Content uploaded by Amir Martin Ebrahimi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Amir Martin Ebrahimi on Jan 17, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Panentheism, Spinoza and world
religions
Is it possible to find panentheistic ideas in the "big five" world
religions?
AMIR MARTIN EBRAHIMI
VEILEDER
Henny Solfrid Fiskå Hägg
Universitetet i Agder, [2021]
Fakultet for [Religion, etikk og samfunn]
Institutt for [Universitet i Agder]
Introduction:
In this essay, I would like to write about Panentheism in world religions and understand
what Panentheism means in a philosophical sense. I will look at the semantics of
Panentheism in a philosophical sense and examine the relationship between the concept
of God and the Existence from a philosophical perspective. I will also look at Spinoza's
view of God and show, based on the evidence, that Spinoza believes in Panentheism. In
the end, I will look upon the panentheistic view of God in the writings of religions. I want
to show that the concept of monotheism is universal in major religions, especially in the
mystical tradition, and one possible interpretation of monotheism is Panentheism.
Panentheism derives from Greek Pan "all", en "in", theos "God "which means "All-in-
God", the Reality is identical with God but at the same time God "transcendence " all
things. In one sense, in Panentheism, creation becomes a theophany. God is not separate
from creation, but God manifests itself in creation which is itself. From Plato to Schelling
(1775-1854), various theologians and philosophers developed ideas similar to
contemporary Panentheism themes. This idea developed as expression of Theism. Plato
provided the basis for Panentheism with his description of the changing world as an
emanation of being from the One making the world part of the Ultimate (Cooper, 2006,
35-39). Emanation avoids ontological separation between God and the world because
the world participates in the infinite as its source (Clayton, 2000, 477-481). Plotinus
developed perspectives in which the world came from God and understood the
relationship between God and the world as a dialectical relationship. The world came
from God and returned to God (Cooper, 2006, 42-46). Gregersen identifies a core
common to all forms of Panentheism, God contains the world so that the world belongs
to God and there is a feeding back from the world into divine life (Gregersen, 2017, 582).
There is a connection between One and All. All is nothing but One. In other words, I can
formulate it as: "God is existence itself" as Paul Tillich says, "Ground of Being", or as
Baruch Spinoza say God is substance, and as Thomas Aquinas name it "Necessary being",
"Brahman" in Hinduism, "tathagatagarbha: buddha-nature" in Buddhism,"Ein Sof" in
kabbalistic Judaism, "Wojod" in Islam which is the other name for Allah and means
Existence, etc. Everything emerges from "Existence". In the language of Religions or
myths, people had been calling It "God" with different names, but the same concept in
the philosophical language is the very essence of Existence. In Panentheism, the universe
and all beings is nothing but manifested God. The Immanence aspect of God emerges
from transcendence, or in other words; transcendence is the source of everything.
Divine immanence derives from divine transcendence. Simply, we can say that God is
everywhere; it's like the soul of the universe (anima mundi), the soul of the universe is a
presence all over. God is present in all of Reality.
Here it is necessary to distinguish Pantheism, Panentheism and classical Theism.
Pantheism is a type of Theism that stresses the identity of God and the world
ontologically. In Pantheism God is identical with Universe. Pantheism considers God and
the cosmos to be equivalent. God is not above the universe, but universe and God are
interchangeable terms. In other words, in Pantheism God does not have a transcendent
aspect. The line between Pantheism and Panentheism can be blurred depending on
varying definitions of God, so there have been disagreements when assigning particular
notable figures to Pantheism or Panentheism (Cooper,2006, 71-72, 87-88). The
panentheistic mutual relation differs from Pantheism which prioritizes divine
immanence by identifying the infinite with the finite. In Panentheism God have a
transcendent aspect that distinguished these two views.
In classical Theism God understood as transcendent, immutable and timeless. Ultimate
Reality is a reality that is distinct from the world (Cooper,2008). Both Panentheism and
Classical Theism distinguish between God and the world; both maintain God's being
differs from the world's being; both Panentheism and Theism also maintain God's
transcendence. Still, they differ in that Panentheism holds that God ontologically
includes the world while Theism maintains an ontological distinction between God and
creation. This distinction in Theism at times develops into an ontological separation
between God and the world that makes any interaction between God and the world
problematic. So, one can say Panentheism is a synthesis of Pantheism and Theism. The
keyword in Panentheism is that God is both transcendent and immanence. Panentheism
pointed to a balance between God’s transcendence and God’s immanence further refines
the distinctiveness of Panentheism's mutual relation between God and the universe in
distinction from both classical Theism and Pantheism.
I find this philosophical view, which are, in my opinion, very profound and interesting in
all-world religions and influential philosophers of all time, so I decided to look around
all-world religions and look upon this idea. This view will help better understand God's
concept and its connection to all beings, and therefore loving creature is loving God and
oneself. The doctrine of panentheism that God is in the world has an important practical
corollary, the sacredness of Nature and all living being, and things lead to be treated
with respect and understanding. And also, as much more we know about the universe
and ourselves, the more we know about God.
God and Existence:
When we are talking about God, what exactly does it mean? God has been understood in
many ways; some think God is the older man in the sky, some others believe God is the
essence of Existence and Ground of being. There are many imaginations and thoughts
about God. We should open the concept of God and understand what mystics and some
philosophers have understood of this concept. There is a connection between the
concept of God and Existence in the eye of mystics and some religious texts. Rabbi Moses
Cordovero (1522-1570) a mystics kabbalist wrote:
Now, the poor person thinks that God is an older man... and he has white hair because he is
old, and he sits on a great wooden throne, and that his appearance is like fire and the results of
all these images, which the fool thinks about until he corporealizes God, is that he falls into
some trap and abandons his faith… But wise, enlightened person knows Gods unity, and his
essence that is completely devoid of material boundaries… God is found in everything
because God is the Existence, the life and the reality of every existing thing. (Michaelson,
2011)
I will examine this Idea further when I look at the God's view in various religions, in
which one of the names of God is Existence. In philosophical language God has been
described and approached by many concepts, such as "necessary being", "ultimate
cause", "the first cause", "ultimate reality", "eternal", "infinity", "the absolute present"
and the "omniscience" etc, all these attributes and descriptions that are used to prove
God, return to the Reality of pure Existence from another perspective. Let us go further
on this issue and understand the term Existence as God itself. All "things" exist
dependently on others. Things are limited. Any object we observe is a finite material
entity. in other words, we can say objects are contingent. But Existence itself is not a
limited object, it is Not-a-thing! and therefore is not dependent on other things, its
Substance, its eternal and infinite. When we say God exists, we create something out of
the word God; then God becomes a thing. Things exist, not God; A table exists because a
table can go into nonexistence, a door exists because it can go to nonexistence. But
Existence itself cannot go to nonexistence because total nothingness is nothing. So, it
cannot be asked whether God exists. That is like asking whether Existence exists. God is
not a thing among other things who need to be proven; God is total thingness. God is
isness, the quality of isness, the quality of Existence (Osho, 2006, chapter 8). God needs
the very essence of Existence himself in the first place, for he can create something.
