2 Ontology

Traditionally understood, ontology is the study of all beings—i.e., God, man, and creation (all things). In Unification Thought, however, God is dealt with in “Theory of the Original Image”; man, in “Theory of Original Human Nature”; and creation, in “Ontology.” The Unification Principle says that all things were created in God’s image, according to the Law of Resemblance. But man was also created in God’s image; consequently, nature must resemble man, though symbolically. Through studying the principles that rule nature, we can perceive some aspects of man’s original nature, which but for the human fall he would have fully developed. This gives us a basis for understanding ourselves as well as our society, in its aspects of politics, economics, and so on.

As stated in ch. 1, God’s Original Image contains the aspects of Universal Image and Individual Image. Existing beings, also, must exhibit a resemblance to these characteristics. When a being does contain the aspects of universal image and individual image, we call it an Individual Truth Body, as explained below.

I. The Individual Truth Body

A. Universal Image

1. Sung Sang and Hyung Sang

Every existing being has both the invisible aspects of function and character, and the visible aspects of matter, structure, and shape. (The latter are visible at least through scientific registration.) The invisible aspects are called Sung Sang, and the visible aspects, Hyung Sang. The Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of existing beings are derived from the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of the Original Image.

In minerals, the physiochemical character of the constituent matter is the Sung Sang,while the atomic and molecular structure of the constituent matter corresponds to the Hyung Sang.

Plants contain minerals; thus, they have both a physiochemical character and a molecular or atomic structure. Plants, however, have additional Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics. The additional Sung Sang elements are function and life, and the additional Hyung Sang elements are cell structure and tissue structure, which include the cortex, xylem, phloem, pith, and shape.

Animals, also, contain minerals, so they have physiochemical character and molecular or atomic structure. In addition, they contain all the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics of plants, namely, function, life, cell and tissue structure, and shape. In addition, animals have Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics of a higher dimension: sense and instinct in its Sung Sang,and sense organs and nerves in its Hyung Sang.

Man contains minerals in his physical body, so he has characteristics corresponding to the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of minerals. (It is said that we must ingest about forty different kinds of minerals to be well nourished.) Man also contains the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang aspects of plants. So, he has life, cells, tissue structure, and shape. Since man also contains the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang aspects of animals, he has sense and instinct (function of the physical mind) as well as organs and nerves. Furthermore, man has Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics of yet a higher dimension—i.e., a spirit-mind (Sung Sang) and a spirit-body (Hyung Sang).

As we can see, then, the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics of existing beings form a kind of staircase, which is called the Stepped Structure of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in Existing Beings. What is the significance of this? It is related to the Unification Principle teaching that man is the integration of the universe (microcosm). Here we can see that man has all the elements of the universe—i.e., the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of minerals, plants, and animals; but he also has higher characteristics, a spirit-mind and a spirit-body. The stepped structure view of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sangs of existing beings can help us to understand man as the integration of the universe, or man as the microcosm. (Fig. 7)

Today, studies about life are flourishing; there is a good deal of controversy about life’s origin and the existence of God. Several decades ago, religious persons had an advantage over materialists in explaining the mysteries of life, in that scientists, in spite of great scientific progress, had not been able to create life. For those who defend the spiritual side of reality, life can only be created by God. For them, as well as for theologians, this creation theory was the last fortress against the assault of materialism and atheism. It seems, however, that modern science is on the verge of synthesizing life. If such be the case, it would appear that we cannot but accept the materialistic theory of evolution. Proponents of this view say that in the early stages after the formation of the earth, several elements gathered accidentally to form organic substances, including amino acids. (Amino acids have actually been synthesized from inorganic gases in recent experiments.) Proteins were then synthesized from amino acids, with the help of nucleic acids (which also appeared by chance), over the period of hundreds of millions of years. Since proteins are the essential substance of life, it is claimed we do not need God to explain the appearance of living creatures.

Unification Thought rejects such a conclusion and presents a different philosophical interpretation of scientific data, based primarily on a clear understanding of the Stepped Structure of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of existing beings. Next, I shall present such data, with a concomitant interpretation.

Many scientists regard the catalytic action of enzymes, which are proteins, to be life itself. This is not correct, from the Unification Thought viewpoint. The catalytic action of enzymes takes place in every part and function of the body—such as in food digestion, in the absorption of nutritious substances into the blood—and even in the thinking process of the brain. Without enzymes we would die immediately.

Proteins, which include enzymes and many of the important structural components of the cell, are created by the work of genes, or DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). The DNA is formed of four chemical bases, aligned in pairs: adenine and thymine, guanine and cytosine. It is the arrangement and sequence of these bases that will instruct the cell to manufacture proteins. This arrangement is the genetic code, stored in the DNA, which will determine the specific characteristics of every living being. This code is transferred from parent to offspring. The arrangement of the four bases—Science tells us—can be altered, thereby changing the genetic code and the whole functioning of the cell.

Scientists can also explain how the information is transferred from the DNA to the specific area of the cell where proteins are produced, through the work of molecules of ribonucleic acid (RNA). Based on such a thorough understanding of the work of the DNA, materialists conclude that life can be totally explained by physiochemical processes alone. Moreover, it has been reported that scientists are now able to synthesize simple DNA, or part of DNA. Consequently, materialists conclude that we no longer need God to explain life.

There seems, however, to be a jump of logic here. It is up to scientists to say, “The results of the scientific experiment are such and such,” and it is up to philosophers, upon this basis, to say, “So, God exists” or “God does not exist.” If Science concludes that God does not exist, without any proof, it will cease to be Science. As yet, Science has been unable to verify the existence of God; nevertheless, we cannot deny the possibility of such verification in the future. Materialists deny the existence of God—whereas we affirm it—on the basis of identical scientific explanations.

With regard to reports that scientists can synthesize simple DNA, what do they actually mean? From the Unification Thought point of view, that which scientists can synthesize—the DNA molecule—is only the Hyung Sang part of DNA. There must also be a Sung Sang aspect, because all existing beings, including DNA, have the dual characteristics of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Accordingly, no one can say that life itself has been synthesized. For the DNA molecule is not life itself, but only the base for life, or that which carries life.

We can liken DNA to a radio: a radio is merely a device to intercept electromagnetic waves,,and to transform them into sound waves. The origin of the sound waves is not the radio itself, but the radio station. In a similar way, DNA has the ability to intercept, not electromagnetic waves, but life. From among the immense variety of electromagnetic waves, the radio picks up only those that are suitable; similarly, DNA picks up a suitable life form from a life field. The whole universe is diffused with life, which comes from the Sung Sang of God. We can say that God created DNA molecules, which pick up life, just as engineers make radio sets, which pick up electromagnetic waves. The DNA molecule is the Hyung Sang part, which “captures” the Sung Sang part—life.

If the behavior of DNA were regulated merely by physiochemical laws, it would be entirely mechanical. DNA, however, manifests selectivity and purpose. Enzymes themselves manifest selectivity and purpose. This indicates that behind the DNA molecule there is reason and will. According to Unification Thought, life is reason and will latent in the physical body. We conclude, then, that there is life behind the DNA molecule, and life gives it selectivity and purpose. Actually, a considerable number of scientists are now ready to include the life-factor in their theories connected with DNA behavior.

Can life, then, be synthesized under laboratory conditions? As we know, every created being has Sung Sang and Hyung Sang aspects, whose origin lies in God’s united Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. From recent discoveries in the field of Biology, it has become clear that now scientists can manipulate the DNA molecule to a degree never thought possible before. Besides, these discoveries are very recent, and future possibilities are wide-open. Any such manipulations, however, are only dealing with the Hyung Sang aspect of DNA. So, scientists cannot synthesize life, even if they can synthesize a DNA molecule. As explained above, the structure of the DNA molecule is nothing but a “receiver” of life. The Genesis account of the creation of man may help us to understand this point. It says: “…then the Lord God formed man of the dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” (Gen 2:7) We can think of life entering the DNA molecule in a similar way: the molecular structure, once prepared, can receive life, which comes from God.

Life, however, does not enter all molecules indiscriminately. It is captured only by a suitable molecule, DNA, as electromagnetic waves are captured only by a suitable apparatus, the radio set. The more developed the molecule, the higher the form of life it can accommodate. This can be seen through the Stepped Structure of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of existing beings, as discussed above. Life exists abundantly in the whole universe, but can only be captured by a suitable structure. The more complex the structure, the higher the form of life it will be able to receive. Here we can see that man has the highest form of life, because he has the most complex structure. (See Fig. 7—Stepped Structure of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in Existing Beings.) For this reason, man is called the integration of the universe (integrated being), having within himself the Sung Sangs and Hyung Sangs of all existing beings.

