrow dwellings and go out often into the open air where the voices of men do not reach; let us lift our eyes to heaven and listen; maybe we will hear things we did not hear before.

Notes:

[1] Editor’s interpolations are shown in [brackets]. —Ed.

[2] Assagioli’s use of this term refers to the French revolutionary leader George Jacques Danton, first president of the French Committee of Public Safety, which was responsible for the execution (by guillotine) of many people. The author here expresses his opinion that immanentism results in the “beheading” of religion. —Ed.

[3] These are translated from Assagioli’s rendering in Italian. —Tr.

[4] This is translated from Assagioli’s rendering in Italian. Other translations render it, “With a single fragment of Myself I pervade and support this entire universe.” —Tr.

[5] probably from The Elements of Theology by Proclus (412-485), who was a major figure in the development of neo-Platonism and wrote extensively about “The One.” Translated from Assagioli’s Italian. Exact source of this quotation is unknown. —Ed.

[6] from The Enneads VI.9 by Plotinus (204-270), the founder of the neo-Platonic school of philosophy. He emphasized the presence of the divine in all aspects of the universe. Translated from Assagioli’s Italian. —Ed.

[7] The Gospel According to Thomas, 77. —Ed.

[8] Both translations from the Revised Standard Version in English. —Ed.

[9] Acts of the Apostles, 17:28. from the Revised Standard Version in English. —Ed.

[10] Quoted by Evelyn Underhill in Mysticism: A Study in Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness, London, 1910, p. 101. —Ed.

[11] Quoted in Underhill, ibid. p. 100. —Ed.

[12] Quoted in Underhill, ibid. p. 110n. —Ed.

[13] August Joseph Alphonse Gratry (1805-1872) was a French Catholic priest, author, and theologian. —Ed.

[14] Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was a German philosopher who lived his entire life in the city of Königsberg. —Ed.

[15] This is a translation of Assagioli’s Italian, taken loosely from Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft)(1788). The complete original saying is, “Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing appreciation (Bewunderung) and awe (Ehrfurcht), the more often and the more persistently I think about them: the starry sky above me and the moral law within me.”