Therefore, maybe it's more understandable to say God is Existence itself. Existence is the
source of Being and is the only Being: Alpha and Omega! Existence is exist in and of
itself, from itself. Therefore, Existence is a self-subsistent, self-evident, and necessary
reality and is omnipresence, boundless, aseity, and sustains and upholds everything.
Many Jewish, Muslim and Christian theologians have also believed God to be
independent and necessary in this way.
But the important question is, what is Existence itself? Many of us never thought about
Existence. We mainly give attention to existed beings. Things which exist, Science deals
with material phenomena and objects that can be observed and tested. Science deals
with details, not generalities. It deals with things that exist and not Existence as infinite
and absolute Reality. Therefore, God neither can be proved nor disproved by Science.
Martin Heidegger (1889- 1976), the famous German philosopher, in his book "Being and
time" states that western philosophy has forgotten the essence of Existence, what he
called "The forgetfulness of Being" (Fulford,2011, 98). Existence is the first Reality we
know from when we are born, any individual feels the presence and being, and still, we
forget it. Existence is so clear and obvious and evident, like light which we sometimes
forget about the light itself; we see the reflection of light on things, not light itself. We
see existed things; we see around us many objects which exist, but not Existence itself.
Still, this is not two things; it's one Reality. We are just focusing on the reflection of
Existence, and therefore we don’t experience and sees the unity of Existence as mystics
do. We are not observing Existence itself as substance and Oneness. Martin Heidegger
used the word "Lethe" Greek mythologist concept to symbolize the concealment of being
or forgetting of Being, which he saw as a major problem of modern philosophy. In Greek
mythology, Lethe was one of the underworld rivers, where all those who drank from it
experienced complete forgetfulness. We see similar meaning in Hinduism, the Concept
of Maya, which is a kind of forgetfulness and illusion which lead man become blind and
don’t see unity and oneness of Existence. Maybe that's why Plato speaks about
anamnesis, which means "All learning is remembering" because learning is discovery
and finding, finding what was there from perhaps beginning. Law of physics we are just
discovering them, we remember them! It's so fascinating that some discoveries had
happened first in imagination and dreams (John Read, 1957, 179-180). It is kind of
remembering what was in mind from the beginning. Therefore, Plotinus refers to the
human soul as an eternal reality that emanated from One and took the body. Plotinus
asserted the ultimately divine nature of material creation since it ultimately derives
from the One, through the mediums of Nous and the world soul. And it is by the Good or
Beauty that we recognize the One, in material things and then in the forms. By this
recognition, self-realization, man can experience the union with the essence of Existence
or with the One (Henosis) related to enlightenment, liberation and mystical union, which
is common to many Eastern and Western traditions (Lander, 2013, 76). According to
Frithjof Schuon:
The key to the eternal sophia is pure intellection or in other words metaphysical
discernment. To "discern" is to "separate": to separate the Real and the illusory, the
Absolute and the contingent, the Necessary and the possible, Atma and Maya.
Accompanying discernment, by way of complement and operatively, is concentration,
which unites: this means becoming fully aware from the starting point of earthly and
human Maya of Atma, which is both absolute and infinite. (Harry Oldmeadow,2010 ,
88).
To remember "Atman is Brahman" man will discover that Existence itself is fundamental
and the ground of everything. It's the source of other understandings, its axiom, and
brightness. Paul Tillich (1886-1965), German theologian, used the concept of "being"
(Sein) in systematic theology:
When a doctrine of God is initiated by defining God as being-itself, the philosophical
concept of being is introduced into systematic theology. [The concept of Being]
appears in the present system: in the doctrine of God, where God is called the Being as
being or the ground and the power of Being. (Victor E, Taylor, 1998, 467 ,
Tillich,1957,10)
I understand that, God is not a being beside other beings, but God is the ground of being,
the pure Existence which is the source of all other beings. Therefore any objects which
exists, exists in Gods Existence which is the infinite and boundless Existence. In this
sense, we can understand better what mystics meant by Panentheism. We are going
more deeply into this understanding of Panentheism from a famous Dutch Philosophe,
Baruch Spinoza.
Spinoza’s Panentheism:
I chose Spinoza because Spinoza’s view of God, in my understanding, bears a
resemblance to the mysticism of religions. I have found similarities between Spinoza's
view of God and many Mystical traditions' views on God that might be understood as
panentheistic. Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) was a Sephardi Portuguese Jewish in
Amsterdam, philosopher and one of the Enlightenment's early thinkers, and one of the
most influential philosophers of all time. Spinoza most famous influential book "Ethics"
in 1661, is one of the most remarkable works of western philosophy. The first capital of
the book speaks about "Of God". There he talks about the relationship between God and
the universe. The classical Theism held that God exists outside of the universe, outside of
creation, and there is no existential unity between God and Creation. But Spinoza denies
that and claims God is in nature. God is the Substance, and God is everywhere. Spinoza
didn't accept nature as blind and without thought and awareness. Because he claims God
has thought, awareness, and attributes (Ethics 2p11c) and all-knowing (2p3). For
Spinoza God is in nature, and God is substance (Skirbekk,Gilje, 2000, 266). He also
claims God has an idea of his essence; that's why God is aware of the universe (Spinoza,
2011, 21).
Was Spinoza a pantheist? As Cooper pointed out the line between Pantheism and
Panentheism can be blurred, so there have been disagreements when assigning
particular notable figures to Pantheism or Panentheism. This is true in the case of
Spinoza. There was always a debate between scholars about his view on God. I might say
that Spinoza himself rejects this view that God and Universe is equivalent. He didn't
mean that God and Nature is interchangeably terms. in a letter to Henry Oldenberg,
Spinoza states that: "as to the view of certain people that I identify god with nature (taken as
a kind of mass or corporeal matter), they are quite mistaken" (Benedict Spinoza, 2009, letter
73). Therefore, we must also be careful with categorizing him as a pantheist. However,
he is most famous as a pantheist thinker.