There is yet another way of looking at the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of created beings, different from the Stepped Structure thus far discussed. We can regard man simply as having mind and body (dual being); animals as having instinct and body; plants as having life and body; and minerals as having physiochemical character and atomic or molecular constituents. Existing beings, then, have a single layer of Sung Sang and a single layer of Hyung Sang, when observed from this perspective. Here, the various Sung Sangs and Hyung Sangs form a double column or row, as opposed to the ladder-like formation of the Stepped Structure. We call this the Monostratic Structure, or Horizontal Structure, of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang of existing beings.

The above two approaches relate man’s Sung Sang and Hyung Sang to those of all existing beings. There are two other ways of looking at man’s Sung Sang and Hyung Sang: as the united body of spirit-man and physical man (dual man), and as the possessor of spirit-mind and physical mind (dual mind). In the former, the spirit-man is Sung Sang and the physical man is Hyung Sang. In the latter, the spirit-mind is Sung Sang and the physical mind is Hyung Sang. From the aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang,then, Unification Thought has four conceptions of man: the integrated man, the dual being, the dual man, and the possessor of dual mind. Let it be noticed in passing that, when living in the spirit-world, the spirit-man is an individual truth body in his own right. The spirit-mind is Sung Sang, and the spirit-body is Hyung Sang.

2. Positivity and Negativity (Yang and Eum)

As previously mentioned, positivity and negativity are attributes of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang. Here, I will briefly sketch the positivity and negativity of Sung Sang, or mind (intellect, emotion, and will), and the positivity and negativity of Hyung Sang,or body. Positive aspects of the intellect are perspicacity, keen perceptiveness, imaginativeness, good memory, and so on; negative aspects are obtuseness, dullness, unimaginativeness, poor memory, and so on. Positive aspects of emotion are pleasantness, cheerfulness, brightness, and so on; negative aspects are unpleasantness, melancholy, gloominess, and so on. Positive aspects of the will are activeness, decisiveness, creativeness, and so on; negative aspects are passiveness, indecisiveness, conservativeness, and so on. Similarly, we also find positive and negative aspects in the Hyung Sang. Jutting, protruding, and convex parts, as well as front side, and so on, are positive aspects; sunken, hollow, and concave parts, as well as back side, and so on, are negative aspects. (Fig. 8)

These characteristics of positivity and negativity can be found in a man and in a woman. Now, let me explain the difference of positivity and negativity of man and of woman. This difference brings about the relationship of man and woman as the relationship of positivity and negativity. Both man and woman have positivity and negativity in their Sung Sangs and Hyung Sangs, but they are not the same. The positivity and negativity of man’s Hyung Sang and those of woman’s Hyung Sang are different quantitatively: man has more positive characteristics than woman, and woman has more negative characteristics than man. The positivity and negativity of man’s Sung Sang and those of woman’s Sung Sang are different qualitatively. For instance, the brightness of man’s mind is different qualitatively from the brightness of woman’s mind.

The positivity of man’s Sung Sang can be called masculine positivity; the positivity of woman’s Sung Sang, feminine positivity.

The negativity of man’s Sung Sang can be called masculine negativity; the negativity of woman’s Sung Sang, feminine negativity. For the sake of a better understanding of this, we can compare masculine positivity and feminine positivity to tenor and soprano; likewise, we can compare masculine negativity and feminine negativity to bass and alto, in vocal music.

Another important point must be mentioned here. The relationship between positivity and negativity is originally that between subject and object. In the case of man and woman, however, the relationship of subject and object applies basically to the husband-and-wife relationship. When their relationship is not of husband and wife, woman can at times have the subject position, and man, the object position. For example: the relationships between mother and son, elder sister and younger brother, female senior officer and male junior officer, and female teacher and male student.

Next I shall discuss the relevance of positivity and negativity with regard to the identity-maintaining and developing quadruple bases of the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang.

The identity-maintaining quadruple base enables man to have a congenitally fixed status, both in his Sung Sang and in his Hyung Sang. This explains man’s unique character (Sung Sang) and unique appearance and constitution (Hyung Sang). These unique features, however, can only be expressed through the attributes of positivity and negativity. One person may be sociable, active, and cordial, while another is aloof, quiet, and reserved. Likewise, each person’s Hyung Sang, or appearance and constitution, will display positive and negative characteristics; these are a reflection of the positive and negative characteristics of the Sung Sang, or mind. It is possible, therefore, to know a great deal about a person’s internal character simply by looking at his external appearance. Hence, only through positivity and negativity can the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang characteristics be expressed in the identity-maintaining quadruple base. Since the Sung Sang and Hyung Sang have unchanging aspects, the attributes of positivity and negativity, also, have unchanging aspects.

The give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the developing quadruple base produces a changing aspect that is both expressed through, and affected by, positivity and negativity. For example, man’s mind, which is expressed through the attributes of positivity and negativity, changes when he acquires new knowledge. There are both positive kinds of knowledge and negative kinds of knowledge. A positive or negative emotional environment, also, has a marked effect on man’s mind. Likewise, man’s body is also affected by the physical environment. Some types of physical environment are positive, such as the seaside or a tropical country; others are negative, such as shady valleys deep in the mountains or a cold country. Positive and negative kinds of food, also, affect man’s body. In conclusion, we can see that the changing aspect of the developing quadruple base, which is expressed through positivity and negativity, is also affected by the positivity and negativity of the environment.

Positivity and negativity can be seen in all beings, not only in man. A plant grows in the spring and is dormant in the winter. This is positivity and negativity in the life of a plant. A leaf has both convexity and concavity, an upper surface, which faces the sun, and an underside, which is away from the sun. Animals are active and restless sometimes, but docile and languid at others. Needless to say, their bodies, also, have positive and negative parts. Minerals have positivity and negativity both in their Sung Sang and in their Hyung Sang. Sodium chloride (NaCl), for example, consists of sodium ions (Na+) and chloride ions (Cl-), which are the positive and negative aspects of the Hyung Sang of sodium chloride. The Sung Sang part of sodium chloride, also, has both positive and negative aspects in its physical and chemical behavior.

3. Logos and the Harmony Between Positivity and Negativity

Logos is formed through the give-and-take action between Inner Sung Sang and Inner Hyung Sang, centering on purpose. In the formation of Logos, both the Inner Sung Sang and the Inner Hyung Sang are expressed through the attributes of positivity and negativity. The positivity and negativity of the Inner Sung Sang comprise the positive and negative aspects of the emotion, intellect, and will, as explained previously. The positivity and negativity of the Inner Hyung Sang can be described, figuratively, as the Inner Hyung Sang’s convexity and concavity. More precisely, the Inner Hyung Sang has the potentiality of assuming positive and negative features.

In the Outer Quadruple Base that is formed by the give-and-take action between Logos and Hyung Sang,the effect of Logos over Hyung Sang is manifested through positive and negative aspects. As we know, Hyung Sang, which is pre-energy (or pre-matter), has no convexity or concavity in itself. Why, then, is it said to have positivity and negativity? Because Hyung Sang has the potentiality of expressing positivity and negativity. We can compare the Hyung Sang of God with water. Water has no definite form in itself, but it assumes a square form when it is put in a square vessel, or a spherical form when put in a spherical vessel, or even the form of a wave, when the wind blows over its surface. Even if the wind blows uniformly, water takes the form of a wave, with crests and troughs. This means that water has the latent possibility of expressing positivity (crests) and negativity (troughs). This parallel may help us to understand the meaning of the positivity and negativity in the Hyung Sang

Thus, the principle of positivity and negativity has been operational in the process of Creation, both in the first stage—the creation of the Logos—and in the second stage—the creation of existing beings.

Not only in the creation of the universe has Logos been operational, but also in its development. In the development of the universe from a gaseous state to a solid state; in the growth of all living things, such as the growth of a plant from a seed to a fruit-bearing tree; everywhere Logos has been working through the principle of positivity and negativity. Thus, Sung Sang and Hyung Sang can neither exist, nor enter into give-and-take action, without the attributes of positivity and negativity.

Furthermore, there is yet another reason why positivity and negativity are at work in the creation process and in the development of the universe. That is to realize the unity and harmony of the universe. The Unification Principle says that all things were created as objects of beauty for man. But beauty can only be realized by harmony, such as the harmony of colors, shapes, and sounds. Harmony here can be defined as a pleasing combination of positivity and negativity. For example, flowers of many colors are usually more beautiful than flowers of a single color. Beauty, therefore, can be found where there is harmony in variation or unity in variety. Harmony in variation comes from the give-and-take action between positivity and negativity, such as positive and negative colors in the above example.¹

Flowers of many colors in a flower-bed are an example of the harmony of positivity and negativity in space. Likewise, the harmony of successive high and low notes, of long and short notes, and of strong and weak notes in music, represent harmony of positivity and negativity in time. The development of the universe, therefore, has not been monotonous, but harmonious and full of variety, largely because of the principle of positivity and negativity. All the indescribable beauty of creation exists for the joy of man, and God enjoys man’s being joyful.

