1 Theory of the Original Image

True knowledge, directly or indirectly, results in action; it is not an end in itself. Unification Thought is written, not to satisfy man’s appetite for knowledge, but to reform our lives, society, and the world, in accordance with the Providence of God. Intellectuals today tend to think phenomenally and to care only about results. This way of thinking never gets to the roots of man’s problems. Let us, then, consider such problems in the light of our new theology, the Unification Principle. According to this view, society resembles man; in order to solve social problems, we need to understand the ideal for society—i.e., the original man. The Unification Principle states also that everything in the created world was made in the image of man. So, in order to understand creation, we need to understand the ideal for creation—i.e., the original man. Finally, man was created in the image of God; in order to understand man, we need to understand the ideal for man—i.e., God Himself.

Unification Ontology comprises the theory of God and the theory of existing (created) beings. I will deal with them separately, calling the former the “Theory of the Original Image,” and the latter, ·simply “Ontology.” I would like to stress the importance of the former.

I. The Cause of the Universe–Various Viewpoints

One’s viewpoint concerning the cause of the universe profoundly influences the way one solves actual problems. The fact that the problems of the universe and human life have not been solved, indicates, we believe, that the cause of the universe has never been correctly understood.

If, for example, one considers force to be the cause of the universe, one is led to think that power is supreme in the actual world. One’s political and economic theories will insist that all the problems of the world can be solved by power.

Those who regard life or will as the cause of the universe—such as Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Dilthey, and Bergson—are the “philosophers of life.” Schopenhauer said that the cause of the universe is a blind will to live (blinder Wille zum Leben). All things are expressions of the will; the eye is an expression of the will to see; the mouth, an expression of the will to eat. Moreover, goodness and happiness are accidental, not essential; they are like the pleasant feeling one gets when watching a movie, and which fades when the movie is over. What we experience is pain, pain that is caused by the blind cosmic will, which has no purpose. With such a philosophy, men of power are justified in doing anything they please. Followers of Schopenhauer’s philosophy, however, usually have a pessimistic outlook on life.

Nietzsche considered the will to power (Wille zur Macht) to be the cause of the universe. Contrary to Schopenhauer’s pessimistic blind will, Nietzsche’s is an active will, or the will to grow. The ideal expression of this will is called the superman (Uber-mensch). Christian morality is slave morality, he maintains. God is dead. Man should continuously strive at becoming a superman. This is Nietzsche’s view of life, derived from his view of the cause of the universe. This theory can be used by dictators to justify their use of power; Adolf Hitler, for instance, made use of it to maintain his dictatorship.

For Hegel, the cause of the universe is reason. He developed quite a few theories relating to actual problems and expected the appearance of a rational nation, which would be realized by the self-development of the absolute spirit (Absoluter Geist), or reason. According to his prediction, Prussia was to be reformed by the absolute spirit, but his expectation was never realized. Consequently, anti-Hegelian thinkers, such as Marx, soon appeared. Without presenting here a detailed analysis of this view, let us just say that those who regard reason as the cause of the universe are liable to think that reason is almighty. It is very difficult to find concepts such as “heart” and “love” in Hegel’s writings; for him, the ideal man is like a puppet being manipulated by the absolute spirit. Obviously, he valued reason too highly.

What kind of way of life has originated from Oriental ontology? Orientals tend to be onlookers in their relationship to historical development (with a few exceptions, of course), and to nature; for man must not interfere with the laws of the universe. Westerners, on the other hand, influenced by Western and Christian thought, have been urged to take positive action in relationship to nature, for Christianity has within itself the spirit of dominion over all things. This is the philosophical reason for science having developed more in the West than it did in the East.

Thus, the way one views the nature of society, politics, and economics—as well as their mutual relationships—derives from one’s view of the cause of the universe. Only a correct understanding of the cause of the universe can lead to real and fundamental solutions to actual problems.

Finally, I would like to discuss a few basic points of Unification Ontology. God, man, and the whole of creation are beings; their positions, however, differ from one another. First, God differs from man and the creation because He is the Creator, while the others are created beings. Second, man also differs from the rest of creation, because he is in the position of dominating creation. Thus, God is called Original Being, since He is the original and causal existence; man and the rest of creation are called existing beings.

What kind of existence is God? Some will say, “God is love”; others, “God is omniscient and omnipotent”; and also, “God is the Creator of the universe,” and so forth. These are a few of God’s attributes, which form a vast field of study. Unification Thought attempts to arrange the attributes of God in an understandable way, in what we call the “Theory of Original Image.”

True understanding of God leads to a true understanding of original man, and that leads us to a true understanding of society and history. (Since man is fallen, however, it is often easier for him to pin some understanding of God through nature.) In this sense, understanding God is not an end in itself, but is related directly to solving practical problems. We should, therefore, take the theory of God very seriously.

Next, I would like to discuss the nature of God, starting with the “contents” (attributes), followed by the “structure” of God.

II. The Contents (Attributes) of the Original Image

A. Divine Image

1. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang¹

Unification Thought says that the Original Image is the united body (Neutral, or Harmonious Body) of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Simple though this explanation may seem, it does give us an accurate picture of God. Philosophers, thus far, have explained the cause of the universe as either spirit (Sung Sang), or matter (Hyung Sang), but never as the united body (Harmonized Body). In the following section I will explain the importance of this concept.

(a) Sung Sang

First, let us remember that in discussing ontology we do not, and cannot, deal with God Himself, but only with the attributes of God. Consequently, our ontology is called “Theory of the Original Image,” and not “Theory of the Original Being.” The Sung Sang of God (Original Sung Sang) is the mind of God, or the attribute of God that constitutes the fundamental cause of the invisible, functional aspects of all existing beings (i.e., their mind, instinct, life, etc.). The Sung Sang of God consists of Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang. The Inner Sung Sang is the functional part of the mind (Sung Sang), and has the three functions of intellect, emotion, and will. Here, intellect refers to the function of cognition; emotion, to the function of feeling; and will, to the function of decision.

There are three stages of cognition in the intellect: sensibility, understanding, and reason. In saying that God has sensibility, we do not mean that God recognizes material objects by looking at them with His eyes, or by hearing them with His ears; for God has neither eyes nor ears. Rather, we mean that the intellectual function in the Sung Sang of God is manifested through the sensibility, understanding, and reason of the mind of created man.

To illustrate this point, let us take the example of a seed. Though there are no stems, branches, leaves, flowers, or fruits in the seed itself, yet they are there as latent potentialities. When the seed is sown and begins to grow, those potentialities become actualized in a stem, branches, and so forth. This example may help to clarify our understanding of God. Although God is the transcendent dimension of cause, and the creation does not actually germinate from God, we can think that the sensibility, understanding, and reason of man are the actualization of latent potentialities within the Inner Sung Sang of God.

The Inner Hyung Sang is the objective part of the mind (Sung Sang); it refers to ideas², concepts, original law, and mathematical principles. In the Unification Principle, Hyung Sang is called the Second Sung Sang. Why? The answer is that in the Sung Sang of God there is already an element of Hyung Sang—i.e., the Inner HyungSang. The Inner Hyung Sang is projected into the Hyung Sang, and causes the Hyung Sang to resemble it. This is in accordance with the Unification Principle, which states that “though the internal character [Sung Sang] cannot be seen, it assumes a certain form [Inner Hyung Sang], so that the external form [Hyung Sang] resembles the internal. character as its visible form.”³ Consequently, the Hyung Sang(i.e., the second Sung Sang) exists only because there is an Inner Hyung Sang.

When we look at a flower, a bird, or a mountain, we retain images of these things in our mind, even though our eyes may be closed. These images form our ideas and concepts, as do the memories of events we have experienced. Consequently, the ideas and concepts in our mind are formed from real experiences. In God, however, ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles existed prior to the beginning of creation. In the creation narrative in the Bible, God said “Let there be light,” and there was light; He called for the appearance of dry land, and it appeared. We see, then, that everything was created according to ideas in God’s mind. So, both from the Bible and from the Unification Principle, we conclude that first God had the idea for each thing—then He created it.

The Sung Sang of God, though absolute, is manifested to varying degrees in the Sung Sangs of all the different entities that make up the creation. Minerals, molecules, and atoms, though obviously serving a vital purpose, might seem to lack any manifestation of the Original Sung Sang (God’s mind); yet, in an atom, that which directs the force causing the electrons to orbit the nucleus is the Sung Sang of the atom, manifesting some part of the Original Sung Sang. In plants, life and growth are an additional manifestation of Sung Sang. In animals, instinct is a higher manifestation of Sung Sang. Finally, in the mind of man—speaking specifically of a person who has accomplished the purpose of creation—almost all the Original Sung Sang functions of God are manifested.

Knowing that the Sung Sang of God, though absolute, manifests itself in the Sung Sang of created beings, let me mention that the absolute God can also manifest Himself as the relative God. Rev. Sun Myung Moon once said that God felt sorry—or felt a sense of personal responsibility—when Abraham failed to make his offering correctly. The God who felt such a sense of responsibility was the relative God (from the standpoint of the absolute God).