Martial Gueroult (1891-1976) suggested the term "Panentheism", rather than
Pantheism. Because the world is not God, but it is, in a strong sense "in" God. Not only do
finite things have God as their cause, but they also cannot be conceived without God
(Genevieve Lloyd, 1996, 40). According to German philosopher Karl Jaspers (1883–
1969), when Spinoza wrote Deus sive Natura, Spinoza meant God was natura
naturans ('nature naturing'), not natura naturata ('nature natured'). Natura naturans
refer to the self-causing activity of nature, while natura naturata refers to nature
considered as a passive product of an infinite causal chain. The distinction is expressed
in Spinoza's Ethics as follows:
By Natura naturans we must understand what is in itself and is conceived through itself, or
such attributes of substance as express an eternal and infinite essence, that is God, insofar as
he is considered as a free cause.
But by Natura naturata I understand whatever follows from the necessity of Gods nature, or
from Gods attributes, that is, all the modes of Gods attributes insofar as they are considered as
things which are in God, and can neither be nor be conceived without God. (Ethics, part1,
Proposition 29).
In Spinoza's view, God is both eternal and infinite essence as natura naturans, and at
same time, everything follows from God's nature and attributes, which are in God.
Therefore, Spinoza believes that God is both transcendence and become immanence
through his modes and attributes. According to Karl Jaspers, Spinoza did not mean to say
that God and Nature are interchangeable terms, but rather that his infinitely many
attributes attested God's transcendence and that two attributes, namely Thought and
Extension, signified God's Immanence. (Karl Jaspers,1974, 14-95). Thus, I can say that
categorizing Spinoza as panentheistic is arguably more acceptable.
Baruch Spinoza claimed that:
"Whatsoever is, is in God, and without God, nothing can be, or be conceived."(Ethics,
part I, prop. 15.)
Individual things are nothing but modifications of the attributes of God, or modes by
which the attributes of God are expressed in a fixed and definite manner."( Ethics, part
I, prop. 25S.)
With its use of "in" God, Spinoza had a more similar view to Panentheism rather than
Pantheism as the concept panentheism means God-in-all. Anyhow he speaks about God
as the Substance, which is in all. Nothing is outside of God's Existence; his Existence is
presence everywhere. God is Infinite, Ultimate and Unlimited; that's why nothing can be
outside of his nature. If something is outside of his Existence, then God becomes limited.
Spinoza said:
"a substance which is absolutely infinite is indivisible" (Ethics, Part I, Propositions 12
and 13)
Let us the open concept of infinite more. When we say infinity, we mean a reality that
has no limits. If we say that God is infinite, he leaves no place for other than himself.
Gods’ infinity encompasses everything else. Hegel understood the infinite as including
the finite by absorbing the finite into its own fuller nature. This retained divine
transcendence in the sense of the divine surpassing its parts although not separate from
parts (Whittemore, 1960, 141-142).
It is the very concept of the infinite, which can be the argument for Panentheism
logically. God is infinite, and therefore, his Existence encompasses everything. Therefore,
no creature is separate from his Existence. Everything is his appearance and in him. In
this interpretation of God, God is the Existence itself and then it must be One also.
Spinoza has written about the Oneness of Substance, he believed Substances is "One"
because what is unlimited can't be two or three or more; if there is another thing beside
it, then it has boundaries or edge, and anything that has edge cannot be infinite. Infinity
is one, which is the whole, which encompasses everything and surrounds all objects;
infinity is without boundaries (Skirbekk,Gilje, 2000, 270). Absolute Oneness cannot be
comparatively greater or lesser, nor can it be multiple; therefore, Substance is infinite
Oneness. As Skirbekk wrote:
I fall det finnes en Gud, kan ikke Gud være noe forskjellig fra substansen, etersom
substansens forhold til dette andre, til Gud, i så fall måtte inngå når vi skulle forstå
substansen. Altså kan ikke substansen skilles fra Gud. Substansen er Gud. Alt er ett,
og alt blir forstått ut fra dette ene... Gud og naturen smelter sammen.(Skirbekk,Gilje,
2000, 270).
This can be understood as pantheistic, panentheistic and monistic; however, these views
are not mutually exclusive. God is one but it appears in infinite forms; Substance itself is
formless, but it appears as forms and modes. This appearance is the immanence part of
God. What it appears in world always was in the Substance in the first place. It is the
manifestation of itself in new forms, as Spinoza stated: "substansen har uendelig mange
manifistasjonens måte" (Skirbekk, Gilje, 2000, 270). Immanence is not something
separate from God in the panentheistic view; it always was in God's mind; therefore,
things exist.
Creation is the manifestation of God himself, the expression of God's mind, which is not
separate from God's essence (God’s simplicity). For instance, when a man creating a
table, the table pre-existed in the cause, pre-existed in the man's mind, and that is why it
is possible to understand the creation as creating "myself from myself", emerging
something from myself and giving Existence to what is in mind. Therefore, there is an
idea of "God's word" in many religions, which is the source of creation. God created the
world through his Logos or Om. God speaks and the world appears! Another metaphor is
when I draw a painting, I manifest my mind on paper. Art is the manifestation of human
creativity, and the world is the great art of manifestation of God's mind in himself. As
Bishop George Berkeley says, creation is God's mind manifestation (Skirbekk,Gilje, 2000,
301). In other words, God himself is conscious and aware of himself and creation is
nothing else but God's self-knowledge.
As I saw in Spinozian view, God is in all beings, there is unity in all nature. It is God’s
Existence that connected all things. But there are differences, differences between
humans and animals, between atoms and galaxies, etc. There are diversity but all this
diversity is nothing but manifested of One. How can we make synthesis and sum
between this paradoxicality unity-diversity? In many mystical traditions, this has been
explained by dialectic, "Unity in diversity, and diversity in unity". Even in science, we try
to find unity in the universe, as Jacob Bronowski (1908-1974) describes:
"… Science is nothing else than the search to discover unity in the wild variety of
nature,—or, more exactly, in the variety of our experience. Poetry, painting, the arts
are the same search, in Coleridge's phrase, for unity in variety." — (H.E Huntley,
1970, 14)
As a result, In the panentheistic understanding of monotheism, God is the absolute
Oneness that encompasses everything and is an infinite being with a hidden and
transcendence aspect and an external and manifest aspect. Nothing is out of his
Existence and all beings are manifestations of God's attributes. There is quality and
attributes such as life, awareness, modes, and consciousness in different levels and
degrees in everything that exists. From my understanding, the more we study
transcendence, the more physical it becomes, and the more we study the physical world,
the more transcendental it turns out! Its dialectic of transcendence and immanence.
Now let's take a look at world religions from oldest to youngest and see if this view of
God is found in different traditions or not?
Panentheism in World-Religions:
1. Hinduism:
Hinduism is the oldest world religion. In Hinduism, many gods are worshiped. But these
gods are all manifestations of the one God (The four denominations of Hinduism, 2014).