I would like to give an additional explanation about the harmony of positivity and negativity in the created world. When a husband and wife relate between themselves through give-and-take action centering on the Purpose of Creation, the husband is said to be a “positive substantial body,” who has a relatively positive Sung Sang and a relatively positive Hyung Sang; the wife, on the other hand, is said to be a “negative substantial body,” who has a relatively negative Sung Sang and a relatively negative Hyung Sang. The give-and-take action between husband and wife forms a family quadruple base. Here we have an identity-maintaining quadruple base (the eternal unity of the loving husband and wife) and a developing quadruple base (the birth of children—i.e., multiplied bodies). In the animal kingdom, there are identity-maintaining and developing aspects in the give-and-take action between male and female; in the plant kingdom, the same is true with regard to the give-and-take action between stamen and pistil. These give-and-take actions are expressions of the harmony and unity between positivity and negativity, or, more precisely, between “positive substantial bodies” and “negative substantial bodies.”

In nature, we can see the harmony between mountains and plains, land and lakes, white cloud and blue sky, flying birds and a tranquil sea, and so forth. A picture contains harmonious elements, such as colors, positions, and shapes. When harmony is achieved, the picture can be called good. In dancing, there is harmony among the various kinds of costumes, among the various types of movements (such as moving to and fro, twirling around, and moving in a straight line), and between dance and costumes. In literature, there are ups and downs, climactic situations and ordinary events.

Thus, the principle of positivity and negativity works universally, whether it be in nature, in the creative arts, or anywhere else. Once we understand this principle, our appreciation of creation and of the arts begins to blossom.

4. Subject and Object

Every individual truth body contains the correlative aspects of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity, principal individual and subordinate individual (or principal element and subordinate element), etc. The Unification Principle says that the elements of each of these correlative aspects relate between themselves as subject and object.

In a nutshell, the relationship between subject and object is as that between dominating and dominated. In other words, it is as the relationship between active and passive, central and dependent, creating and conservative, initiating and responding, controlling and obeying, dynamic and static, extrovert and introvert, etc. This means that the relationship between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang in the Original Image is as that between dominating and dominated. We can say, therefore, that God created all things through the dominion of Sung Sang over Hyung Sang.

Accordingly, every individual truth body has subject and object elements within itself, and is, at the same time, connected with other individual truth bodies in subject-object relationships.

The “great macrocosm,”² which is also an individual truth body, comprises the spirit-world (subject) and the physical world, or universe (object). In the universe-astronomers tell us-galaxies (object) revolve around the center of the universe (subject), which has not yet been defined or clarified. In a galaxy, solar systems (object) revolve around a core system of fixed stars (subject). In a solar system, planets (object) revolve around the sun (subject). The earth, which is a planet, has a crust (object) and a core (subject), and rotates on its axis, which goes through the core.

Moreover, on earth there are nations—a kind of individual truth body—consisting of government (subject) and people (object). Governments consist of a head of state (subject) and ministers (object). Within the nation, families consist of a husband (subject) and a wife (object), or parents (subject) and children (object). An individual member of the family consists of spirit-man (subject) and physical man (object). The physical man consists of a brain (subject) and organs and limbs (object). Each cell has a nucleus (subject) and cytoplasm (object). In the nucleus, chromosomes (subject) are suspended in the karyoplasm (object). In a chromosome, there is DNA (subject) and a chromosomal base (object). DNA consists of the four bases (subject) and sugar and phosphate groups (object). These molecules are composed of atoms, which have a positive nature (subject) or a negative nature (object). Atoms consist of the nucleus containing protons (subject) and electrons (object).

As we can see, from elementary particles to the great macrocosm, there are numerous levels of individual truth bodies, each one consisting of subject and object parts. The individual truth body of one level constitutes only a pa rt of an individual truth body of the next level, while containing the individual truth bodies of the levels below it. For example, the solar system, which is a constituent of the galaxy, contains lower level individual truth bodies, such as Mercury, Venus, and Earth. “Individual truth body,” therefore, is a relative concept: it is a constituent, when seen from a higher level, and a synthesized being, when seen from a lower level. (Fig. 9)

5. The Difference Between Unification Thought and Traditional Philosophy Regarding the Concept of ‘Subject and Object'

The concept of ‘subject and object’ is important in Unification Thought and differs in meaning from ‘subject and object’ in traditional philosophy. It is necessary, therefore, to clarify the difference.

(a) ‘Subject and Object’ in Traditional Philosophy

Epistemologically, in the philosophy after Kant, ‘subject’ refers to man’s consciousness, or the self, which perceives things; ‘object’ refers to the thing that is perceived by the ‘subject'.

Ontologically, in the controversy between materialism and ideal ism, the concept of ‘subject and object’ is used for describing the reality of mental and material entities. A mental entity (consciousness) is called subject; a material entity (material thing), object.

Concerning man’s practice in the various fields, man is regarded as subject, while the things that are dealt with by man are regarded as object.

In sum, the concept of ‘subject and object’ in traditional philosophy is used primarily to explain the relationship between man and things.

(b) ‘Subject and Object’ in Unification Thought

According to the Unification Principle, ‘subject and object’ can be defined as follows: “when the dual beings, or dual elements, give and take something to each other, forming a reciprocal relationship, the being (or element) that is chiefly dominating, active, or central is called subject; and the being (or element) that is chiefly dominated, passive, or dependent is called object.” In any reciprocal relation ship, one of these dual beings (or elements) will necessarily take the subject’s position; the other necessarily takes the object’s position, except in the phenomenon of repulsion.

Different from traditional philosophy, the concept of ‘subject and object’ in Unification Thought applies to relationships not only between a person and a thing (being), but also between person and person, thing and thing (or being and being), element and element, and so on. In addition, it also applies to the relationship between the functional part of the mind (Inner Sung Sang)and the non-functional part of the mind (Inner Hyung Sang).

(c) Types of ‘Subject and Object’ in Unification Thought

The types of ‘subject and object’ that can be derived from the Unification Principle are as follows.

(1)Original Type

The original type is the eternal and universal relationship of ‘subject and object’ seen from the viewpoint of God’s creation. For instance, the relationships between husband and wife, parents and children, teacher and students, star and its planets, nucleus and cytoplasm (in a cell), nucleus and electron (in an atom) belong to this type. When the reciprocal relationship of ‘subject and object’ is viewed from this point of view, the subject bears the purpose and the direction of an action within that relationship.

(2) Temporary Type

The temporary type refers to relationships of ‘subject and object’ that are effective only temporarily; such relationships occur frequently in our daily lives. For instance, the relationship between lecturer and listener belongs to this type, since it is effective only while the lecture is going on.

Note that the positions of subject and object in an original-type relationship may be reversed in some cases, as for example, in a family where the wife is responsible for the family (instead of the husband) or a son or daughter makes a living (instead of the parents). Such relationships can also be regarded as being of a temporary type, but they are not effective apart from their original type. In order to be effective, these relationships must be based on the original type.

(3) Alternate Type

In the cases where the positions of subject and object alternate between themselves, the relationship is called alternate-type ‘subject and object'.

A dialogue is an example of this type of relationship. The speaker is in the subject position; the listener, in the object position. As the positions of speaker and listener alternate, so do the positions of subject and object.

(4) Undetermined Type

The undetermined type refers to a relationship of ‘subject and object’ in which a human being may freely decide what has the position of subject and what the position of object. In a relationship between an animal and a plant, for instance, the animal gives carbon dioxide to the plant and receives oxygen from it. If someone sees this relationship from the viewpoint of the flow of oxygen, the plant can be considered the subject; if he sees it from the viewpoint of the flow of carbon dioxide, the animal can be considered the subject. Thus, in this type of relationship, the position of subject and object are determined by man.

6. Paired Elements and Opposing Elements

The subject and object elements in an individual truth body perform give-and-take action between themselves, and are called Paired Elements, or Correlative Elements, in Unification Thought.

The Unification Principle, however, says that in order for a subject and an object to perform give-and-take action, they must first establish a reciprocal relationship. When this relationship is established, give-and-take action can occur; the subject and the object form a reciprocal base, constituting an individual truth body. A reciprocal base can only be established when there is a common factor at the center, a common purpose, motive, or cause. Without a common factor, no reciprocal relationship is formed, and no give-and-take action can take place. Paired elements, or correlative elements, then, refer to a subject and object that do have a common factor.