In Aristotle’s dualism of eidos and hyle (form and matter), eidos—that which makes a thing be what it is—corresponds, to some extent, to Sung Sang in Unification Thought. The eidos of eidos (prote eidos) then, would correspond to the Sung Sang of the Sung Sang—i.e., the Original Sung Sang lying behind all things. Aristotle said that the eidos of eidos is God. Accordingly, prime matter (materia prima, prote hyle) has nothing to do with God, and Aristotle was never able to give a reasonable explanation of the origin of matter.

Thomas Aquinas, who applied Aristotle’s philosophy to Christian theology, regarded the eidos of eidos as the only cause of the universe—God. This means that he elevated the position of Sung Sang, compared to that of Hyung Sang. The Gospel of John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” (John 1:1) The phrase “The Word was with God” does not mean “God =Word”; it means that the Word came from God. The phrase, “the Word was God,” however, does “mean “God =Word.” Aquinas emphasized the latter, and concluded that “God = Logos” (Word, spirit), thereby excluding the material factor from the cause of the universe. When asked, “Where does matter come from?” he answered that God created matter from nothing, since God is omniscient and omnipotent. This is known as creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothing), a term first used by Augustine. In his monism, Aquinas could not but exclude matter from the causal world, thereby precluding any causal explanation of its existence. Hegel, on the other hand, regarded God as the absolute spirit.

How did God think before the creation? God thought in a three-stage process: affirmation-negation-negation of the negation, or thesis-antithesis-synthesis. The starting point is reason, or Logos, where “God = Logos” (Word). Consequently, his logic developed in the wrong direction. Unification Thought says that Logos is the multiplied body formed in the Sung Sang of God. “The Word was with God.” We do not, however, say that the Word was with God from the beginning, since that would create a God-Word dualism. We maintain that the Word was born, or derived, from God. Itis not wrong to say “the Word was God,” since the Word is an essential attribute of God; we should, however, give “the Word was with God” priority over “The Word was God.” Hegel is considered to have started with “God = Logos,” thus going in the wrong direction. Itis clear, then, that the way we understand the Sung Sang of God may influence the direction of our whole system of thought.

Descartes, with his Cogito, ergo sum (“I think, therefore I am”), denied the existence of that which we can see with our eye and hear with our ears. Having negated the universe, he was left only with thinking, which can be regarded as the Inner Sung Sang before creation, in Unification Thought. Nevertheless, to think is a transitive verb, and as such it needs an object. This implies that Sung Sangconsists of an Inner Sung Sang(function of thinking) and an Inner Hyung Sang(thought). Even within the system of methodical doubtproposed by Descartes, it is possible to verify this.

The phenomenologist Husserl discussed the structure of pure consciousness—or non-experience-born consciousness—by excluding memories and ideas formed in our mind as the result of experience. He said that there is both a functional part and an objective part (a thinking part and a thought part) in consciousness. The former he called noesis, and the latter, noema.This also refers to the Inner Sung Sangand Inner Hyung Sangin Unification Thought. Husserl discussed man’s consciousness taken all by itself, without in any way relating it to God. Unification Thought, however, maintains that the structure of man’s mind originates from the structure in the Sung Sang of God, since man is created in the image of God. Correct understanding of man’s mind, therefore, cannot be achieved without reference to God.

(b) Hyung Sang

The Hyung Sang of God (Original Hyung Sang) is the attribute of God that constitutes the fundamental cause of the material aspect of all existing beings (i.e., their mass, shape, structure, and so on). The essence of the Hyung Sang of God may be considered a kind of energy latent in God. This latent energy is considered as manifested in the matter of the created world and in its physical force. This energy, however, is not the actual physical energy that we observe in the created world, but the “prior-stage energy” that will eventually appear in the created world. Accordingly, this energy can be called pre-energy.

What is the essence of the matter of the universe? The arche, or ultimate cause of the universe was considered to be different things by different ancient Greek philosophers. It was considered to be water by Thales; fire by Heraclitus; air by Anaximenes; apeiron (boundless or infinite) by Anaximander; eînai (being) by Parmenides; the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water by Empedokles; spermata (seeds of existence) by Anaxagoras; and the atom by Democritus. Democritus conceived of a fundamental, irreducible particle, which he called atom.

I think we should entrust the study of the essence of matter to scientists, since they study the material aspect of the universe. Modern physics has clarified that atoms are formed from elementary particles, and elementary particles from energy. After this point, it seems nothing is clear. For the present, the essence of matter is said to be energy, which has the nature both of waves and of particles.

When pre-energy (Original Hyung Sang) is engaged in give-and-take action with the emotional impulse (Original Sung Sang) centered on Purpose, an energy is generated as a multiplied body. Here there are two purposes: one is the purpose to generate the energy to form all things, and the other is the purpose to generate the energy to make all things interact with one another. The energy generated according to the former purpose can be called forming energy, and the energy generated according to the latter purpose, acting energy. The existence of forming energy can be confirmed by Einstein’s equation E = mc²(E = energy, m = mass, c = speed of light), which expresses the convertibility of energy E into mass m. Accordingly, the Original Hyung Sang, or pre-energy, can be said to be pre-matter, when seen from its potential to manifest itself as mass.

The acting energy is nothing but the Prime Force, which will give rise to the Universal Prime Force.⁴ The Universal Prime Force is the force that acts among correlative elements (subject and object) in the created world; it is also the force that is generated by the give-and-take action between them. We can understand, therefore, that God’s love is working behind all natural phenomena-even if scientists cannot recognize it-since Prime Force consists of the emotional element and the energetic element.

The Universal Prime Force acts between subject and object, and vice versa. This results in a subject-object union. This union, which is an individual entity in itself, further relates to other individual entities in a subject-object relation. Then, again, the universal prime force acts between the new individual entity and is related to other individual enttt1cs. The Universal Prime Force is called the force of give-and-take action when it is considered as a result of the give-and-take action between the subject and object. (Fig. 1).

The Universal Prime Force acting between the subject and object is caused directly by the Universal Prime Force acting within the subject and object. If we pursue the cause of the Universal Prime Forces in nature, we will come to the atomic level. The Universal Prime Forces acting between the atoms arc caused by the Universal Prime Forces acting within each atom, i.e., the Universal Prime Force acting between elementary particles. The cause of the Universal Prime Forces acting between elementary particles is the Prime Force, or the Force in God. There is a series of causes and effects in the forces of the created world. The forces acting between elementary particles are resultant forces, when we consider the Prime Force, but are causal forces, when we consider the forces acting between atoms. A force, when considered as a cause, is called a universal prime force, and when considered as a result, is called a force of give-and-take action.

Hyung Sang, which is a Korean word, contains the concept of form, whereas pre-energy, or pre-matter, has no form. Why, then, is Hyung Sang said to be the same as pre-energy, or pre-matter? Let us make an analogy with water. Water takes the form of a wave when the wind blows over it. Why does it do this, even though the wind is blowing in a straight line? Because it has the potential of taking a wave form. Moreover, water can take any form, according to the vessel in which it is put.

Likewise, Hyung Sang, which has both wave and particle properties, has the potential of manifesting itself in any form, according to the working of the Logos upon it. This does not mean the Hyung Sang is actually waves or particles; it means, however, that it does have the potential of taking these forms. Poetically stated, the Hyung Sang will manifest itself in various forms when the wind of Logos blows over it. It should be made clear, however, that the concepts of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are not the results of my own analytical thinking and systematization: they were originally revealed by Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

Regarding the essence of the material world, traditional philosophers have dealt with matter as an entity completely separate from form. Aristotle, for example, discusses form (eidos) separately from matter, or pure material (hyle). In the Unification Thought view, God’s Hyung Sang, or pre-energy or pre-matter, cannot be completely separated from God’s Sung Sang, as explained above.

(c) Difference Between Sung Sang andHyung Sang

Sung Sang and Hyung Sang must share something in common in order to perform give-and-take action between themselves.⁵ If they were fundamentally and essentially different, no relationship would be possible between them, and we would have a case of dualism.

Malebranche and Geulincx, followers of Descartes’s dualism, doubted that two essentially different elements could assume a mutual interaction. They questioned how spirit-which is essentially different from matter-can recognize material beings, and even control a physical body. In their theory of occasionalism, they had no choice but to introduce God as the medium for the interaction between spirit and matter.

Descartes’s dualism considered spirit (thinking) and matter (extension) to be completely heterogeneous, united with a higher being-God. In contrast, Unification Thought does not treat the origins of spirit and matter as ultimate realities in the causal world. Though spirit and matter may seem quite different in the phenomenal world, they originate as relative attributes of One God.