Scholars have described Hinduism as Panentheism, polytheism, pantheism, monism and
monotheism. In my understanding, all these describe is pointing to truth from a different
perspective. Many forms of Hinduism believe in a monotheistic God in which God is
glorified in various forms, manifestations, and names, and each god is a symbol (pratika)
of an aspect of the one God (Whaling, 2010, 19). Many traditions within Hinduism share
the Vedic idea of an ultimate metaphysical reality called Brahman. Trimurti (shiva,
Vishnu, Brahma) are all manifestations of Brahman. Brahman is the highest universal
principle and the ultimate Reality, which is Existence itself (sat). Brahman is The All and
has both immanence Brahman saguna and transcendence Brahman nirguna. In
Hinduism, everything in the universe is just a symbols (pratika) of Brahman. Brahman is
the absolute, infinite, eternal, the cosmic principle, the ultimate that is the cause of
everything that including all gods, essence and everything innate in all that exists inside,
outside and everywhere (Paul Deussen, 1897, 600- 619). Brahman as Existence itself
refers to the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.
So, it's evident that there is one Reality and Oneness of Existence (One: Ekam). There is
sutra verse in Rigveda states that "ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti: There is only one
truth (or true being) and learned persons call it by many names". Panentheism is also
expressed in the Bhagavad Gita. In verse IX.4, Krishna states:
By Me all this universe is pervaded through My unmanifested form.
All beings abide in Me but I do not abide in them.
The relationship between Brahman and creation is often thought to be panentheistic.
For Hindus, all thing in nature is sacred entities, and they have a principle of ahimsa or
nonviolence to all living beings. It's one of the most important virtues and an act of
morality in India and Eastern religions. For instance, Advaita Vedanta is a school of
thought that understood non-dualism as inclusive of differences. There is no
fundamental duality and diversity in Reality. Duality and multiplicity result from an
illusion (maya); there is diversity, but it's illusion, and it’s not real, which is caused by
our ignorance (avidya). In this view, Humans soul is just the expression of ultimate
Reality, Brahman. They refer to it as the famous aphorism "Ayam Atma Brahma: Atman is
Brahman" , according to Advaita Vedanta, human's true Self is the highest manifestation
of the Existence (sat). Another famous aphorism, "Sarvam khalvidam brahma: All this is
Brahman" (Huxley,1947,77) and many other Hindu works of literature which point to
that Hinduism is a panentheistic religion that believes in One absolute Reality that
manifests itself in many forms. As we read in Bhagavadgita 13.14:
Everywhere are His hands and feet, eyes, heads, and faces. His ears too are in all
places, for He pervades everything in the universe.
This is what God told in the sloka 18 -61 of the Bhagavad Gita:
“ God is residing (sitting in the heart/chest) in the hearts of all living beings , but GOD is
mesmerizing all the living beings , in a fashion similar to the giant-wheel.” (18–61 ).
Max Muller (1823-1900), a German orientalist, speaks about similarities between
Hinduism (Vedanta) and the system of Spinoza, he believes "The Brahman, as conceived
in the Upanishads and defined by Sankara, is clearly the same as Spinoza's
'Substant’")Muller,2003, 123)
Brahman is the One sees everything, created the earth and revealed the heavens with his
great ability (R.V, X,81,2). He is the One who knows all living beings as the Lord and
Organizer of the world (R.V X,82,3). His eyes are everywhere, and his mouth is open
everywhere. His hands and feet are everywhere (R.V X,82,3). Further, Brahman,
introduced in one of the poems, is related to the cosmological allegory known as the
"Cosmic egg" (Hiranyagarbha), from which the egg splits and the universe emerge. The
Cosmic Egg is Brahman who expanded and become visible.
In other hymns of Rig Veda, we read that the universe's creation is affected by a
primitive sacrifice. That is, the sacrifice by each part of Brahman cosmic body becomes a
part of the universe. Creation is considered a kind of self-sacrifice of God, and His
severed limbs are degrees of creation. Hence, Brahman has been called "self-
created."(svayam bhava). Creation is interpreted in the sense of God's body
(Klostermair, 2007, 87). This action caused the hierarchy of Existence to emerge and to
limit the infinite essence of God. He infinitely transformed his Existence from
potentiality to actuality, from transcendence to immanence. He is both creator, created,
invisible and visible. Now that creation is realized by the sacrifice and the unity is
become multiplied and the parts of the Brahmans body become the universe, it is man's
duty to gather these scattered parts of the first being and bring them back to unity!
Helena Blavatsky, a founder of the Theosophical Society, also compared Spinoza's
religious thought to Vedanta, As to Spinoza's Deity—natura naturans—conceived in his
attributes simply and alone; and the same Deity—as natura naturata or as conceived in
the endless series of modifications or correlations, the direct outflowing results from the
properties of these attributes, it is the Vedantic Deity pure and simple (Blavatsky, 1982,
308-310).
2. Judaism:
In Judaism, for most Kabbalists, the visible world is only the superficial skin of Reality
(Michaelson, 2011). At the deepest, most fundamental level, the true Reality of our
Existence is One, Ein Sof, infinite. Thus the sense of separate self that we all have the
notion that "your" and "I" are individuals with souls separated from the rest of the
universe is not ultimately true. Being in itself is actually nothing but God (Michaelson,
2011). From God's point of view, all of the distinctions we make between ourselves and
the world outside ourselves are completely illusory. Ultimately, there is only the
undifferentiated unity of the Ein Sof, the infinite. In this sense, God is Existence itself
(Michaelson, 2011). Everything emerges from One and manifests in intensity and
different forms. The term Sefirot means emanations in Kabbalism. They are the ten
attributes/emanations in Kabbalah, through which Ein Sof (The Infinite) reveals himself
and continuously creates both the physical realm and the chain of higher metaphysical
realms (Groth, 2011, 132). This kabbalistic is also similar to the Neoplatonic view that
everything emanated from One and God is in everything (Groth, 2011, 117-118).
In Lurianic Kabbalah, the first act of creation, the Tzimtzum self "withdrawal" of God to
create an "empty space", takes place from there (Groth, 2011, 132). In Hassidic Judaism,
the Tzimtzum is only the Illusionary concealment of the Ohr Ein Sof, giving rise
to Panentheism. The sefirot are described as channels of divine creative life force or
consciousness through which the unknowable divine essence is revealed to mankind. In
kabbalistic understanding, the universe is inconceivably vast, and every subatomic
particle of it is filled with God. Here is Rabbi Moses Cordovero developing that point
further:
The essence of God is in everything, and nothing exists outside of God. Because God causes
everything to be, it is impossible that any created thing exists except through Him. God is the
Existence, the life, and the Reality of every existing thing. The central point is that you should
never make a division within God. If you say to yourself, the Ein Sof expands until a certain
point, and from there on is outside of it, God forbid, you are making a division. Rather you
must say that God is found in every existing thing. All Existence is God and the rock is a
thing filled with God… God is found in everything and there is nothing besides God.