The concept of paired elements is a contrast to the notion of opposites in Marxian philosophy. Unification thought and Marxian philosophy are in agreement as far as recognizing that everything has two elements. Unification Thought, however, says that they are correlative and cooperative, whereas communist philosophy says that they oppose each other. Communist philosophy claims also that development is brought about by the struggle between the opposing elements, and this principle is called the dialectic. Unification Thought says that development is the result of harmonious give-and-take action between subject and object, and this principle is called the law of give-and-take action,or briefly, the give-and-take law. Which concept is more reasonable: opposites or paired elements?

Marx, who first expounded dialectical materialism,³ did not base his theory on the natural sciences. He supported his theory by citing the history of class struggles, especially the struggles between the productive forces and the relations of production in Europe. True philosophy, when dealing interrelatedly with the causes of natural and socio-historical development, should explain natural phenomena first, and socio-historical phenomena next. Marx, however, without any prior clarification of the causes of development in nature, insisted that socio-historical development, accompanied by class struggle, has followed the law of natural development. This is a weak point in his philosophy.

It was Engels who approached dialectical materialism through the natural sciences. After prolonged studies in physics, chemistry, mathematics, astronomy, and so on, he observed that there are two elements in every natural phenomenon and being. Then, he hastily concluded that these elements are opposites, or contradictions. That was a jump of logic.

In order to determine whether two elements are in contradiction or in harmony we need to find out whether or not there is a common factor or common purpose between them. If no common factor or purpose is found—and instead there are contradictory factors or purposes—we can say that the two elements are in contradiction. If, however, a common factor or purpose does exist, then the two elements are in harmony and can be called paired elements.

In order to substantiate his theory of opposites, Engels gives the following description of polarity in nature:

A magnet, on being cut through, polarizes the neutral middle portion, but in such a way that the old poles remain. On the other hand, a worm, on being cut into two, retains the receptive mouth at the positive pole and forms a new negative pole at the other end with excretory anus; but the old negative pole (the anus) now becomes positive, becoming a mouth, and a new anus or negative pole is formed at the cut end.⁴

The north and south poles of a magnet, as well as the mouth and anus of a worm, cannot exist independently of each other, but always exist in pairs. Engels concluded from this that they are in opposition, without any further explanation. This is the jump of logic we referred to before. We should examine whether or not a common factor or purpose exists between the two elements—N-pole and S-pole, mouth and anus—before drawing any conclusions.

If you spread iron filings around a magnet, they will form curved lines from the N-pole to the S-pole. This is the magnetic field, which the two poles form around themselves, showing that they are mutually attractive and complementary. The N-pole needs the S-pole for a partner, for it cannot make a magnetic field by itself. The same is true for the S-pole. Making a magnetic field, then, is a common factor, or purpose, between them, and we conclude that they are paired elements. If the two poles opposed each other, the iron filings would not make a line from one co the other but would scatter in repulsion.

As for the mouth and anus of a worm, we can recognize their common purpose also. Although the ingestive function of the mouth and excretory function of the anus are different, they serve a common purpose: to support the life of the worm. So, it is not correct to say that they have an antagonistic relationship, but we should say, instead, that they are paired elements.

Engels cites many other examples of opposition, such as positive and negative electricity in physics; addition and subtraction, multiplication and division, roots and powers in mathematics; life and death in biology. A careful examination of these opposites, however, reveals that every pair has a common purpose—the common purpose of making an electric field, of making mathematical calculations, and so on. Accordingly, these, also, are paired elements.

The chicken egg is another frequently presented example of opposites.⁵ The egg, containing embryo, yolk, white, and shell, brings forth a chicken, supposedly through a struggle among the elements. Are these, however, real opposites? Is there not any common purpose among them?

The function of the embryo is to grow into a chicken. The yolk and the white serve as nourishment for its growth, while the shell protects it, until it is ready to emerge as a brand-new chicken. Accordingly, the various elements have a common purpose—making a chicken in the egg—and there is no clash of interests among them. Struggle will only occur if there is a clash of interests—if one element profits at another’s expense—but no such clash can be seen here.

We can further explain this point by discussing the breaking of the shell at hatching. When the embryo has grown into a chicken, after the period of twenty-one days, the protective role of the shell comes to an end. At this point, the shell must be broken, in order to allow the chicken to come out; it becomes very thin and easy to break. The embryo does not grow into a chicken by struggling with the shell, for it is already a chicken before it starts pecking at it from the inside. The breaking of the shell, therefore, is not a sign of struggle, but a sign that the chicken is fully developed, and is ready to come out, through the cooperative phenomenon of hatching.

Through the Unification Thought view, we can recognize the flaws in the concept of opposites. The two elements have a common purpose, the purpose for the whole. Accordingly, they are not opposites, but are paired elements of subject and object. There is no struggle between subject and object. If we find struggle, it will be only between subject and subject, as explained below. (Fig. 10)

It is not a mere conjecture to say that communists are involved in all major wars today, since the communist philosophy is one of struggle. Where there is communist philosophy, there we shall find struggle-among families, social groups, and nations. Before we can even hope to end struggles, we must eradicate the ground of dialectical materialism, which is the very basis of the communist philosophy. Unification Thought, with its concept of paired elements and law of give-and-take action, is an adequate counter-proposal to it.

Undeniably, there have been numerous struggles in the course of human history, but they owe their existence to man’s Fall—that is, man’s deviation from principles. If man had not fallen, history would not have been marred by struggle. In the Unification Thought view, the struggles in human history took place for the purpose of restoring the sovereignty of goodness. The history of mankind should, therefore, be understood as the history of struggle between good and evil.

We have been deluded into believing that struggles occur between the ruling class and the ruled class, since we have heard it from the communists so many times. This is nothing but fiction. They depict the ruling class as being evil and exploitative and as giving the ruled, exploited class a miserable life. In the Unification Thought view, however, the relationship between ruling and ruled is not inherently evil; originally, this relationship should be as that of subject and object. The important question here is whether or not the ruling class is governing in a principled way.

Here I will present a brief sketch of the Unification Thought view of the history of struggle; this view will be dealt with in greater detail in the chapter on Theory of History. When society is in a state of disorder, and people no longer believe in the government, a new leader appears from among the people. When he makes himself known to the people, some will decide to follow him, while others will remain with the old leader. We have here, then, two leaders, in the position of subjects, and two groups of people, in the position of objects. The new leader, leading the new group, will then struggle with the old leader, leading the old group. The struggle is not between subject and object, since the object follows the subject. The struggle here, as in every case, takes place between two subjects. (We should note that in the natural world only the laws of Creation continue to apply; the situation there is different from that in human society, because there was no fall in the natural world.)

Someone might point out that there are numerous instances of struggle in the animal kingdom, where the strong prey upon the weak. But the struggles in the animal kingdom and those in human society are essentially different, since those among the animals are struggles between different families, whereas those in human society are struggles within the same family—the family of man. A cat, for instance, eats a rat; a snake eats a frog; a crab eats a shrimp, and so forth. Cats and rats belong to the class of mammals, but are of different order and family. Snakes and frogs are vertebrates, and thus belong to the same phylum, but are of different class, order, and family, Crabs and shrimps belong to the animal kingdom, but are of different phylum, class, order, and family. Under normal circumstances, a cat does not kill another cat; a rat does not eat another rat. In human society, however, it is not unusual for people to fight or kill one another.

Occasionally we can see struggles within the same family of animals. When a new lion comes into a group of lions, for example, there may be an actual struggle between the newcomer and the head of the group. Still, this kind of struggle is no more than a process for deciding which lion should be the head. When the decision is made, peace is restored. Such struggles, therefore, are only temporary.

Even the instances of violence now perceived among families of animals can be removed, if man-who was supposed to dominate creation with love, but failed to assume his proper position because of the Fall-finally perfects himself and dominates them well. Thus, man’s restoration will affect even nature itself. (Isaiah 65:25)

From among the major Marxist theoreticians-such as Marx himself, as well as Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao Tse-tung—no one ever said that the two opposing elements are subject and object. Maurice Cornforth, an English communist, wrote in his Dialectical Materialism that the relationship between two opposing elements is that of ruling and ruled. ‘Ruling’ and ‘ruled’, however, are not to be taken as ‘subject’ and ‘object’, since no struggle can take place between two beings that are in the position of subject and object. Cornforth’s explanation of social change is based on the Law of the Transformation of Quantitative into Qualitative Changes in the dialectic. According to this law, a sudden qualitative change occurs when quantitative change reaches a certain point. Cornforth said that although the relationship of ruling and ruled is invariable during the process of quantitative change, the relationship is reversed upon the attainment of qualitative change. Since a struggle does take place, however, we can say that the relationship of ruling and ruled is, in fact, of subject and subject. As a matter of fact, Marx, Engels, and Lenin considered the two opposing elements to be equal in position, and not to have the relationship of ruling and ruled. Accordingly, we can say that in their view the opposing elements are in the relationship of subject and subject. This further substantiates the Unification Thought view of socio-historical struggle, as explained above.