A Korean professor of theology once criticized the Unification Principle as being a dualism of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. The recognition, however, that give-and-take action between the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang is possible refutes such a criticism. They must

have something in common, for them to relate at all. A husband and a wife must have something in common in order to relate meaningfully. The fact that Sung Sang and Hyung Sang have something in common indicates that Sung Sang has in itself a Hyung Sang element. This is not in the sense that Sung Sang has an Inner Hyung Sang, but in the sense that it has a material element—pre-energy. Likewise, the Hyung Sang has Sung Sang elements, such as reason.

Energy has no mass and no form, and in this respect pre-energy is the same as spirit. Yet energy is neither ambiguous nor accidental. It forms definite particles—such as electrons, protons, and neutrons—which have definite charges and masses. When we describe energy in terms of electromagnetic waves, we say that each kind of energy has a characteristic wavelength. Pre-energy, then, must have a kind of direction or purpose, a Sung Sang element, to cause energy to form sometimes particles, and other times, waves.

Conversely, Sung Sang has an energetic or Hyung Sang element in itself. Some psychologists and medical scientists refer to it as the “dynamic effect of the spirit.” When a child is not loved or is ill-treated by his parents, his dissatisfaction accumulates. This accumulated dissatisfaction has a dynamic effect, which can be expressed either physically—causing the child to be openly defiant—or mentally, in the form of neurosis or mental illnesses. Also, through hypnotism we can make a person sleep, move his hands and legs, etc., just as we wish. Furthermore, we can move our own hands and legs by the decision of our mind. These facts demonstrate that our mind, which is insubstantial, has an energetic element.

We can definitely say, then, that there is a Hyung Sang element in the Sung Sang, and a Sung Sang element in the Hyung Sang. Put in another way, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang have something in common and are not essentially different elements in the world of the ultimate cause. Thus, the Unification Principle says that God is the united body (Harmonious Body) of the dual characteristics of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, which means, first, that they are essentially of the same nature, and second, that they are united in God.

Actually, God is absolute, and thus cannot be separated into elements. He is not a composite being as finite beings are. The theory of dual characteristics objectifies God into the world of time and space, for the purpose of obtaining a convenient and correct understanding of God. Figuratively speaking, the attributes of the absolute God can be likened to a point: from a point, two rays can be drawn; likewise, from the absolute God, two directions can be objectified—Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. (Fig. 2)

Coming from one point, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are essentially of the same quality, with only a relative, not an absolute, difference. Their relationship is that of subject and object—i.e., dominating and dominated—with one taking the controlling and active role, and the other, the obeying and passive role. Unification Thought is neither dualism, nor spiritualism, nor materialism: it is Unitism⁶ (in Korean, Yu-il Ron “Theory of Oneness”), or Unificationism.

When we look at an object, light comes into our eyes and stimulates the optic nerves. The stimulation is then transmitted to the brain, where the physical process becomes a mental process. The process reverses itself when, with our minds, we move our physical body into action. Until we understand that the origin of mind and matter are essentially of the same quality in the ultimate cause, we cannot understand these phenomena.

(d) Remarks Concerning the Terms ‘Sung Sang’ and ‘HyungSang’

In the Unification Principle, the terms Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are translated as “character” and “form” (“internal character” and “external form”, to be exact). In the Unification Thought translation, however, these terms have been kept in their Korean form, since the English translation does not accurately represent their meaning.

Sung Sang means “mind”, which, as explained before, has a subjective, functional part consisting of intellect, emotion, and will (Inner Sung Sang); as well as an objective part consisting of ideas, concepts, original laws, and mathematical principles (Inner Hyung Sang). Sung () expresses the functional part of the mind, and Sang (), which means image, or figure, expresses the objective part of the mind. The Korean expression, therefore, is full of contents. Its English translation, “character,” is inadequate, first, because it does not mean “mind”; also, because it does not contain the idea of forms.

Moreover, the relationship between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang cannot be adequately expressed by the relationship between character and form. As explained in the Unification Principle, the relationship between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang is as that between internal and external, invisible and visible, cause and effect, subject and object, vertical and horizontal. With regard to their relationship to God, we say that Sung Sang is closer to God than Hyung Sang. The reason is that the core of God is Heart, and Heart lies in the very depth of Sung Sang. Based on this relationship, the Unification Principle considers Sung Sang to be “Abel-like” and Hyung Sang to be “Cain-like.” In the Unification Thought chapter on the “Theory of History,” Hebraism is said to be a “Sung Sang culture,” and Hellenism, a “Hyung Sang culture.”

It is evident, therefore, that character and form could never portray such a variety of contents. (One could not, for example, say that Hebraism is a “character culture,” and Hellenism is a “form culture.") Consequently, in the present book we have decided to keep these terms in their Korean form.

2. Positivity and Negativity (Yang and Eum⁷)

In addition to Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, the Unification Principle ascribes another set of dual characteristics to God, namely positivity and negativity. These dual characteristics relate between themselves as subject and object. Before describing them, does this mean that God has four-fold characteristics? Actually, it does not. Positivity and negativity are not direct attributes of God, but attributes of God’s Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. We may describe them as attributes of attributes. Both Sung Sang and Hyung Sang contain positive and negative attributes.

The positive aspects of man’s Sung Sang (mind) include perspicacity, good memory, cheerfulness, activeness, and so on. The negative aspects include obtuseness, poor memory, melancholy, passiveness, and so on. With regard to man’s Hyung Sang (physical body), the positive aspects include jutting and protruding features, convex parts, and the front side. The negative aspects include sunken, hollow, and concave parts, as well as the back side.

Although both Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are attributes of God, they seem to exist as two distinct entities in the phenomenal world. Positivity and negativity, however, do not appear as entities in the phenomenal world, for they are attributes of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Rather than saying that man is a positive being and woman is a negative being, we should say that man is the united being of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristically positive (masculine), whereas woman is a united being of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristically negative (feminine). (For further details, see ch. 2, A, 2.) (Fig. 3)

The Oriental philosophy of Yin and Yang (negativity and positivity) deals with yin and yang as entities, rather than as attributes. Man is a positive being; woman is a negative being. The sodium ion would be a positive being; the chloride ion, a negative being. Unification Thought says that the sodium ion is a union of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, having more positive characteristics. The Sung Sang (cause of the structure) of the sodium atom has more positive characteristics, and so does the Hyung Sang (the structure itself). Positivity and negativity act as modifier of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, and not as independent entities—this is the difference between the concept of positivity and negativity in Unification Thought and that in Oriental philosophy.

Unification Ontology seems to he the union of Occidental ontology (eidos and hyle, or spirit and matter) and Oriental ontology (Yin and Yang, or negativity and positivity). The culture that will be developed based on Unification Thought will be the union of Occidental and Oriental cultures—a unified culture. We should, however. keep in mind what was mentioned previously—i.e., that Unification Thought was not created by a deliberate, skillful, well planned welding of those two concepts.

The dual characteristics of SungSang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity are called Universal Image, since they are images of God that appear universally in every created being. In God, however, we also find Individual Images, which are explained in the next point.

3. Individual Images

As indicated above, every existing being contains the universal image of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity. Besides, every existing being has some individuality, or individual image, which comes from the Individual Image in God. From the countless Individual Images in God comes the individuality of each person and each being in creation.

Why did God give each being individuality? As it will be explained later, God’s most essential character is Heart, or the emotional impulse to seek joy through loving an object. Thus, He created man and all things as His objects. How monotonous it would have been, however, if all individuals were exactly the same! One person or a million—joy would not have been any greater. Consequently, God’s infinite “appetite” for joy necessitated His giving man and all things individuality.

Here is an anecdote concerning individuality, the story of Chung Suk Wong, an old Korean woman and a member of the Unification Church in Korea. Every time she saw her face in the mirror, she would feel really bad, because she thought her face looked so ugly. She would feel sorry even for sitting in the presence of Rev. Sun Myung Moon. One day, Rev. Moon said, looking around at all the faces of the church members, “God has created every person for His joy.” Chung Suk Wong wondered if God really felt joy in her case, because she felt so ugly. Worrying about this, she went back to her room and prayed: “Why, Heavenly Father, have you made my face so ugly? Couldn’t you have made it better?” Then the voice of Heaven came to her: “It is my face, good or bad.” Her face is one of the individual images of God. She told her story to Rev. Moon, who said, with a smile, “It is true.” Ever since that time she has never suffered because of her face again.

One day I visited the Ueno Park Zoo in Japan. There were many kinds of animals there, and some of them seemed very ugly. I wondered if God felt joy in seeing them and decided that He must, since He created them according to the Purpose of Creation.

Man has been given remarkable individuality. Created as the highest being, he can give the greatest joy to God. Can we also find individuality in a bacterium? Some biologists say that even a bacterium seems to have a male or a female individuality, although we would expect its individuality to be much more obscure, since it is one of the lowest forms of life we know. Birds of a certain species seem almost identical to us, yet it is said that even in a large flock a bird can recognize its mate.

That man has remarkable individuality means that his individuality should be highly valued, as well as the fact that he is the supreme being to give the greatest joy to God. Man’s individuality is not acquired a posteriori, but is part of the original nature bestowed by God; if God means anything to us, then we certainly must treasure man’s individuality.