(Michaelson, 2011).
There is nothing besides God; we saw a similar view in Hinduism and will see in other
religions. Ein Sof means infinite and all over. God is YHVH, one of the main Hebrew
terms for this Reality, might even be translated "is". The Infinite is everything. It is the
only thing (Michaelson, 2011).
3. Buddhism:
Buddhism is considered an atheistic religion, but according to Alan Wallace, an
American expert on Tibetan Buddhism, this view is not universal and accurate in all
Buddhistic schools of thought, especially in Mahayana, Vajrayana and Zen Buddhism.
Wallace has noted that some doctrines in Vajrayana Buddhism can be seen as some
panentheistic doctrines of creation (Wallace, 2000, Volum 15). In Mahayana Buddhism,
the absolute eternal Reality is called Adi-buddha or eternal Buddha, which manifests
himself in all nature (Tathagatagarbha). The concept of Adi-buddha is the First Buddha
or the primordial Buddha is the present Reality in all beings. Adi Buddha is self-evident
and self-contained (Svayambhu). It is the eternal Existence that is manifest in all things
and connected with the concept of Buddha-Nature, which is the nature of all living
beings. The Buddha-nature is always present, in all times and in all beings. According to
Wallace, this is similar to the divine creative " ground of being"(Wallace, 2000, Volum
15). This understanding corresponds to Paul Tillich's view, who used the concept of
"ground of being" for God in Christian Theology. At the same time, according to Takasaki
Jikido, a specialist in Indian Buddhism, understanding of Adi-Buddha is also similar to
Vedic Brahman; the same teaching we saw in Hinduism is presented in another way in
Buddhism (Takasaki Jikido,2014, 198). The Zen Master Soyen Shaku wrote in his essay
titled "The God Conception of Buddhismen" God in a Buddhist sense:
Buddhism is not pantheistic in the sense that it identifies the universe with God. On
the other hand, the Buddhist God is absolute and transcendent; this world, being
merely its manifestation, is necessarily fragmental and imperfect. To define more
exactly the Buddhist notion of the highest being, it may be convenient to borrow the
term very happily coined by a modern German scholar, "panentheism," according to
which God is πᾶν καὶ ἕν (all and one) and more than the totality of Existence. (Shaku,
1996, 25-26)
For many Monks in Buddhism, the most profound law of the human mind declares that
they are all one in their hidden nature. Later we will study the same teaching in Islamic
Mysticism who sees unity in diversity, this is also one of the most fundamental beliefs of
Buddhism is that all multiplicity and diversity in the universe emerge from one Reality
which itself has "no fixed abode", being above spatial and temporal limitations. Different
and separate things (nanatva) all are One (samata) in their hidden nature. This Oneness
corresponds to God and the realm of separation related to the world of individual
entities. Things are many and yet one, they are one and yet many. I am not thou, and
thou art not I, and yet we are all one in essence. (Shaku, 1996, 27)
In the School of Madyamika, Sunyata or Emptiness's concept is related to the ultimate
Reality as Suzuki writes: "Sunyata is the pure experience" (Oliver Li, 2019, p6). Sunyata
is like an "empty space" that floats in everything. As Pannenberg Christian theologian
puts it, "space" is the absolute presence of God (Pannenberg, 1992, 411). Sunyata is pure
experience and pure Existence as it is without any form, but it gives form to everything.
In the Heart Sutra Pragnaparamita there is a famous passage that we read:
Form is emptiness, emptiness is form
Emptiness is not separate from form, form is not separate from emptiness
This passage also seems paradoxical of unity and diversity. The mystics experienced
unity during the "religious experience" and described this mystical experience with
symbolic language. It appears to us contradictory and not easy to understand. For
mystics, it’s not paradoxes. Maybe we can say this is the mystery of God and the wonder
of Existence. Anyhow, can any of these passages also interpret as panentheism? We saw
similar teaching in Spinoza, in which there is one substance without form which
manifests in infinite forms and modes. Therefore, maybe I can claim and argue that
panentheistic reading is possible in some schools of thought in Buddhism. The ultimate
Reality in Buddhism is beyond duality and diversity. It is the infinite Reality and essence
of all beings in the universe and causes the pure unity of all elements. This teaching,
which has been mentioned, arguably can understand as panentheistic.
4. Christianity:
Monotheism can also be interpreted as panentheistic for many theologians and Christian
Mystics throughout Christian history (Nesteruk, 2004, 169). God is both transcendent
and immanence together in a way that allows us to have a panentheistic understanding.
For instance, some Gnostics groups, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (late 5th
century), John Scotus Eriugena (c. 815–c. 877), Meister Eckhart (c. 1260 – c. 1328),
Henry Suso (1295-1329), Gregory Palamas (c. 1296 – 1357), Nicholas of Cusa (1401 –
1464), Giordano Bruno (1548 –1600), Boehme (1575-1624), Nicolas Malebranche(1638
- 1715), etc. And the mystical tradition of the eastern Church such as "Hesychasm", and
mystical theologian books like "The Cloud of Unknowing" and "Theologia Germanica"
there is found the root of mystical Panentheism in Christianity (Farley, 2016, 141). The
doctrine of the Trinity has the aspect of Panentheism. The God who is invisible, infinite,
transcendent becomes visible and manifests himself. Logos is the manifestation of
hidden and invisible God. Everything unseen has emerged and become visible. God's
love, power, wisdom, and all fathers attribute, which is Inaccessible, become available
and visible.
According to Catholic theology: "In God's self-communication to his creation through
grace and Incarnation, God really gives himself, and really appears as he is in himself"
(Harrower,2012, 62). This is what church fathers called God in"divine economia". This
would lead to the conclusion that we come to a knowledge of the immanent Trinity
through the study of Gods work in the "economy" of creation and salvation. Quoting the
Areopagite: "He is all things in all things and He is no things among things" This is the way
of unknowing reveals the dialectic negation of panentheism (Farley,2016,141). The
notion that One in all things---God within and God without--- which we saw above in
Hinduism is found in the work of Christian mystics. Henry Suso, a German Dominican
friar, says:
All creature have existed eternally in the divine essence, as in their exemplar. So far as they
conform to the divine idea, all beings were before their creation, one thing with the essence of
God. God creates into time what was and is in eternity. Eternally, all creature are God in
God… so far as they are in God, they are the same life, the same essence, the same power, the
same One, and nothing less. (Huxley, 1947,69)
The image of God is found essentially and personally in all nature and mankind. Each
possesses it whole, entire and undivided and altogether not more than one alone. In this
way we are all one, intimately united in our eternal image, which is the image of God and
the source in us of all our life. From the atom up to the most highly organized of living
bodies and the most exalted of finite minds, every individual being may be as a point a
ray of the primordial Godhead meets one of the differentiated, creaturely emanations of
the same Godheads creative energy. As the creature, the creature may be very far from
God because it lacks the intelligence to discover the nature of the divine Ground of its
being. But the creature in its eternal essence is one of the infinite number of points
where divine Reality is wholly and eternally present (Huxley, 1947,70).