B. Individual Image

1. The Location and the Monostratic Nature of the Individual Image

The Bible describes the creation of man and the universe in the following words:

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light … And there was evening and there was morning, one day... And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from waters which were above the firmament. And it was so... a second day... and God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit...” And it was so... a third day. And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens …” And it was so … a fourth day. And God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let the birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens.”... a fifth day. And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds; cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so... God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them... And it was so... a sixth day. (Genesis 1:3-31)

The words, “it was so,” mean that all things were created according to the images in God’s mind. These mental images can be called ideas. Since every created being has its own specific characteristics, we can infer that the mental images in God’s mind, also, have specific characteristics and are the model for each being. These are the Individual Images of God. The location of the Individual Images, or mental images, of God is in the object—part of God’s mind, that is, in the Inner Hyung Sang—as explained in “Theory of the Original Image.”

What are the specific contents of the individual image of a man? Let us take a Korean as an example. First of all, this man is a living being. He is also an animal and a vertebrate. He belongs to the mammalian group of vertebrates. Of the mammalian groups, he is a primate. Among the primates, he belongs to the anthropoid apes. Among the anthropoid apes, he is a human being. Ethnically, he is oriental, and more specifically, a Korean. Thus, he has the general characteristics of living beings, animals, vertebrates, etc.

You might think, then, that the Individual Image of man consists of many levels of characteristics, or that it is polystratic. (Polystratic image implies that the various characteristics were added one by one, beginning with the most generic ones, down to the most specific.) Unification Thought, however, does not share such a view, for it would lead us to the Theory of Evolution. Instead, Unification Thought maintains that the Individual Image is monostratic—i.e.,of a single layer.

In order to understand this concept, let us refer again to the process of Creation. According to the Bible, God created man on the last day of Creation. It is the Unification Thought point of view, however, that in His mind, God conceived the image of man first. Then He conceived the images of animals, plants, and finally mineral—taking the image of man as the standard. This is the downward process of creation of images (Logos) in the mind of God. It explains why man is the integration of all things. In the phenomenal world, however, God created everything tarting from the minerals, then plants, animals, and finally man. This is the upward process of creation of substantial beings.

The image of man, therefore, was the first to be created in the mind of God and was the standard for all other images. The original Individual Image of man in the Inner Hyung Sang of God (before the creation of the universe) was none other than the image of Adam himself. It was neither vague nor abstract, but specific and concrete. Adam’s image had both a spiritual aspect (spirit-mind and spirit-body) and a physical aspect (instinct, sense, organs, nerves, tissues, cells, molecules, and atoms). Of course, Adam’s individual character and appearance also were included in the original Individual image. God then thought of another human, Eve, the helper of Adam. The image of Eve was conceived so as to enable her to be a wife to Adam. Their relationship was to be as that of positivity and negativity. The new image had additional aspect of new individual character, leaving out Adam’s individuality. In other respects, the image were quite the same.

Then God conceived the images of animals, leaving out the spiritual aspect of the image of man. Next He conceived the image of plants, leaving out the instinct and nervous system of the animals. Finally, He conceived the image of minerals, leaving out the life, tissues, and cell of the images of the plants.

We can see, then that the individual image of man was originally conceived by God before the images of animals, plants, and minerals. The individual image of man therefore, which include heart, reason, instinct, organs, cells, atoms, etc., was not formed by a process of piling up successive layers of other images—it is monostratic. God conceived all the elements of man simultaneously. The images of animals and plants, conceived through a gradual elimination of certain aspects of the image of man, are also monostratic. (Fig. 11)

The theory of continuous evolution says that protozoa evolved into mesozoa, sponges, coelenterates, echinoderms, protochordates, and cyclotomes (jawless fish). These evolved into bony fish, which evolved into amphibia, reptiles, mammals, anthropoids, and finally into mankind. There are many problems with this theory. One is that there should be no protozoa now, if they had evolved, according to the “survival of the fittest,” into mesozoa, sponges, etc. This is not the case: there are still protozoa on earth today. Another problem is that there should be intermediate beings, showing slight and gradual changes, if evolution is to be a continuous process. If there had been intermediate beings, they would have been fitter to survive than those that had existed before them, for they would have been the very ones that had survived by natural selection. Actually, we cannot find such creatures, even amongst the fossils. If the “survival of the fittest” were true, the fossils of such intermediate beings would be easily found, since the fossils of even more primitive beings have already been found. Evolutionists may point to the archaeopteryx as being an intermediate between reptiles and birds. This is the only example they can cite, and even then it is extremely difficult to establish that it actually is an intermediate. Because of these two incongruities, we must seriously question the theory of continuous evolution.

What about the theory of mutation, as presented by Hugo de Vries? This theory says that higher beings have evolved from lower beings by successive random mutations. Mutation is understood to be caused by changes in the gene structure of the cell. Genes can be affected by heat, radioactive rays, chemical agents, etc. Mutation evolutionists conclude that animals and plants have evolved as the result of countless genetic mutations over a period of millions of years, brought about through irradiation by cosmic rays or by other means, such as crossing over during cell replication.

This explanation, also, poses some difficulties, the most important of which is that there is no definite direction in the change of the genetic structure, with such accidental causes. In other words, the direction of change will be completely at random. We know that random mutations can cause changes within a species or lead to degradation; but can they bring forth higher beings, even if repeated an infinite number of times? Some people may bring up the principle of natural selection and claim that meaningful changes—that is, those with a better chance to survive—have been selected. But even in evolution by mutations, a change cannot be so drastic as to bring forth a new and higher species instantly, but it should be a slight and gradual change, since mutations are completely at random. Accordingly, there should have been intermediate beings showing the footprints of evolution, Such beings, however, were apparently unfit to survive, as shown by the absence of their fossils. Clearly, there is a contradiction here; this claim cannot be considered as valid.

According to the Unification Thought view, plants and animals have not evolved by chance and accident, although a superficial observation of the phenomenal world might suggest that opinion. Every existing being was created by God, following His plan. Unification Thought accepts genetic mutations as a possible factor in the appearance of new species. Such mutations, however, were caused, not by chance and accident, but by the work of God.

2. The Individualization of the Universal Image

The individual image in all beings is not, and cannot, be separated from the universal image of Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity. The individual image is in actual fact the individualization of the universal image.

In the case of human beings, for example, one person may express his joyfulness by laughing, another by joking. This is an example of the individual image in the positivity of the mind (Sung Sang). As for the positivity of the body (Hyung Sang), one person may have a large nose and long fingers, while another has a snub nose and short fingers. Negativity of the mind and of the body are similarly individualized. The individual image, therefore, is the individualized Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, or individualized positivity and negativity.

3. The Individualization of Chung-Boon-Hap Action

What is the relationship between the individual image and C-B-H action? To state the conclusion first, the individual image is the individualization of C-B-H action.

As previously mentioned, C-B-H action in the Original Image is the structure of God’s attributes when seen from the perspective of time. Similarly, in the created world, subject and object conduct give-and-take action centering on purpose, bringing about either a united body or a multiplied body. The time process of this give-and-take action constitutes the C-B-H action of all things.

Since each created body is individualized, or has an individual image; the C-B-H action is also individualized. Let us take man’s digestive process as an example. The digestive process is not an isolated action, but is the cooperative give-and-take action of the heart, brain, liver, pancreas, etc. The heart sends blood to the digestive areas; the liver and the pancreas secrete digestive enzymes; the brain controls the process. This process of C-B-H action is slightly different from person to person, because it is individualized. One person can easily eat eggs; another develops an allergy eating them.

As another example, let us use the give-and-take action between the spirit-mind and the physical mind (C-B-H action in the Sung Sang). The spirit-mind seeks the values of trueness, goodness, beauty, and love, while the physical mind seeks food, clothing, and shelter, following instinctive desires. The spirit-mind should be the subject, and the physical mind, object. Original man pursues a life of spiritual values first, considering food, clothing, shelter, etc., as means for attaining those values. He eats and lives in order to love other persons, his nation, and all mankind.

In fallen man, however, the relationship between the spirit-mind and the physical mind has been reversed. He seeks to gratify the desires of his physical mind more so than to attain a life of spiritual values. Furthermore, the give-and-take action between spirit-mind and physical mind is different from individual to individual, showing unique characteristics. Thus, the C-B-H action in the mind (Sung Sang) is also individualized.