Communism criticizes the democratic way of thinking, saying it has no basis for asserting the importance of individuality as it does. Man is nothing but a higher animal, evolved from other animals. Individuality may be respected for the sake of convenience in social life, but should never be regarded as absolute. Those who oppose the revolution may be disposed of with no qualms of conscience. The result of such a way of thinking, however, has been mass slaughter, which can easily be born from an ideology that makes light of man’s individuality.

The way we understand the cause of the universe influences the way we understand the phenomenal world and the way we act in society. In denying the existence of God—the source of individuality—communists can easily find justification for killing those who oppose the revolution, whom they call reactionary elements. Their view that the universe, including man, originated from matter and consists only of matter further supports this justification.

According to Lenin, for example, an artist that disobeys party policy in his artistic activity must be punished. We maintain, however, that true art must not be subservient to the dictates of party policy; rather, it should display the artist’s individuality, in order to be truly appreciable. We should use our God-bestowed creativity to the full, creating pictures, sculpture, music, etc., thus imitating God, who created everything as His work of art. As God has thrown Himself into creating each being, we should, likewise, throw ourselves into creating each work of art. All fine art, then, bears the stamp of individuality. This explains why most works of art are accompanied by the name of the artist, such as The Unfinished Symphony, by Schubert; Missa Solemnis, by Beethoven; or The Angelus, by Millet. Our original mind has subconsciously known the need to respect individuality; now we are aware of the philosophical foundation for this need.

Where in God are the Individual Images located? They belong to the Sung Sang; more precisely, the Inner Hyung Sang. As already mentioned, the only direct attributes of God are Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Positivity and negativity are attributes of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (attributes of attributes). These (the Universal Image), together with the Individual Images, we call the Divine Image.

B. Divine Character (Divinity)

Divine Character means the character of God. Heart, Logos, and creativity are three representative aspects of God’s character, although there are others, such as omniscience, omnipotence, judgeship, paternity, truth, and goodness. Let us look at Heart, Logos, and Creativity in detail.

1. Heart

That which lies deeper than intellect, emotion, and will is Heart, which in Unification Thought, means the emotional impulse to seek joy through love. This impulse wells up from the bottom of the mind; it is irrepressible, even for God Himself. In order to obtain joy, there must be an object of love, related to the subject. God, therefore, having Heart, seeks objects, in order to fulfill His impulse for joy. This explains why God created man and all other creatures.

Since man is created in the image of God, he, too, has heart, or the emotional impulse to seek joy through love. Accordingly, like God he seeks objects to love. Even an infant, although contented at first simply with suckling, will gradually begin to look for objects, such as toys. If the parents deny expression to the impulses of the child’s heart, the child’s mind may become distorted.

By the way, what is love? It is an emotional force that the subject gives to the object and which makes the object rejoice. Accordingly, heart is “the emotional impulse to seek joy through being loved” on the part of the object, while it is “the emotional impulse to seek joy through loving” on the part of the subject.

Then, doesn’t the object love his subjects? Yes, he does. For instance, a child loves his parents. In this case, the subject regards the object’s love as beauty and becomes joyful by receiving it. So, both the subject and the object experience joy through loving and through being loved.

It must be noted here that the love I mean, is not mundane love (self-centered love), but true love, which is centered on God. The kind of joy that is obtained through mundane love is relative and temporary, while the kind of joy that is obtained through God- centered love is absolute and eternal.

One studies; another runs a business; others do something else—but everyone acts in order to seek joy. Fallen man, however, is not aware that true joy can be obtained through love, or he has an illusion that it can be obtained through material things, power, knowledge, and so on.

Heart, the emotional impulse to seek joy, is causal, and emotions are resultant. Everyone acts, deep in his mind, according to the impulse of heart. One feels joyful or pleasant when his impulse of heart is fulfilled, and one feels sad or angry when it is not.

At this point, I would like to discuss the relationship between Heart and love. Though both are of an emotional nature, Heart is the inner emotional impulse to obtain joy, while love is the outer emotional force that brings about a union between the subject and the object. Heart, seeking an object, or seeking a subject, is the “starting point of love,” or the “source of love.”

The closer the relationship between subject and object, the more the subject loves the object and the greater joy the subject can obtain. God, therefore, created man and all things in His image. Although all of creation resembles God’s nature to some degree, God can obtain the greatest joy from man, who resembles Him directly and fully.

If God did not have Heart, He might have never created the universe. No religion has managed to explain why God created the universe. They normally take creation as an accomplished fact and limit their discussions to the process of creation. The explanation presented in Oriental Philosophy, also, assumes an already-accomplished creation. In the beginning was Tai ch’i ( -The Absolute Origin), from which appeared yin-yang (negativity and positivity). Ssu Hsiang ( -four emblematic symbols) appeared from yin-yang; Baguah (八卦 -eight trigrams of divination) from Ssu Hsiang; and finally all things appeared from Baguah. Nevertheless, the questions, “Why does Tai ch’i bring forth Yin-yang?” and “Why doesn’t Tai ch’i remain as it is forever?” remain unanswered. Though they explained the cause of the universe, nevertheless Oriental philosophers were unable to explain the reason for its creation, for they did not know that God has Heart, neither did they understand what Heart is.⁸

This explanation may seem unsophisticated; its merit becomes evident, however, when we see it along side other thoughts. For instance, if we do not consider the Heart of God, it will be difficult for us to go beyond communist thought.

According to Feuerbach—whose ideas have been used by communist theorists—God is said to have such qualities as goodness, love, truth, dignity, perfection, and righteousness, because man has such qualities, though perhaps undeveloped. Everyone wants to do good, to love others, to become perfect, to live according to the truth, and so on. Such ideals can be traced back to our human essence, or generic essence. People objectify their human essence—the source of their ideals—and call this objectified human essence God, just as the painter objectifies his image as a picture on canvas. Man made God and worships Him. Feuerbach, consequently, tried to solve social problems with human love—without God. When the reason for Creation is not clarified, this approach can be convincing. We may well think “God exists for convenience’ sake only,” or “God may or may not exist—it does not really matter.” What an unreliable God!

We said before that God could not but create objects resembling Him, in order to obtain joy. Man, created as the supreme object of God, has been given almost all the attributes of God, including Heart. For this reason, we have an irrepressible impulse to seek joy through love, regardless of time and place. Communism says that the so-called “original nature” of man is no more than the nature that is formed in bourgeois society. This original nature, however, is God-given: the more it is suppressed, the more it will resist suppression.

Many thinkers have tried to solve the problems of the world, nation, society, family, and individual—but their efforts have been in vain. If the Purpose of Creation is clarified, the purpose of human life, family, society, etc., will be clarified. This will enable us to find out how we should lead our lives, and how families, societies, etc., should be. Consequently, we lack true standards and true direction because no one has ever known the reason for the creation of the universe.

2. Logos

The Gospel according to John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.” (John 1:1-3). Here ‘Word’ means ‘Logos.’ Many philosophers have tended to move away from ‘the Word was with God’ towards ‘the Word was God’. Hegel, for example, developed his theory assuming God to be Logos. Unification Thought, however, says that Logos is created by God, as a Multiplied Body (New Body). It is the Word uttered by God. The Unification Principle says that Logos is an object of God, containing dual characteristics.

Logos is the Multiplied Body formed by give-and-take action between Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang, centering on purpose. Inner Hyung Sang refers to idea, concept, original law, and mathematical principle; Inner Sung Sang, on the other hand, refers to intellect (sensibility, understanding, and reason), emotion, and will. Reason, in the Inner Sung Sang, and law, in the Inner Hyung Sang, play the most important role in the formation of the Logos. Accordingly, we call Logos ‘reason-law’ ( Ih-Bup).

Reason is the faculty that enables thinking and practice. We make a plan to do something, then we put our plan into practice. Reason operates in freedom. The nature of law, however, is necessity and inevitability; there is no freedom in law. Freedom and necessity are united in reason-law, Logos. In the natural world, the evidence of law is more pronounced than that of reason, whereas the reverse applies to man. Traditionally, Logos has been called Law or natural law or the rule of Heaven when referring to the natural world, but we cannot ignore the workings of reason.

Scientists say the universe has been developing for billions of years. We recognize that this development has been directional—i.e., the earth was formed, plants appeared, animals came to exist, and finally man was created. The question arising here is whether the development of the universe has been accidental or not. The earth started as swirling gas, gradually cooled, liquified, and finally solidified. Is this development accidental? Is it similar to the changes occurring, say, in water? Upon heating, water vaporizes; upon cooling, it turns into ice. If vapor is “cooled, it becomes water again; ice, when heated, also becomes water. This process is repeatable. Does the development of the universe occur in similar patterns of predictable repetitions?

There are various views concerning this question. Accidentalism, for instance, stresses contingency, or the idea that the universe will eventually go in one of many possible directions. In contrast, a second view maintains that the universe could only have developed in a single direction, according to natural law. This view is characterized by inevitability. A third view proposes the theory of the autonomous development of the universe in one direction, excluding other possible directions. This view is characterized by the unity of freedom and necessity.