John Scotus Eriugena (815-877 AD) Irish theologian and philosopher in Christian
Tradition had such panentheistic view, he states: "All creation is theophany" (Moran,
Guiu, 2019). According to Max Weinstein, Eriugena argued on behalf of the panentheistic
definition of God in the Christian tradition. He believed everything emanated from God,
and every creature is nothing else but the appearance of Existence, a revealing of God.
All is the attribute of God, will, and the creatures are then acts of will. The will is
personally thought of God's emanation (Weinstein, 1910, p 283-284). John Scotus
Eriugena explains four types of Existence these four levels as:
1- That which creates and is not created
2- That which is created and creates
3- That which is created and does not create
4- That which is neither created and creates.
Can we agree with Weinstein, who stated Eurigena had a panentheistic view? I think we
can because the first and the last is God as transcendence and as Substanse, as Existence
itself or necessary being. God as the ground or origin of all things, the second is platonic
ideas or forms, and the third is the material world and all phenomena. Therefore,
Eriugena nicely states that All creation of the world is in Reality a theophania. God as
Existence reveals itself to the senses in the created world around us. Creation is,
therefore, a process of unfolding of the Divine Nature. All nature is the kingdom of God
and the appearance of it. To discover the Kingdom of God within oneself, not only there,
but also in the outer world of minds and things and living creatures. I understand this
view that God is both transcendences and manifested, as the panentheistic view of God.
Meister Eckhart's most famous single quote, "The Eye with which I see God is the same
Eye with which God sees me", is used by religious pluralist thinkers as a sample to show
contact between these traditions and Christian mysticism. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-
1860), German philosopher, compared Eckhart's views to the teachings of Indian,
Christian and Islamic mystics and ascetics:
If we turn from the forms, produced by external circumstances, and go to the root of
things, we shall find that Sakyamuni and Meister Eckhart teach the same thing; only
that the former dared to express his ideas plainly and positively, whereas Eckhart is
obliged to clothe them in the garment of the Christian myth, and to adapt his
expressions thereto (Schopenhauer, 2010, Vol. 2, Ch. 48)
Meister Eckhart had been considered both pantheistic and panentheistic. David E. Linge
state that "thought elements of what would later be known as Panentheism seem to be
present in Eckhart’s metaphysics" (Linge, 1978, 484). He wrote about mystical theology
and believed that at the deepest level of spiritual life "whoever sees God sees nothing but
one", "In the Kingdom of Heaven all is in all, all is one, and all is our" (Huxley,1947,90) is
similar to the concept of unity of Reality and Existence, which we saw above in other
religions. Eckhart's approach is that the One pervades the universe, and resides within
us all, in our souls, and that we should detach from all things so we might return in
contemplation to that inner ground (Huxley, 1947, 70). It is also a neo-platonic
understanding of God. I understood that this mystical view could be panentheistic that
everything is in God.
In Catholic catechism concept of "deification" in the Western Church and "Theosis" in the
Eastern Church connected with Panentheism in my understanding; without
Panentheism it's challenging to understand Theosis. Theosis means "making divine" its
transformation in which human becomes union with God, purification of mind and body.
In the same way, Existence in its heart is holy, and the more soul pure itself by the
cleansing of itself, the more sacred it becomes and more godly it becomes and might be
partakers of the divine nature (2Peter1:4). In my opinion, It's a way of understanding
theosis or deification In Eastern and Western Christianity in the principle of
Panentheism. Not only these theologians who have been mentioned in Christian History,
but scripture itself has some passages that can interpret regarding Panentheism, for
instance, In John 14: 20, 1 Corinthians 6: 17, Acts 17:28, Jeremiah 23: 23-24, Psalms 139:
7-12, One interpretation of these verses is that God is infinite. God is all-encompassing.
God is in everything and we are not separated from Him. God is like an infinite circle
with its center everywhere.
5. Islam:
Islam is a monotheistic religion and in the history of Islamic thought, different
interpretations of monotheism have been presented. Both theistic and panentheistic
interpretations. In Sufis literature, according to scholars we see a panentheistic
conception of monotheism, which of course, has its roots in the Qur'an itself (Minai,
2003, 250). In Islamic Sufis tradition, like other religions, God is both present and
absent, he is both manifested and hidden, Visible and invisible, and his essence is
everywhere. The visible allows the invisible to manifest, and the invisible allows the
visible to exist (Corbin,1998,211). There are many verses regarding Panentheism in
Quran, for instance, Allah is both unseen and manifest (57:3), He is everywhere (57:4)
(2:115), Allah encompasses all (4:126), etc.
Sufi metaphysics is centred on the concept of "Unity of Existence". Several Sufi thinkers
wrote about Panentheism, which is called "Wahdat al-wujud: the unity of existence" in
the Islamic language. In this view, God is understood as absolute and pure Existence.
Wujud (Existence) refers both to God as the Absolute Reality and to the finding of God as
experienced by God himself and by the spiritual seeker. Many may classify this
expression as Panentheism, pantheism and existential monism (Golkhosravi, 2004, 15).
For Example, according to Al-Ghazali "There is nothing in Wujud (Existence) except God…
Wujud (Existence) only belongs to the Real One". Ghazali explains that the fruit of the
spiritual ascent of the Sufi is to "witness that there is no existence in the world except God
and all thing perishing in God’s existence" (Banani, 1994, 71). Many Sufis authors
consider being or Existence to be the proper designation for the Reality of God. While all
Muslims believes the Reality of God to be one, critics hold that the term "existence"
(wujud) is also used for the Existence of things in this world. Defenders of Sufis
metaphysics answer that the attributes are neither God nor other than God. God’s sign
(ayat)- the creature- are neither the same as God nor different from him because God
must be understood as both absent and present, both "transcendent" and "immanent".
We remember the same view in Hinduism which everything is Gods pratika (symbols-
signs). Understood correctly, wahdat al-wujud elucidates the delicate balance that needs
to be maintained between these two perspectives (Chittick, Encyclopaedia of Islam and
the Muslim world, 727).