Another level of give-and-take action is that between the mind and the brain. According to the Unification Principle, the human mind is the united body of the give-and-take action between spirit-mind and physical mind. The mind then enters into give-and-take action with the brain in order to cause mental activity. This is clearly different from the materialistic view, which says that the mind (spirit) is a product of the brain (matter). (Our critique of this materialistic view is explained in detail in ch. 4, Sec. IV, B.) As stated above, the give-and-take action, or C-B-H action, in the mind is individualized. Then, the individualized mind enters into give-and-take action with the brain, which is also individualized in shape, structure, function, and so on. Consequently, the give-and-take action between mind and brain, also, is individualized. Mental activity, therefore, is different from person to person; in other words, the C-B-H action of the mental process is individualized.

4. Individual Image, Idea, and Concept

'Individual Image’ is an expression peculiar to Unification Thought. ‘Idea’ and ‘concept’, on the other hand, are terms from traditional philosophy, where idea is considered to be individual, and concept, universal. ‘Idea and concept’, ‘individual and universal’, would seem to correspond to ‘Individual Image and Universal Image’ in Unification Thought, but this is not the case. In God, the Individual Image does in fact correspond to idea—i.e., the mental image of each thing to be created. Universal Image, however, is quite different from concept.

Concept can be defined as the mental image of—or a name given to—the common properties abstracted from a group of individuals. The common properties are called intension (connotation), whereas the things that belong to the same concept are called extension (denotation). In the concept of ‘animal’, for example, intension includes sense organs, nerves, mobility, etc.; extension includes dogs, chickens, fish, birds, and so on. Extension indicates the range of the concept. The extension of ‘animal’ is greater than that of ‘bird’, and the extension of ‘living being’ is greater than that of ‘animal'.

The word ‘universal’ is often used in the same way as ‘concept'. ‘Universal image’, however, is different from ‘concept’, since it is not derived from abstracting the commonness of a certain group of individuals. Universal Image refers to the common attributes (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, positivity and negativity) that every being necessarily possesses.

5. The Universal and the Individual

An important philosophical argument took place in the Middle Ages as to which is first, or more essential, idea or concept, i.e., individual or universal. The argument is known as the Universalien-streit(dispute about universals). This is the same as asking which is first in the Sung Sang of God, the Individual Image (idea), or the concept. Did God think of a universal man first, or did He think of an individual (Adam) first?

Realism supports the priority of the universal, and nominalism supports the priority of the individual. Nominalists say that a concept is a man-made label given to classify the commonness he finds in certain individuals, and there is nothing like a concept in the ultimate existence.

According to Unification Thought, God originally conceived a concrete image, or idea, of Adam, in His Inner Hyung Sang. From the image of Adam, God derived the concept of man, animal, plant, and mineral. In this sense, the idea of Adam is called the original idea, or the standard idea.

The concept of man was derived from the idea of Adam, through eliminating Adam’s individual characteristics. The ideas of Eve, Cain, and Abel were formed by adding appropriate individual characteristics to the concept of man. The concept of animal, on the other hand, was derived from the concept of man, through leaving out the spirit-man, thereby eliminating spiritual characteristics, such as heart and reason. From the concept of animal, ideas of specific kinds of animal were derived, sud1 a cow, horse, dog, hen, elephant, anchovy. These ideas came about by the process of imitating and transforming the concept of animal, which was set up as a standard. The various ideas are called ideas of similarity, and the concept of animal is called the standard concept.

Likewise, the concept of plant was derived from the concept of man, through eliminating specific characteristics pertaining to man and to animals. The idea of each kind of plant was formed by setting the concept of plant as the standard. The formation of the concept of minerals-and the ideas of the various kinds of minerals-follows a similar pattern.

In conclusion, there was an idea as the standard in the beginning. Concepts were derived from it, and finally the ideas for all created beings were formed, all within the Sung Sang of God.

6. The Individual Image and the Environment

The individual image of every existing being, which, to a large extent, is determined a priori, can change to a certain degree through give-and-take action with the environment. Accordingly, everything has a priori, determined features, as well as a posteriori, changing features. The determined features are essential and basic, since they originate from the1ndiv.idual Image in God.

Our environment comprises both natural and social beings. Under natural beings we have animals, plants, minerals, mountains, the sea, etc.; under social beings we have family members, neighbors, groups, institutes, political parties and so on. Throughout our whole lives, we are constantly engaged in give-and-take action with the environment, whereby we both influence, and are influenced by, persons and thing we come in contact with. The effect of the give-and-take action between one constituent of the environment and another is called individual effect. Owing to the countless individual effects, our individual image are continuously changing, although our basic and essential features remain unchanging.

II. The Connected Body

As already mentioned, there are content and structure in the Original image. Content refers to each Divine Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang, Positivity and Negativity, and Individual Image) and to Divine Character (Heart Logos and Creativity); Structure, on the other hand refers to Quadruple Base and C-B-H action. Every existing being is created in the direct or indirect image of God, so it resembles God both in content and structure.

Let us consider the resemblance in content. In Unification Thought, man is the direct image of God’s Divine Image and Divine Character but the rest of creation is the indirect image of God, reflecting only His Divine Image. Accordingly, this view may be called Pan-Divine-Image Theory . It must not be misapprehended as Pantheism, which says in effect, that all things are the direct expression of God. In Unification Thought, creation is not God Himself. God is the subject and all created being are His substantial objects.

Next, let us consider the resemblance in structure that is, the quadruple base. Man has an inner quadruple base, formed within him by the give-and-take action of spirit-mind and physical mind (together making the original mind). All other created beings also, have an inner quadruple base, since they, too have correlative elements within themselves. Any being that has an inner quadruple base is called an individual truth body. When we say that a being resembles God, we mean that it is an individual truth body.

In addition, beings conduct give-and-take action with other being also. A man, for example, has give-and-take action with his wife, thereby establishing an outer quadruple base—a family centering on the Purpose of Creation. In this case he is called a connected body, a he has both inner and outer quadruple bases. He is called an individual truth body when we consider only his inner quadruple base, independent of other individuals. A connected body is an individual who has established both the inner and the outer quadruple base. The term does not mean two connected individuals.

A. Connected Body and Dual Purposes

The connected body is called a being with dual purposes when seen in the light of purpose. It simultaneously has a purpose for the individual and a purpose for the whole. The purpose for the individual seeks self-preservation and self-development; the purpose for the whole seeks to contribute toward the preservation and development of the whole.

In concrete terms, an atom, for example, exists for the purpose of making a molecule, by forming an outer quadruple base through give-and-take action with other atoms. It exists for itself also, by forming an inner quadruple base through give-and-take action between its nucleus and electrons. Similarly, molecules exist for the purpose of making a cell, as well as for their own purpose. Cells exist for the purpose of making the tissues and organs of a plant or an animal, as well as for themselves. Other molecules exist for making minerals, which form the earth; the earth exists for forming the solar system; the solar system, for forming the galaxy; the galaxy, for forming the universe. And all of these exist for themselves as well. For what purpose, then, do plants, animals, and the universe exist? They exist for man. What about man? For what purpose does he exist? He exists for God. Thus, every existing being has both a purpose for the whole and a purpose for the individual. Each being is a whole, when seen from below; it is a component, when seen from above.

Incidentally, within the purpose for the whole, there is both “Sung Sang purpose” and “Hyung Sang purpose.” The purpose for the whole of the earth, for example, is to orbit the sun in order to form the solar system: this is Hyung Sang purpose. It is also the earth’s purpose to provide a suitable dwelling place for man: this is Sung Sang purpose. An electron orbits the nucleus, in order to form an atom: Hyung Sang purpose. On the other hand, an electron helps to make the physical body of man and the environment for man, the earth: Sung Sang purpose. In other words, through the Hyung Sang purpose, an existing being contributes to the individual being of the next higher stage; through the Sung Sang purpose, it contributes to the existence of man. (Fig. 12)

B. The Connected Body and the Original Image

Every existing being forms both inner and outer quadruple bases, just as both Inner and Outer Quadruple Bases are formed in the Original Image. Man’s inner quadruple base is established by the give-and-take action between his spirit-man and his physical man (essentially, spirit-mind and physical mind); his outer quadruple bases are established by give-and-take actions with other persons, such as spouse, children, friends, and fellow citizens. These relationships should be characterized by harmony. A value-centered life will bring harmony to the inner quadruple base, whereas an atmosphere of love will bring harmony to the outer quadruple base.