Needless to say, materialism and communism base their theories on the second view. They maintain that we can thoroughly explain the direction of the development of the universe, as long as we understand the exact laws at work in that development—which is similar to applying mathematical formulae to mathematical problems.

Unification Thought takes the third view. It explains the development of the universe from the standpoint of creation by Logos (reason-law). Reason in Logos works freely; it influences the direction of the development of the universe, while preserving the efficacy of laws.

The development of a tree can illustrate the point of reason in Logos. First, there is a seed, which grows into a stem; then, it develops branches, leaves, flowers; finally, fruits appear. The plant possesses a kind of “mind”—or latent consciousness—which makes it grow in a definite direction, displaying the “intellectual” functions of selectivity and adaptability to the environment.

By extension, we can say that the universe itself has a kind of latent consciousness, or life, which can be called cosmic life or cosmic consciousness. This seems to be a more scientific and reasonable explanation than saying that the universe has developed solely according to the necessity of law. When Logos is considered merely as natural law, freedom (or selectivity) is excluded. When it is considered as the union of Inner Sung Sang (reason) and Inner Hyung Sang (law), both freedom (or selectivity) and natural law are included. Unfortunately, however, a great number of scientists today only pursue laws, neglecting the contribution of reason.

As mentioned before, the work of law (necessity) is very obvious in the natural world, whereas that of reason is more apparent in man. Although man is endowed with great reason, and thus with freedom, he should still obey laws. In the various meetings of the International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences, Rev. Sun Myung Moon has been stressing the importance of values. As I see it, values in science are related to reason working in nature. As stated above, reason influences the development of the natural world; similarly, we can control or change the direction of the development of the sciences by using our reason and wisdom. This is the purpose behind the International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences, which seeks to formulate a values-oriented viewpoint that can guide the direction of the development of the sciences.

3. Creativity

Everyone has an innate tendency and desire to invent new things, develop new ideas, and live a creative life. This is a reflection of God’s own character and ability to create new things, which is called Creativity. It was this character of God that enabled Him to create human beings and all things.

According to the Unification Principle, God has given us His creativity. We say, then, that our desire and tendency to create have come from God. In order to understand the purpose and nature of our creativity, we need to understand God’s own Creativity.

The first expression of God’s Creativity is His ability to form the Inner Quadruple Base, or Logos, which takes place through the give-and-take action between God’s Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang, centering on purpose. Next, God’s Creativity is manifested in the formation of the Outer Quadruple Base⁹ which takes place when the Logos, formed in the Sung Sang of God, enters into give-and-take action with the Hyung Sang, in order to form a new body (multiplied body). God’s Creativity, then, is described as the ability to form those two quadruple bases.

With regard to the creative act, one might think that it is a kind of energy. Creativity, however, has two aspects: one is the energetic aspect; the other, the aspect of will, which is a spiritual aspect and is more significant than the first. Thus, creativity in God takes place primarily due to the action of the will within the Inner Sung Sang.

Quadruple bases are formed centering on purpose. At this point I would like to discuss purpose, which is the center of the Quadruple Base. What is the origin of purpose? Purpose is grounded in, and established by, Heart. Heart is described as the emotional impulse to seek joy through loving an object. Heart is the very reason for the establishment of the Purpose of Creation; without Heart, there can be no Purpose of Creation. When we say that God created the universe according to the Purpose of Creation, we should acknowledge the underlying role of Heart. We must conclude, then, that Creativity itself is also motivated by, or is grounded in, Heart.

According to the Unification Principle, God’s ultimate purpose in bestowing His Creativity on man was to set him up as the dominator over all things (See Divine Principle, Part I, ch. 2, Section VI, 3.) Man, however, was to receive God’s Creativity only after passing through the three stages of growth (Formation, Growth and Completion Stage·). It i important to note here that God intends to endow man with His own Creativity, not just with creativity in general. When I queried the Reverend Sun Myung Moon about this, he answered that there is no true creativity apart from God’s Creativity. The fundamental characteristic of God Creativity is that it is based on Heart (love). This, of course, raises the question about fallen man’s creativity. Fallen man does exhibit a sort of creativity; since, however, it is not based on Heart (love), his creativity is quite different from that of God.

As stated above, the purpose of man’s creativity is to enable him to dominate all things. ‘Dominion’ has various shades of meaning. It may imply ‘ruling’, ‘controlling’, ‘dealing with’ or ‘protecting’. Consequently, various human activities fall under the category of dominion. For instance, industrial production, commercial enterprises, farming, scientific research, artistic creativity—all these can be considered under the concept of ‘dominion’.

We should be reminded, however that dominion of all thing with love can only be accomplished through the Creativity given by God. After the fall, man lost the original Creativity given by God. He now expresses creativity without Heart, which is only the Hyung Sang aspect of God’s Creativity. Scientific research, commercial enterprises, and so on, are undertaken without any love for the creation or for mankind. They are undertaken for individual purposes, or, at best, for the nation; hence, we have been plagued by the evils of war, pollution, etc.

This is in sharp contrast to God’s Creativity. When God created man and all things, He took exceedingly good care not to harm them, for His creativity is based on love. This, again, brings up the point of the International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences. The purpose of the Conference is to give scientists an opportunity to discuss the relationship between science and values, as an attempt to reconnect scientific research with true Creativity (God’s Creativity). It is hoped that scientists will finally realize that they must conduct their research on the basis of love for mankind and for all things.

Summary of the Contents (Attributes) of the Original Image

Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, and Individual Images are called Divine Image. Heart, Logos, and Creativity are called Divine Character. The Divine Image and the Divine Character constitute the ORIGINAL IMAGE.

III. Structure of the Original Image

The structure of the Original Image refers to the relationships between the various attributes of God. A watch is composed of many parts, and each has its fixed position and maintains a specific relationship with other parts. Similarly, each attribute of God has its position and maintains a specific relationship with other attributes. Of course, it is not really appropriate to discuss the transcendent God by using such temporal terms as ‘structure’ and ‘position’, and we must bear in mind that if God were a composite being of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, or Positivity and Negativity, He would no longer be God. Nevertheless, with the limitations of our words, which have been developed in space and time, we cannot but explain the absolute God, for the benefit of our own understanding, as if He were an objectified being.

A. Quadruple Base

1. Quadruple Base (Four Position Foundation)

In the Original Image, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang form a United Body, or Harmonious Body, through give-and-take action centered on Heart. The structure of the Original Image is the Quadruple Base (Four-Position Foundation), which is made up of four components: Heart, Sung Sang, Hyung Sang, and United Body (Harmonious Body). Heart, actually, lies deep within the Sung Sang, but we put it in the central position, since it is the motive, or starting point, for the give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Centering on Heart, Sung Sang is in the subject position, while Hyung Sang is in the object position. The relationship between subject and object is as that between active and passive, controlling and obeying, central and dependent, creating and conserving, initiating and responding, dynamic and static. In the Original Image, Sung Sang, which is subject, actively controls and works on Hyung Sang, which takes an objective, passive position.

Let us discuss the center of the Quadruple Base. I explained in the “Introduction” that many of today’s social problems arise from unclarity as to (a) how something should be, and (b) how its relationships should be. There is no relationship without a center, for the center is the standard or motive for establishing the relationship. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang relate with each other centering on Heart. In the same way, members of a family must relate with one another centering on the Purpose of Creation, or centering on the parental will, if their relationship is to be harmonious and meaningful.

Give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang originally should be harmonious and smooth, without the slightest strain or angularity. For this reason we refer to the United Body resulting from the give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang as a ‘Harmonious Body’ or ‘Neutral Body’.

According to Unification Principle the give-and-take action between a subject and an object is initiated through the agency of the universal prime force. This might give the impression that there is something like a physical force at the center of the Quadruple Base in God; that is not the case, however. To be sure, a force is present in the initiation of give-and-take action between a subject and an object in the physical world. This is the universal prime force, which may be likened to the Newtonian universal force of gravitation. The origin of the universal prime force lies in God; this origin is called Prime Force, in Unification Thought.

The Unification Principle says that the universal prime force is the center of the Quadruple Base and the initiating factor of the give-and-take action between subject and object. This, however, is liable to be misunderstood, if we happen to consider the universal prime force as nothing but a physical force. In this case, we would be led to the inevitable conclusion that force is the most essential element in the universe, including social life. We would have to say that give-and-take action occurs centering on power, and would have to agree with the proposition, “Might makes right.” In doing this, we would lose the philosophical basis for valuing love and goodness and would find ourselves—like the communists—justifying dictatorial power. The most essential and central attribute of God is Heart. God created all things motivated by Heart. Heart is “the center of the Quadruple Base in the Original Image. By showing that Heart and love have the highest value, we can protect people from false philosophies.