Mulla Sadra (1571-1640) an Islamic-Iranian influential philosopher who lived half-
century before Spinoza. He had a similar view on God that God is Wujud and emphasized
the unity of Existence. Mulla Sadra argued that there is a variable according to the
degree of intensity of its act of Existence (Corbin, 1993, p 342). He says Reality appears
as graded in intensity, a kind of neo-platonic idea of emanation, which The One appears
in different levels. Existence is a singular reality, but diversity in this world still needs to
be explained. Different existents in this world are thus different, intense degrees of a
single whole. This mystical view looks pretty paradoxical; how can all things be one
Existence? Mula Sadra answers that the hierarchy of being is differentiated through
degrees of intensification and debilitation of Existence (ishtidad wa tada‘‘uf). Thus, the
old metaphysical debate about the One and the many is settled in favour of both:
Existence is both singular and multiple. Mulla Sadra summaries modulation in the
following manner:
Existence is a single, simple reality having neither genus nor differentia, nor a
definition or a demonstration or a definiens. It only admits of degrees by perfection
and deficiency (bi-l-kamal wa-l-naqs), by priority and posteriority (al-taqaddum wa-l-
ta'akhkhur) and by independence and dependence (bi-l-ghina wa-l-haja). (Sajjad
Rizvi, 2019)
For him, Existence is One, it's like Light with different degrees. Light of the Sun and light
of a candle are both Light but in various degrees of appearance. But the Pure Existence is
perfect, prior and independent. As we saw in the last part, Existence precedes
everything. According to Mulla Sadra:
"existence precedes the essence and is thus principal since something has to exist first
and then have an essence." (Sajjad Rizvi, 2019)
For Mula Sadra, Substance is in motion and changing. God manifests every second in
new forms (similar to Process Theology of Alfred N. Whitehead). There is a verse in
Quran that supports his view: (every moment He is in a state. 55:29). This change is the
result, we see diversity in the universe. Mulla Sadra held the view that Reality is
Existence and God is pure Existence. Here is why Quran states that 'Is there any doubt
about Allah? ' (14:10). In this view, Existence is undoubted, is obvious and evident. For
him, 'The simple reality is all things', a doctrine predicated on the Neoplatonic notion of
the simple One: God, the One is simple and pure Being. Thus, as such is the totality of
Existence: Unity in diversity and diversity in Unity.
Another famous Sufi is Ibn Arabi (1165- 1240) Andalusian Muslim Scholar, considered
panentheistic. Ibn Arabi sees everything that exists as a part of and a manifestation of
the Oneness of God. For Ibn Arabi unity and multiplicity are different aspects of one
Reality (Sharifi-Funk, Dickson, 2013, 5). He also employs the term wujud to refer to God
as the Necessary Being. He insists that wujud does not belong to the things found in the
cosmos in any real sense; instead, the things borrow wujud from God, much as the earth
borrows light from the sun. So he declares that wujud (Existence) belongs to God alone.
From this perspective, he affirms that all things are wujuds self-disclosure (tajalli) or
self-manifestation (zohur). All is connected and came from God, and All goes back to God
(Quran 2: 156). Humans are part of God, and the idea of a separate self is the result of
ignorance. Ibn Arabi believed that God had a transcendental as well as an immanent
aspect. When an individual understands that there is no separation between human and
God they begin on the path of ultimate Oneness. The one who decides to walk in this
Oneness pursues the true Reality and responds to God's longing to be known. In that
state, man sees that all things are "He/not He" (Howa/lahowa), which is to say that they
are both God and not God, both wujud and not wujud (Chittick, 1994, 53). We saw a
similar view from Areopagite above. The search within for this Reality of Oneness causes
one to be reunited with God and improve self-consciousness (Little, John T. 1987, p 43-
54). For Ibn Arabi and Mula Sadra, the concept of Wujud (Existence) is intimately
intertwined with one of the foundational and overarching Quranic Principle of Tawhid,
the unity of God, of humanity, of the universe, and of truth itself. Tawhid is all-Oneness,
the whole before and after Existence, thus, the One who transcends all duality and
plurality and yet is the manifester of all duality and plurality (Sharifi-Funk, Dickson,
2013, 7). As we saw, it is possible to understand the term of Vahdat wujud in a
panentheistic view in the Sufis literature in Islam which corresponds with Quranic
metaphysics.
Conclusion:
These similarities between religious traditions are what Marsillio Ficino (1433-1499)
Italian philosopher called "Prisca Theologia", which could be found in all ages (Schmitt,
1966, 508). In this article, I wanted to point to a kind of understanding of religious
pluralism and "transcendence unity of religions" regarding panentheism and mystic
traditions. Its universal idea of God can see in the mystical traditions of West and East.
As I understood, the universal truth is the same within each of the world's orthodox
religious traditions and is the foundation of their religious knowledge and doctrine. Each
world religion interprets this universal truth, adapted to cater to the psychological,
intellectual, and social needs of a given culture of a given period of history. The aim of
the perennial philosophers, sages and mystics are to become directly aware of it, to
know it, so that they and others may actually become the causeless One. This perennial
truth has been rediscovered in each epoch by mystics of all kinds who have revived
already existing religions. "there is one principle of all things, of which there has always
been the same knowledge among all peoples." (Lings, Minnaar, 2007, 7).
We also argued that it is possible to say Panentheism is a universal view of God. It's a
logically defendable understanding of God. If God is infinite, his Existence must be
infinite and all over, and this view makes the balance between transcendence and
immanence. God, who is Existence itself, appears in unlimited forms but still holds his
transcendence. In some sublime religious experiences, the whole world becomes one
with the realm of holiness and the world is a conduit of sacredness. In Mahanirvana
Tantra (II, 46) states that: "O Adored of the Devas! all the Devas and Devis – nay, the whole
universe, from Brahma to a blade of grass – are His forms." And as Mircea Eliade writes,
"The essence of life is Christ, who says Ego Sum Vita, I am life. Life, whether in man, animal,
or plant, is always his life" (Eliade, 1948, 392). In this sense, God doesn't need to be
proven, it's Existence itself, it's absolute Reality, it's everywhere, it's true nature of all
things! Therefore, in the panentheistic view, in which God is in all, we do not need to
prove ourselves to ourselves! As Rudolf Bultmann says, "if we want to speak of God, we
must speak of the works of God in relation to human existence" (Jensen Alexander, 2007,
125- 128). While being the soul of the universe, God also has infinite manifestations that
when a man reaches enlightenment, he sees everything in God, and the diversity
disappears. Therefore, in many religions, God, while He is invisible and transcendent, at
the same time, many religions point out to sees God through all nature, specifically in a
cosmic human who is the manifestation of his highest state. God manifested himself
through the Logos, mentioned in different world-religions through mythological
languages and philosophical language. Here we come to understand the transcendence
unity of religions regarding panentheism.