Though the Quadruple Bases in the Original Image are non-dimensional (in other words, they are of the absolute dimension), man, who lives in the world of three dimensions, forms quadruple bases in six directions: front and back, right and left, above and below. In front, he has teachers, leaders, and seniors; behind, pupils, followers, and juniors. His brothers and sisters and friends will be to his right, whereas his competitors and those whom he finds it difficult to get along with, to his left. Above him he will find his parents, superiors, and the head of his nation (king or president); below, he will find children and subordinates. During one’s lifetime, one should develop harmonious give-and-take action in all the six directions. The six directions, plus the spot in the center where the individual is located, make the number seven, which symbolizes man’s forming relationships in three dimensions. (In the Unification Principle, the number seven also symbolizes perfection.) These are the relationships necessary for man to enter into family and social life. This is the Sung Sang aspect of original man’s relationships as a connected body.

Moreover, man has relationships with his natural surroundings. Even distant stars influence us; scientists tell us that cosmic rays penetrating the earth’s atmosphere influence the physiological processes of living beings. We gain much from nature and influence it as well. We. are, therefore, connected with nature, and even with the whole universe, directly or indirectly. This is the Hyung Sang aspect of original man’s relationships as a connected body. As we can see from the above, the concept of ‘connected body’ is indeed very significant.

III. The Existing Mode⁶ (Yang Sang) and the Existing Position

A. The Existing Mode

In Sections I and II, I expounded the Unification Thought view on the content and structure of existing beings. In this section, I would like to discuss motion in existing beings. How do existing beings move? The answer to this question lies in the explanation of the “existing mode” of existing beings. To say the conclusion, existing mode is defined as the circular motion that results from the give-and-take action between subject and object.

As there is no effect without a cause, we would expect to find a causal motion in the Original Image corresponding to the motion of every existing being. Of course, motion can only take place in the world of time and space, so there can be no actual motion in the transcendent God; nevertheless, there is some essentiality, or cause, in God that corresponds to circular motion in the phenomenal world. This essentiality, or cause, is the harmonious give-and-take action between Sung Sang and Hyung Sang (subject and object), centering on Heart. The harmony or smoothness of this give-and-take action in the Original Image is reflected in circular motion in the phenomenal world.

According to the Unification Principle, man was created as God’s substantial direct image, while the rest of creation was created as God’s substantial indirect image. Thus, man is referred to as “figural individual truth body,” whereas creation is referred to as “symbolic individual truth body.” A brief explanation of the terms ‘truth’, ‘figural’, and ‘symbolic’ may be useful at this point.

‘Truth’ means true character, or true attributes—that is, the attributes of God. Accordingly, an ‘individual truth body’ is an individual body with God’s attributes. ‘Figural’ indicates that man is the figure, or the image, of God. In other words, man expresses, directly, the attributes of God—that is, Divine Image (Sung Sang and Hyung Sang,Positivity and Negativity, and Individual Image) and Divine Character (Heart, Logos, and Creativity). ‘Figural’, therefore, means “of direct likeness or similarity.”

With respect to creation, it is said to be the symbol of God, since it represents God only indirectly. In a certain sense, every existing being is the image of God. Creation, however, is the indirect image—more precisely referred to as the symbol—of God, whereas man is the direct image of God.

The terms ‘symbol’ and ‘figure’ can have a wide variety of application. The Korean flag, for example, is the symbol of Korea; the Korean map, on the other hand, can be considered a figure of Korea, as it resembles the shape and proportions of Korea. In the Unification Principle we can find other examples: in its second flight, the dove set free by Noah after the flood was a symbol of Jesus. By contrast, the Temple of Jerusalem (or even the Tabernacle, which was a pre-stage of the Temple), was a figure of Jesus, since it expressed the structure and function of original man.

Likewise, iron can be a symbol of the hardness of the Original Image; water, of its softness. The sea is symbolic of its breadth; sunlight is symbolic of its brightness; heat is symbolic of its warmth; and green or blue colors are symbolic of its youth. Circular motion is the symbol of the harmony and smoothness of give-and-take action in God. Moreover, love, the most essential attribute of God, is symbolized by harmonious roundness with no angularity. In fact, if we were to draw a representation of the Original Image, it would have to be a circle.

Although God has no definite form, He has the original form, which is expressed in an infinite variety of ways in the creation. God has infinite forms, united into one form; He has an unlimited form. The example of water may be helpful again. Water has no form, but can assume the form of a cube, of a sphere, or of any other container. In a similar manner, God, who has no form, can manifest Himself in the created world in any kind of form.

Although God’s manifestations in the created world can take any kind of form—such as a tree, a flower, or a bird—the most representative form is the sphere, just as the spherical drop of water is the most representative form of water. Every existing being makes circular motion, taking after the Original Image.

There are additional reasons for the necessity of circular motion in all things. Everything exists by forming quadruple bases through the give-and-take action between subject and object. Of the four elements in the quadruple base—purpose, subject, object, and united body (or multiplied body)—purpose itself does not engage in give-and-take action directly, because it is not a substantial being; neither does the united body (or multiplied body), because it is a resultant being, derived from the very give-and-take action. Consequently, only the subject and the object participate directly in the circular motion caused by give-and-take action. The center of the circular motion lies in the subject, and the object revolves around the subject. If the motion were linear, instead of circular, it would eventually come to an end; the object would be either separated from the subject, or absorbed by it. Give-and-take action would be impossible. Without give-and-take action, however, nothing can exist, since existence, multiplication, and the force of action can only be realized through give-and-take action—as explained in the Unification Principle (Principle of Creation). The object must not be separated from the subject; it must maintain a fixed distance from, and revolve around the subject.

The necessity of circular motion can also be grasped from the perspective of dual purposes. From our explanation of Connected Body and Dual Purposes, we can conclude that there is a graded series of centers, or subjects, in the created world. The subject on one level relates to the subject of the next higher level as its object. The new subject, in turn, relates to the subject of a still higher level as its object—and so forth. This graded series of centers, of subjects, is only possible because of the circular motion of the object around the subject on each level.

The moon revolves around the earth as its object; the earth revolves around the sun, as the sun’s object; the sun, along with other stellar groups, revolves around a nuclear system of fixed stars, as their object-taking two hundred and fifty million years for one revolution. The galaxy, in turn, revolves around the center of the universe (macrocosm), as the object of this macrocosmic center. At the other end of the spectrum, we have the electron revolving around the nucleus, as its object. We can see, then, that this pattern is identical at every level of the phenomenal world.

The supreme center of the created world is man. Although man is less than microscopic, when compared with the heavenly bodies, his value is greater than the whole universe. Hence, the universe revolves around man, the highest center in the series of circular movements. Of course, this revolution is not physical, but is referred to as Sung Sang motion (purposeful motion). There is harmonious give-and-take action in all creation. If man had not fallen, he, too, would be enjoying circular motion now—i.e., a harmonious life through complete give-and-take action centering on the Purpose of Creation.

What is the purpose of give-and-take action? What is the purpose of circular motion? The purpose of these things is none other than the realization of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth—the fulfillment of the Purpose of Creation.

Although the rest of creation performs give-and-take action solely according to the autonomy of the Principle, man’s harmonious give-and-take action requires his own creative effort and responsibility. Human history has developed through circular motion (harmonious give-and-take action between subject and object), even in the fallen world of wars and struggles. How much more would it have developed in the original world, with circular motion based on the Purpose of Creation!

B. The Existing Position

All beings in the natural world are individual truth bodies. The numerous complex phenomena in the natural world are caused by the countless interactions between these individual truth bodies. No matter how complex, there is order in all these interactions. All parts of an organism are related to one another in a certain order. ‘Order’ means a hierarchy of positions: it is realized when things are positioned or ranked. For example, in man’s physical body, the cells, tissues, and organs make a hierarchy of positions, with the brain in the highest position.

Since society is to be formed after the model of man, it must have order as well. The same applies to the universe, also made after the model of man. Accordingly, there is order in the solar system, in the galaxy, and in the universe-no matter how large these things may be.

Order within the created world is a reflection of the order within the Original Image. In the Quadruple Base, Heart is in the first position; Sung Sang, in the second; Hyung Sang, in the third; and the United Body (or Multiplied Body), in the fourth. Man takes after the orderly structure of the Original Image; creation—i.e., the universe and human society—takes after the orderly structure of man. Each cell in man’s body lives for the whole (the tissue or the organ) as well as for itself. The same applies to each tissue or organ. Cells, tissues, and organs are linked to one another through harmonious give-and-take relationships of subject and object. Warm blood runs through every part of the body without discrimination. Similarly, in society, every man should live for the whole (his family, his nation, and the world), as well as for himself. Men should relate to one another through orderly and harmonious give-and-take relationships of subject and object. Love should be communicated from person to person without any discrimination, just as warm blood runs through every part of the body. (Blood can thus be considered a symbol of love.) With the correct understanding of original man—or by setting original man as the standard—we can rescue society from its present confusion.