Finally, let me explain the Quadruple Base in the Sung Sang. Sung Sang consists of Inner Sung Sang (subject) and Inner Hyung Sang (object). The Quadruple Base that is formed by the give-and-take action between Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang is called the Inner Quadruple Base. Needless to say, the center of the Inner Quadruple Base is Heart, and the United Body is nothing other than Sung Sang itself. The Quadruple Base that is formed by the give-and-take action between this Sung Sang and the Hyung Sang is called the Outer Quadruple Base, to distinguish it from the Inner Quadruple Base. (Fig. 4)

In the Original Image, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang are engaged in harmonious give-and-take action centering on Heart to form the United Body or Synthesized Body. This aspect of the Original Image is eternal and unchanging, and the Quadruple Base thus formed is called the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base or Static Quad- ruple Base.

In the creation of the universe, however, the Purpose based on God’s Heart becomes significant. Heart is the emotional impulse to seek joy, and in this process the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang enter into give-and-take action centering on the Purpose based on Heart—the Purpose of Creation.

2. The Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base and the Developing Quadruple Base

The aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang that are engaged in give-and-take action centering on Purpose are different from those engaged in maintaining the identity of God. Intellect, emotion, and will in the Sung Sang are mobilized to realize the Purpose in the process of Creation; in maintaining identity, however, they are silent. When God decided to create something—a bird, for instance—He thought of a concrete image, including such things as the type of feathers, the location of the beak, and the shape and location of the eyes. This means that the contents of Sung Sang (Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang) are changing. The form, or image, of the bird is “stamped” onto the Hyung Sang, so that it, too, is changing. Change in the Original Image means development, for the New Body or Multiplied Body is formed as the result of this change. Through give-and-take action, God’s SungSang and Hyung Sang are multiplied, so that the New Body results. The Quadruple Base, consisting of Purpose, Sung Sang, Hyung Sang and Multiplied Body (New Body), is called Developing Quadruple Base or Dynamic Quadruple Base. (Fig. 5)

The fact that both the Developing and the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Bases appear in the Original Image indicates that God created the universe while maintaining His immutability. Changeability and unchangeability are united in God. Man and all of creation, being created after the Original Image, necessarily and simultaneously have both identity-maintaining and developing quadruple bases.

For example, man, on one hand, grows and changes both mentally and physically; on the other hand, he maintains his character and identity: he cannot change into another man, no matter how long he lives. A cherry tree grows branches, produces flowers, and bears fruit; yet it maintains its identity as a cherry tree: it can never change into a pear tree or an apricot tree. A tree grows from being a seed into a sprout through the give-and-take action between the embryo and albumen; its growth continues to fructification. This is the developing aspect of the tree. Throughout its growth, however, it remains the same tree. This is the identity-maintaining aspect of the tree.

In the Original Image, the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base is centered on Heart; the Developing Quadruple Base, involved in the Creation process, is centered on Purpose. This Purpose, however, is the Purpose of Heart, and the two are not essentially different. When we say ‘Purpose’, we are referring to ‘Heart with Purpose’; when we say ‘Heart’, we are considering ‘Heart’ minus the ‘Purpose’ factor.

In the created world, however, both the identity-maintaining and the developing quadruple bases are centered on Purpose. In a timepiece, for instance, it is obvious that there is purpose in its maintaining its identity, since it was made by man for the purpose of telling time. Likewise, there is purpose in every existing being’s maintaining its identity. Animals, plants, and even inorganic matter have purpose—the Purpose of Creation. Man was created with a purpose; in a family, the husband and wife love each other, forming an eternal unity centering on the Purpose of Creation. Not knowing one’s purpose can be the source of great anxiety. In fact, numerous problems in life are due to people’s ignorance of the purpose of life. The developing quadruple base in created beings is also cen- tered on purpose. A growing seed, for instance, has the purpose of becoming a new plant and bearing fruit; an incubated egg develops to realize the purpose of becoming a chicken; husband and wife bear children centered on the Purpose of Creation—the realization of God’s love through the family (developing quadruple base of the family).

Philosophical trends of the past have tended to emphasize either the identity-maintaining or the developing aspect of the quadruple base. In either case, the resulting world view becomes distorted. The materialism of the 17th and 18th centuries, for instance, called mechanical materialism, only dealt with the identity-maintaining aspect of repetitive motion in every being. Communists criticized this philosophical trend, saying that it did not recognize development in the universe, even though it recognized motion. In fact, communists consider mechanical materialism to be a prop for maintaining the capitalist system. In the communist philosophy itself, on the other hand, dialectical materialism emphasizes development, with the specific purpose of justifying the changing of capitalist society into a communist one. When such a high priority is given to the developing aspect of the universe, the political under- currents become very strong.

Communists also criticize traditional metaphysics, which deals with unchanging essences. According to this type of metaphysics, a bud, for instance—which seems to be constantly changing through the stages of becoming a flower, then withering and dying—has an unchanging essence, for the same flower will bloom again in the following year. Stalin challenged this idea, saying, “Contrary to metaphysics, dialectics holds that nature is not a state of rest and immobility, stagnation and immutability, but a state of continuous movement and change, of continuous renewal and development, where something is always arising and developing, and something always disintegrating and dying away.”¹⁰

To be sure, motion and change are, in fact, real aspects of the universe. Nevertheless, dialectical thought, also, is one-sided. In Unification Thought, everything has both changing and unchanging aspects, since there are both Identity-Maintaining and Developing Quadruple Bases in the Original Image.

3. The Inner Structure of the Logos

The Inner Sung Sang and the Inner Hyung Sang, centering on Heart, make up the Sung Sang. When Purpose appears in the Heart, both the Inner Sung Sang and the Inner Hyung Sang move toward its accomplishment. Hence the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base in the Sung Sang¹¹ becomes the Developing Quadruple Base.

The Inner Sung Sang consists of intellect, emotion, and will. I will now explain these terms in greater detail.

First, ‘intellect’ refers to “the function of recognition, which includes sensibility, understanding, and reason. When Isaac Newton, for example, saw an apple fall to the ground, he recognized that it had fallen. This is cognition based on sensibility, or perceptual cognition. Then he wondered, “Why do apples fall?” He tried to acquire a deeper cognition, through understanding. Next, he began to think beyond the mere incident of the apple: “Why does anything fall to the ground?” “How can this be understood?” He looked for a universally applicable truth, and finally discovered the law of universal gravitation. He had applied ‘reason’ to the problem. Sensibility corresponds to formation-stage intellect; understanding, to growth-stage intellect; and reason, to completion-stage intellect. The origin, or prototype, of the three-stage intellectual faculty of man is the intellect of God.

Second, ‘emotion’ refers to the function of feeling-feeling joy, sadness, etc. It is different from Heart, for Heart lies deeper than emotion, intellect, and will. Heart is the cause; emotion, the effect. God feels joy when His Heart is satisfied, and sadness when it is not. Joy and sadness are not emotion itself, but emotional states; emotion refers to the function of feeling them.

Third, ‘will’ refers to the function of intent, or the decision to do something. The will of man originates from the will of God, which is expressed as the decision to realize the Purpose of Heart. Once the Purpose for creating something—such as a bird—is formed by Heart, the Inner Sung Sang (intellect, emotion, and will) interacts with the idea or image in the Inner Hyung Sang.God thinks with His intellect (especially with reason), “How can I realize the idea of a bird? What color should it be? What should the shape and structure of the feathers be like? How should the bones and muscles be constructed?” Next, He makes a specific plan for creating the bird. Seeing the plan, He feels with His emotion, “It is not good,” or “It is fine.” If the plan is unsatisfactory, He corrects it. Then He decides, with His will, to realize the plan. In forming and carrying out the plan, intellect, emotion, and will are all mobilized; of these three, however, intellect plays the most important part in forming the plan.

Besides the idea, the other aspects of the Inner Hyung Sang,—i.e., original law and mathematical principle—are also mobilized. Law plays the most important part in this process. It may be said, in fact, that the plan of anything is formed through the give-and-take action between reason and law. (There are, of course, other factors, too.) The concrete plan of the bird, for instance, is its logos. Logos is the unity of the dual characteristics of Inner Sung Sang (reason) and Inner Hyung Sang (law).

As explained before, the quadruple base formed by the give-and-take action between Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang is called Inner Quadruple Base. We also said that the Quadruple Base centering on Purpose is called Developing Quadruple Base. So, the quadruple base that forms Logos by the give-and-take action between Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang, centering on the Purpose of Creation, is called Inner Developing quadruple Base. Logos, therefore, is the New Body formed by this Quadruple Base. This is the inner structure of Logos. Logos is the very Sung Sang of God in Creation. Human creativity follows a similar pattern. When we want to make something, first we form a plan in our mind—the blueprint. Besides the blueprint, we need materials to realize the plan. The same can be said with regard to God. In order to realize the Logos of a bird, for instance, God needs matter to make bones, muscles, feathers, and so on. The actual bird is the result of the give-and-take action between Logos and Hyung Sang (pre-matter). Logos is in the subject position; pre-matter, in the object position. Thus, the purpose arising from Heart can finally be accomplished.