Reference:
Banani, Hovannisian, Sabagh (1994), Poetry and Mysticism in Islam: The Heritage of
Rumi, Cambridge University Press
Blavatsky, H.P. (1982). Collected Writings. 13. Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publ. House
Chittick, William, Wahdat Al-Wujud, Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim world
Chittick, William (1994), Imaginal worlds. New York: State University of New York Press.
Clayton, Philip, (2000), The Problem of God in Modern Thought, Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans.
Cooper, (2008), Panentheism: The Other God of the Philosophers: An Overview, American
Theological Inquiry
Cooper, John W, (2006), Panentheism The Other God of the Philosophers: From Plato to
the Present, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Corbin, Henry (1993), History of Islamic Philosophy, London: Kegan Paul International
Corbin, Henry (1998), The Voyage and the Messenger: Iran and Philosophy. Berkeley,
Calif: North Atlantic.
Deussen, Paul (1997), Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidaas
Eliadeh, Mircae (1948), TRAITE D HISTOIRE DES RELIGIONS, Paris: Payot
Farley, Wendy, (2016), Environmental Philosophy: Cloud of the impossible: Negative
Theology and Planetary Entanglement by Keller Catherine, Columbia University Press.
Hentet fra:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26169854?seq=2#metadata_info_tab_contents
Fulford, Amanda (2011), Becoming Literate> Heidegger, Language and the 'Forgetfulness
of Being', Graduate School of Education: KYOTO UNIVERSITY
Golkhosravi, Mehrdad (2004), Panentheistic view of Divine Love in Man and Nature,
University of Barcelona.
Gregersen, Niels Henrik, (2017), "The Exploration of Ecospace: Extending or
Supplementing the neo-Darwinian Paradigm?" Zygon 52: 561–586.
Groth, Bente, (2011), Jødedommen, Oslo: PAX FORLAG
Harrower, Scott, (2012), Trinitarian self and salvation (An evangelical engagement with
Rahners rule), Eugene, Oregon: PICKWICK publication.
Huntley, H.E (1970), The Divine Porportion (A study in Mathematical Beauty),
Massachusetts: Courier Corporation
Huxley, Aldous (1947), The Perennial Philosophy, London: Chatto and Windus
Jaspers, Karl (1974), Spinoza (Great Philosophers), Harvest books.
Jensen, Alexander S. (2007), Theological Hermeneutics, London: SCM Press
Klostermair, Klaus K. (2007), A survey of Hinduism, 3rd Edition, USA: State University of
New York Press
Lander, Janis (2013). Spiritual Art and Art Education. London: Routledge
Linge, David E (1978), Mysticism, Poverty and Reason in the Thought of Meister Eckhart,
Oxford University Press.
Lings, Martin; Minnaar, Clinton (2007), The Underlying Religion: An Introduction to the
Perennial Philosophy, World Wisdom
Little, John T. (1987), "Al-Insān Al-Kāmil: The Perfect Man According to Ibn Al-Arabi". The
Muslim World
Lloyd, Genevieve (1996), Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Spinoza and the Ethics,
London: Routledge
Michaelson, Jay (2011), An Introduction to Kabbalah, part2: God does not exist, God is
Existence itself. Hentet fra: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/an-introduction-to-
kabbal_b_329921
Minai, Asghar Talaye (2003). Mysticism, aesthetics, and cosmic consciousness: a post-
modern worldview of unity of being. N.Y.: Global Academic Pub.
Moran, Dermot,. Guiu, Adrian (2019), John Scottus Eriugena, (Hentet fra:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scottus-eriugena/)
Muller, F. Max (2003). Three Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy. Montana: Kessinger
Publishing.
Nesteruk, Alexei V, (2004), The Universe as Hypostaic Inherence in the logos of God:
Panentheism in the Eastern Orthodox Perspective: In whom we live and move and have our
being: panentheistic reflections on Gods presence in a scientific world, Grand Rapids,
Wm.B. Eerdmans-Lightning Source
Oldmeadow, Harry (2010), Frithjof Schuon and the Perennial Philosophy, Indiana: World
Wisdom
Osho (2006), The Great Challenge, Osho International Foundation.
Pannenberg, Wolfhart (1991), Systematic Theology Vol 1, London: T&T Clark
International
Razavi, Mehdi Amin (1997), Suhrawardi and the School of Illumination. New York:
Routledge
Read, John (1957), From Alchemy to Chemistry, New York: Courier Corporation
Rizvi, Sajjad (2019), Mulla Sadra, (Hentet fra: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mulla-
sadra/)
Schmitt, Chares (1966), Perennial Philosophy: From Agostino Stuevo to Leibniz, Journal of
the history of ideas.
Schopenhauer (2010),The World as Will and Representation, Vol. II, Ch. XLVIII.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Shaku, Soyen (1906). Zen For Americans (translated by Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki), Kessinger
Publishing, LLG. (Hentet fra: https://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/zfa/zfa04.htm)
Sharifi-Funk, Meena,. Dickson, William Rory (2013), Traces of Panentheism in Islam: Ibn
al-Arabi and the kaleidoscope of Being, Hentet fra:
https://www.academia.edu/7487922/Traces_of_Panentheism_in_Islam_Ibn_al_Arabi_and_
the_Kaleidoscope_of_being
Skierbekk, Gunnar,. Gilje, Nils (2000), Filosofihistorie, Universitetforlaget
Spinoza, Baruch, W.H.White (Translator) (2011), Ethics. Wordsworth Editions Ltd; New
ed edition: Hertfordshire
Spinoza, Benedict D.(2009), Correspondence of Benedict de Spinoza, St Paul: Wilder
publication
Takasaki, Jikido (2014). A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Being a Treatise on the
Tathagatagarbha Theory of Mahayana Buddhism), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers
Taylor, Victor E. (1998), Postmodernism: Critical Concepts, London and New York:
Routledge
The Four Denominations of Hinduism". Retrieved 7 February 2014, Hentet fra:
https://www.himalayanacademy.com/readlearn/basics/four-sects
Tillich, Paul (1957), Systematic Theology, 2: Existence and the Christ,
Wallace, B. Alan (2000), "Is Buddhism Really Non-Theistic?" in Snow Lion Newsletter,
Volume 15, Number 1. Hentet fra: https://www.shambhala.com/snowlion_articles/is-
buddhism-really-nontheistic/
Weinstein, Max Bernhard (1910), Welt Und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus
Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis (World and Life Views, Emerging from
Religion, Philosophy and Nature), Leipzig.
Whaling,Frank (2010). Understanding Hinduism. Dunedin Academic Press.
Whittemore, Robert C., (1960), “Hegel As Panentheist”, Studies in Hegel (Tulane Studies
in Philosophy: Volume 9)