In sum, God created the universe through give-and-take action of two successive quadruple bases: first, the Inner Quadruple Base; second, the Outer Quadruple Base. Both are centered on Purpose and are called Developing Quadruple Bases. The structure involving these two Quadruple Bases formed during the Creation process is called the two-stage structure of Creation¹² (Fig. 6)

Following the pattern of God, man, also, has a two-stage structure both in his creative process and in his existence. Specifically with regard to his creative process, first he thinks and makes a plan for what he wants to make; then he makes it, through using all the necessary materials.

Here I would like to reemphasize the proper position of reason in the Quadruple Base of God. Heart, or Purpose, occupies the central or highest position; Sung Sang, which contains reason, is in the second position; Hyung Sang (pre-matter) is in the third position; and the United Body, or the Multiplied Body, is in the fourth position. Reason, to say nothing of matter, is not the motive, but the means, to accomplish the Purpose of Creation. Even the attributes of omniscience and omnipotence are related to Heart, for God is said to be omniscient and omnipotent because He can always accomplish the purpose of Heart. In all respects, therefore, Heart is the most essential attribute of God.

4. The Quadruple Base and Real Problems

The Inner Quadruple Base has two forms: the Inner Identity-Maintaining (Static) Quadruple Base, and the Inner Developing (Dynamic) Quadruple Base. Moreover, there is the Outer Quadruple Base, which also has two forms: the Outer Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base and the Outer Developing Quadruple Base. In all, then, there are four kinds of Quadruple Bases.

Understanding these Quadruple Bases is very important for solving real problems. The inner quadruple base of man is formed by the give-and-take action between his spirit-mind and his physical mind. This give-and-take action will be harmonious only when the spirit-mind is in the subject position and the physical mind is in the object position. The function of the spirit-mind is to seek the values of love, trueness, goodness, and beauty; it also directs man to live according to the Purpose of Creation. The function of the physical mind is to seek the basic physical necessities of life, such as food, clothing, shelter, and reproduction. One should seek a life of spiritual values first, and physical necessities second.

While forming a correct Inner Quadruple Base (proper way of life within oneself), one should also make Outer Quadruple Bases through establishing give-and-take action with others (such as family members and co-workers). Harmonious relationships with parents, spouse, children, superiors, inferiors, and so on—through the establishment of relationships of subject and object—will bring unity and prosperity to one’s family, business enterprise, organization, etc. This is related to ‘how each being should be’ and ‘how relationships should be’—questions which I raised in the Introduction. There is no harmonious give-and-take action if the participants do not occupy their correct positions—if, for example, students in a school oppose their teachers and go on strike; or the teachers do not care about the well-being of their students. Harmonious give-and-take action is based on love and on the observance of position. Teachers should teach their students with love; students should study seriously and show respect for their teachers.

We can see, therefore, that both the theory of dual characteristics and the theory of Quadruple Bases in the Original Image have been proposed, not for the sake of theorizing, but in order to be practiced in daily life.

Finally, I would like to give an additional explanation about the Identity-Maintaining and Developing Quadruple Bases. The Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base is characterized by unchangeability, whereas the Developing Quadruple Base is characterized by changeability. These two Quadruple Bases are not separate from each other, but represent dual features of the one Quadruple Base. Every existing being simultaneously has both identity-maintaining and developing aspects in its quadruple base. In our specific case, for example, some aspects of our character and appearance remain the same throughout our whole life; on the other hand, we are constantly growing and changing from birth. Indeed, the unity of changeability and unchangeability constitutes an important aspect of existence.

B. The Chung-Boon-Hap Action¹³

The structure of the Original Image is the Quadruple Base, which has four components and is centered on Heart. Let us consider the process of forming the Quadruple Base in the Original Image. First, God is the Absolute, or the Oneness. Furthermore, He has the correlative aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Finally, these correlative aspects enter into give-and-take action to form the United Body or Multiplied Body. This means that there are three stages in the formative process of the structure of the Original Image—i.e., the Absolute, the Correlative, and the United. The Absolute is represented by Heart (or Purpose), since Heart is the essence of God. This formative process of the structure of the Original Image, which goes through these three stages, is called Chung-Boon-Hap action (Origin-Separation-Union action), abbreviated as C-B-H action (O-S-U action). Both the Quadruple Base and the Chung-Boon-Hap action are relative views of the structure of the Original Image: the former is a spatial approach; the latter, a temporal approach.

Since God transcends time and space, He actually has neither a forming process nor a spatial structure. He is the oneness, or the “point,” from which time and space have developed. Such a view of God, however, will help us to understand the forming processes in the world of space and time.

There are Inner and Outer Quadruple Bases, as well as Identity-Maintaining and Developing Quadruple Bases in the Original Image. Similarly, there are Inner and Outer C-B-H actions, as well as Identity-Maintaining and Developing C-B-H actions. Chung (Origin) in the Identity-Maintaining C-B-H action is Heart, whereas Chung (Origin) in the Developing C-B-H action is Purpose. In the created world, however, Purpose constitutes Chung for both the identity-maintaining and the developing C-B-H actions, just as Purpose is the center for both the identity-maintaining and the developing quadruple bases in the created world. Purpose, or motive, is the prerequisite for give-and-take action between a subject and an object. The result is a United Body, or Multiplied Body. When seen from the time perspective, then, give-and-take action is none other than C-B-H action. The earth, for example, orbits the sun based on the Purpose of Creation, and together with the other planets, forms the solar system. The center of the give-and-take action between the planets and the sun is the Purpose of Creation; the result, the solar system. This process is the identity-maintaining C-B-H action. In the family, a husband and wife who love each other form an eternal unity, centering on the Purpose of Creation. This is the identity-maintaining C-B-H action. The bearing of children, however, is a developing C-B-H action.

C. The Structural Unity of the Original Image

We have discussed the attributes and structure of the Original Image from the viewpoint of time and space. As we noted, however, there is neither time nor space in God. Thus, our explanations about attributes and structure in God are figurative and metaphorical. God’s attributes and structure are actually unified in one point. In God, there is no difference between front and back, right and left, above and below, here and there, inside and outside. God exists in one locus, yet simultaneously, in an infinite number of loci. He exists simultaneously in the present and in the future. The world of the Original Image, therefore, is the infinite “here” and the eternal “now.”

The four positions in the Quadruple Base are actually one position; the three stages of C-B-H action are actually one stage. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, Inner Quadruple Base and Outer Quadruple Base, Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base and Developing Quadruple Base—all these are totally united and harmonious in God.

Without describing the Original Image as we have, however, our understanding would not develop. We can better understand the structural unity of the Original Image by thinking of a roll of movie film. When we watch a movie, the part of the film that has already been projected on the screen belongs to the past; the part that we watch now belongs to the present; and the part that remains to be seen belongs to the future. There is a past, a present, and a future as we watch the movie; yet all are united in the one roll of film. People, animals, trees, and so on, have positions on the screen and are separated from one another, but come from the same roll of film.

In a similar—though essentially different—manner, everything that exists in the universe, from the greatest heavenly bodies to the minutest particles, originates from one point—God. (God’s attributes themselves are united in God.) Every existing being in the universe has its own position. But there is one (united) position within God; hence, the whole universe forms a united, organic body. Consequently, all the existing beings in the universe are related.

The solar system, for example, would become disordered if just one planet, such as the earth, were taken away. With regard to physical health, a man with a stomach ailment, for example, will find his whole well-being affected. In the physical body, the cells and the organs are related to one another, since the body is the result of successive cell divisions from the original fertilized egg-cell. Furthermore, all the bodies of the universe are related to one another, for all of them have been projected from the one origin—God.

Engels said that metaphysicians cannot see the forest for the trees. They do not realize the universal relatedness of all things. His description of mutual relationships is only natural from the Unification Thought viewpoint. Unification Thought, however, goes on to clarify why all things cannot but be mutually related; Engels offered no such clarification.

I have pulled God down to the temporal world, by describing Him in temporal language. Still our concept of structure is effective, since the relationships among God’s attributes do in fact exist, even though God is beyond time and space. The structural unity of the Original Image is a critical and essential concept for a correct understanding of the absoluteness and oneness of God.

IV. Critique of Traditional Philosophies

A. Critique of Marxist Philosophy

Marxism has held sway over the philosophical world for almost a century. I would like to point out the shortcomings of this philosophy—dialectical materialism—and its harmful influence on man and the world.

The Marxist dialectic maintains that development is realized by “the unity and struggle of opposites.” This, actually, differs from Hegel’s original thought. In his writings, contradiction—the extreme condition of opposites—is the motive of development; there is no mention of the concept of struggle, except in an explanatory note.¹⁴ In Marx, Engels, and Lenin, however, the concept of struggle became an essential factor of development. In Lenin’s words, “The unity (coincidence, identity, equal action) of opposites is conditional, temporary, transitory, relative. The struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is absolute, just as development and motion are absolute.”¹⁵ Accordingly, in the communist dialectic the unity of opposites has become no more than an ornament; the struggle of opposites has become the essence of the dialectic.

In contrast, Unification Thought says that development is realized through the harmonious give-and-take action between subject and object. Subject and object have a common purpose; give-and-take action is centered on that purpose. Engels said that he verified the dialectic through his study of the natural world, but that is not exactly true. All he did was to observe the existence of two elements in every natural phenomenon; his conclusion that they are opposites was hasty, unfounded, and illogical. Since the two elements share a common purpose, they do not exist in a state of opposition, contradiction, or struggle. On the contrary, they exist in the correlative relationship of subject and object, centering on their common purpose.

Yet it is difficult for man to form and keep meaningful relationships with his fellow man, for the common purpose—the Purpose of Creation—has been lost because of his Fall, and many struggles and wars have occurred in human history. Struggles, however, have never brought about development, but only stagnation and the decline of culture and economy. In the fallen world itself, development has been realized by the give-and-take action between subject and object, even when they were centered on a “non-principled” purpose.

The origin of the subject and object in every existing being is the Subject and Object (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang) in the Original Image, for every existing being is created taking after the Original Image. But fallen man is separated from God; the relationship be- tween subject and object in human society has become disordered, from within the individual level to the level of family, society, nation, and world. (No such disorder is found in the natural world.) So, the relationships between government and people, teachers and students, parents and children, and so on, must be corrected, if we are to bring about the world of harmony, centered on the Purpose of Creation.

In sum, in order to bring about an ideal individual, family, society, nation, and world, as well as an ideal school and an ideal education system, it is imperative to establish proper relationships between subject and object and to maintain harmonious give-and- take action between them. This gives us the basis for solving the problems raised in the Introduction. Furthermore, it should help us to realize that Unification Thought is not just a matter of semantics and high-flown ideas: it is immediate and practical.

By saying that struggle in nature and in human history is absolute, the communist dialectic can easily justify class struggle as something inevitable. It scatters the seeds of unbelief and hatred into families, societies, nations, and the world, striving at establishing a communist dictatorship on earth. Peace and happiness, however, can never be realized by such philosophical principles. (More on the communist dialectic in ch. 2, Sec 1, 1, [5])

These views, however, can be overcome by the theory of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. The shortcomings of materialism, as well as the excelling qualities of the Unification Thought view, will be discussed in ch. 2, “Ontology,” and in ch. 4, “Epistemology.” At this point, I will limit my comments to the image of man based on materialism. Communist materialism considers economy as the basis for society, or the infrastructure of society, classifying it in the category of matter. On the other hand, politics, religion, art, philosophy, and so on, are placed under the category of ideology, which, in their view, constitutes the superstructure of society. Naturally, then, economic activity is regarded as the most central aspect of human concerns. In other words, labor is the essence of man. Engels, in fact, says this about labor: “It is the prime basic condition for all human existence, and this to such an extent, in a sense, that we have to say that labour created man himself.”¹⁶

Based on their view of man, communists have attacked intellectuals, managers, artists, religious persons, and others in non-communist societies, saying that they are not laboring, but exploiting laborers, especially manual laborers. Is this view of man correct and satisfactory?

In Unification Thought, labor is viewed as a creative activity. True creativity originates from God’s Creativity, which is based on heart and love. Labor, therefore, should be based on heart and love, should be pursued for the realization of love—the Purpose of Creation. Unfortunately, heart and love are left out of the communist idea of labor. Their concept of labor is different from our view of labor as a creative activity. Hence, their attack on intellectuals, managers, and so on, in non-communist societies. From the Unification Thought point of view, however, not only manual laborers, but also other members of society such as managers, scientists, and artists should express their creativity for the realization of the purpose of creation, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.

B. Critique of the Philosophies of Life

At this point I would like to criticize the philosophical trends that designate ‘life’ as the ultimate cause of the universe. Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Bergson, Simmel, and others, can generally be classified under this category, if we account for specific variations in their views. In Unification Thought, life-force corresponds to the creative force (will), or simply to energy. As such, it cannot be the ultimate cause of the universe, because Heart lies even deeper than will and energy.In fact, subject and object cannot achieve a harmonious give-and-take action centering on force alone. History shows that those who have based their philosophies on force have failed to solve real human problems.

Hitler and Mussolini reportedly used Nietzsche’s philosophy of force in order to strengthen their dictatorships. General Kanji Ishihara, seeking to justify the Japanese occupation of Manchuria, said, “All living things struggle for existence. It is natural for the strong to prey upon the weak. A strong nation, therefore, is justified in occupying a weak nation in order to protect her, for the weak nation might be destroyed, if left alone.”

Despotic rulers can easily make use of philosophies that justify hegemony; those trends that designate life, force, or will as the cause of the universe are especially suitable for their purposes.

Life alone could never be the basis for an ideal world, for life without heart and love can easily take a destructive direction. Animals, for example, without man’s dominion of love, may kill one another recklessly. It must have been so before the appearance of man on earth. (Since, however, that was the process of creation, it could not be helped.) Struggles among the animals continue until today, but they are due to the human fall. If man had not fallen, but instead had realized the Purpose of Creation, he would have dominated all things with love, preventing needless struggles among animals. The fact of struggle, however, illustrates the point that life (force, will) that is not based on heart and love inevitably leads to conflict and strife. We maintain, therefore, that the philosophies of life, force, and will should be connected with, and supplemented by, the philosophy of heart and love.

The French theologian Teilhard de Chardin, while admitting that God has various attributes, said that the motivating essence behind the creation is force. Polish communists have made use of this statement to substantiate their view that Marxism and Christianity are in effect the same, for both designate force as the cause of the universe. They criticize Teilhard de Chardin, however, for failing to recognize the character of struggle within force. Clearly, philosophies of force, or theologies of force, can invite utilization by those who would propagate the “revolution of the proletariat.”

Notes

1 Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. which are Korean terms. cannot be accurately translated into English. and will, therefore, be used in their Korean form throughout this book, as explained in item A (l) d) of this section.

2 ‘Idea’ in Unification Thought is regarded as almost identical with ‘Idea’ in Plato’s philosophy.

3 Divine Principle, 2nd ed. (New York: The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, 1973), p. 22.

4 In Explaining Unification Principle, which was published in the early times of the Unification Church, it is written that the universal prime force is generated when subject and object become engaged in give-and-take action (in other words, it belongs to the created world), and that love, which originates from the give-and-take action among persons, is also a universal prime force. On the other hand, in Divine Principle, which was published later, it is written that the universal prime force seems to be a kind of physical force that belongs to God. These explanations seem to be in disagreement. What we have here, though, is simply that Divine Principle expresses only the causal aspect of the process of operation of the acting energy (Prime Force), whereas Explaining Unification Principle expresses only its resultant aspect. The unitive view cannot but be the Unification Thought view as explained above.

5 Give-and-take action refers to the giving and receiving between subject and object when they are in a reciprocal relationship. There are five kinds of give-and-take actions in the created world, which originate from the give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Image. They will be explained in Ch. 11, Methodology.

6 More precisely; Unitism is called “give-and-take Unitism,” since it is based on the give-and-take action of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang.

7 Yang and Eum are Korean terms and correspond to the Chinese terms Yang and Yin.

8 The word “Heart” can be used in both a general and in a special meaning. In its general meaning, Heart corresponds to “feeling,” “emotion,” “affection,” “or deep (sincere) mind”; this is also referred to as the mundane meaning of Heart. In its special meaning (unique to the Unification Principle and Unification Thought), Heart is the “emotional impulse to seek joy through love.” The latter meaning is causal; the former, resultant. The Unification Principle and Unification Thought make use of the word Heart in both of its meanings. Above, Heart is taken in its special meaning; but in the “Theory of Education,” I will use this term also in its mundane meaning, when, for instance, I refer to “God’s Heart at the Fall of Man,” or “God’s Heart during Restoration History.”

9 The Quadruple Base, which includes both the Inner Quadruple Base and Outer Quadruple Base, is explained in the next section of this chapter.

10 J. Stalin, Dialectical and Historical Materialism (New York: International Publishers, 1975), p. 7.

11 The Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base in the Sung Sang is called the Inner Identity- Maintaining Quadruple Base, and the Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base formed between the Sung Sang and the Hyung Sang is called the Outer Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Base. The establishment of these Quadruple Bases enables God to exist eternally.

12 In a similar manner, the process of forming the Inner and Outer Identity-Maintaining Quadruple Bases for the eternal self-existence of God can be called the two-stage structure of existence.

13 Chung-Boon-Hap is a Korean expression that may be translated as “Origin-Separation-Union.”

14 Hegel, Hegel’s Science of Logic, trans. by A.V. Miller, (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1969), p. 435-438.

15 V.I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 38: Philosophical Notebooks, (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1961), p. 360.

16 F. Engels, Dialectics of Nature (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1976), p. 170.