Man has always underestimated his own value, considering it only a little greater than that of the animals. Consequently, we have been unable to realize that circular motion—resulting from harmonious give-and-take relationships at all levels of creation—is for the sake of man himself. Electrons revolve around the nucleus for man, as does the earth around the sun, and so forth. For what purpose, then, does man himself exist? Man exists for God.

Note that by ‘man’ I do not mean an individual person: I mean ‘husband and wife’, for without realizing the unity of husband and wife through marriage man cannot be the center of the universe.

C. The Various Types of Circular Motion and Developing Motion

1. Types of Circular Motion

As I have explained, circular motion is the existing mode of existing beings. There are numerous kinds of motion, however, that are not literally circular. In the atom, for example, the electrons revolve around the nucleus, performing a spherical movement; yet atoms and molecules in minerals and living things do not move circularly, for they establish relatively fixed structures.

The atoms and molecules that constitute the earth’s crust, mantle, and core are strongly bound to one another, in order to solidify the earth—our dwelling place. If they moved circularly, the earth would be gaseous, and thus unfit to be man’s dwelling place. Water, on the other hand, needs to have a liquid form, with loose bonding, in order to fulfill its numerous functions; by being liquid, it can form part of the blood, which flows through all the parts of the body. In contrast, a house fulfills its purpose by being stationary.

In living things, neither cells, nor tissues, nor organs make circular movements. (Body fluids, however, such as blood and lymph, move circularly.) The cells that form the walls of the heart must be tightly bound together; they need to facilitate muscle contraction, which pushes blood out of the heart and around the body. Without this, we would be unable to live. Furthermore, people do not move around in circles: they walk on their legs and move their arms freely. If we were to move circularly, we would become extremely dizzy, to say the least, and would be quite unable to dominate the creation.

Since all things in creation act in order to accomplish the Purpose of Creation, they have various kinds of shape and perform various kinds of motion suitable to their specific purposes. When a created being cannot fulfill its Purpose of Creation through actual circular motion or with an actual spherical shape, its movement and shape will be modified as needed, becoming non-circular and non-spherical. We should, however, regard such non-circular motion and non-spherical shape as modified circular motion and modified spherical shape. Actual circular motion can be seen most clearly on the microcosmic (atomic) and macrocosmic levels, while the majority of intermediate forms of motion are modified, in order to accomplish the Purpose of Creation. Thus, there are two kinds of circular motion in the universe: actual circular motion and modified circular motion.

2. Development and Spiral Motion

The concept of development involves a changing process with a definite forward direction. A seed grows a sprout, then a stem, branches, leaves, flowers and fruits, which yield a lot more seeds than existed before. During this process, we see a change from simple to complex, from low to high and from old to new: this is development.

In the change from simple, low, and old, to complex, high, and new, we can see direction. The direction of development is determined by a purpose, or a goal. There is also a time period needed for growing and for realizing the purpose. There are three stages in the development (growth) process. In the plant, for example, there are the stages of sprouting, leafing, and flowering (including fruitage), which is the goal of the plant. Besides intragenerational development, there is also intergenerational development, which is especially significant in the case of man. Thus, there are three necessary elements in developmental motion: purpose, time, and stages.

A seed grows into a fruit-bearing tree, manifesting several stages, as mentioned above. Its new fruit falls to the ground, and seeds are dispersed again. The new seeds grow; the process repeats itself. Likewise, a young chick hatches from an egg, grows into an adult bird, and lays eggs, which hatch; the process repeats itself. Developmental motion, therefore, progresses toward a purpose (becoming a fruit-bearing tree or an egg-laying hen) and at the same time revolves, with each circle being represented by one generation. We can figuratively express this motion, which is characteristic of all living beings, with a spiral; thus, we call it “spiral motion” or “circular motion in time.” Without exception, then, spiral motion contains purpose, time, and stages.

On the other hand, the revolution of the moon around the earth, for instance, or of the earth around the sun, is “circular motion in space.” The movements of molecules, cells, tissues, and organs, which have been modified by the Purpose of Creation, are also types of circular motion in space.

Why is circular motion in time characteristic only of living beings? All created, non-living beings (such as the moon and the earth) perform circular motion in space in order to maintain their eternity. Living beings, however, do not live eternally through the circular motion in the space of (the components of) their physical bodies. They maintain their eternity through succeeding generations by spiral motion—circular motion in time.

Why should it be so? An explanation of the process of Creation may be appropriate here. Although inorganic beings were created almost infinite in number, living beings were created from a single source—just as mankind came from Adam and Eve—and they multiplied all over the earth, as the Bible says: “And God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let the birds multiply on the earth;” (Genesis 1:22) This means that the multiplication of living beings is performed according to the plan and order of God.

Since all things were created as the object of man—as the Unification Principle tells us—their numbers should increase proportionally to those of man, in order for man to live with them and have dominion over them. (This is related to the problem of natural resources.) Thus, living beings should multiply, as well as maintain their eternity, which they can do intergenerationally—i.e., by circular motion in time.

The multiplication of living things has two characteristics: diversification of features and numerical increase. All beings in creation are objects of beauty, as well as of dominion, for man. As explained before, beauty is realized by harmony in variation. Consequently, the diversification of features is necessary for creating beauty in nature. (When we look at puppies in a litter, for example, the variety of markings, hair color, and individual features is very beautiful.) Finally, with regard to numerical increase, I have already discussed what it means.

By the way, why do plants and animals not live forever? It is because they are the objects of man’s dominion, and they need not live eternally, even if man does live eternally in the spirit-world. The purpose of maintaining their eternity and multiplication can be carried out intergenerationally. It is doubtful that a dog would become more beautiful simply by living a long time—say, a hundred years or more-growing bigger and bigger and outliving its master. It would become ugly and repulsive. By contrast, how lovely a litter of puppies is!

3. The Direction of Developmental Motion

The Unification Principle says all living things grow according to the autonomy and dominion of the Principle. Growth here actually means development. All living things produce offspring when they become mature. Multiplication is development, as well. In living beings, development is irreversible; in contrast, change in inorganic things is reversible. Water, for instance, changes into vapor or ice, and back into water again. But this cannot be called development; change in inorganic things is not developmental motion.

Here I would like to discuss the concepts of autonomy and dominion of the Principle. These are essential characteristics of life. What is life, then? Life is consciousness, will, or reason latent (hidden) in the body of a living being.

Autonomy, the opposite of heteronomy, means doing something of one’s own will. The earth, for instance, does not move around the sun according to its own will, but according to mechanical laws. Living things, however, clearly have their own will and purpose, and do not merely follow mechanical laws. Even a plant has its own latent will: when physical objects impede its growth, the plant will grow around them.

Dominion means the governing or influencing action of a subject over objects. If a seed is sown in good soil, it will grow shoots and leaves, according to its autonomy. At the same time, it influences its surroundings. It takes in water, carbon dioxide, and nutrients, and releases oxygen, thereby influencing its environment. This is dominion. Thus, life is autonomous when seen from the perspective of growth, and has dominion when seen from the perspective of influencing objects.

As a seed grows and bears fruit, its developmental movement has a definite direction and purpose. There must be a force behind growth in order for the purpose to be realized. This force is “life.” The direction and purpose of development is determined by life at the starting point of growth, for life is the will latent in material—in the above instance, in the seed.

Let us consider the development of the universe. We are told that there was a big bang in the beginning, about 15 billion years ago. A gaseous whirlpool appeared, and then emerged various bodies, such as the stars and the earth. Plants, animals, and finally man appeared on earth. This process has taken fifteen billion years and has been guided through the workings of physiochemical laws. Of course, when we look at each individual stage, or when we observe only short periods of time, we can see only the workings of physiochemical laws; yet if we look at the development of the universe as a whole (through fifteen billion years), we will recognize direction and purpose (the purpose of forming the earth). The direction of the development of the universe has been determined by a certain will or reason latent behind it, which may be called cosmic will, or cosmic life.

The universe has developed in a fixed direction. Plants, animals, and man have appeared along this line of direction. There are atheists who say that this development has been purely accidental, but this is unreasonable, for in spite of an infinite number of possibilities, the universe has not only developed, but has developed in a fixed direction. In the Unification Thought view, this development has been determined by cosmic life. Cosmic life is none other than reason (or consciousness). On the other hand, it is also obvious that laws are at work in the universe. We can, therefore, conclude that Logos (reason-law) has controlled the development of the universe.

Thus, it may be said that the universe has grown according to the life latent within it, just as a seed grows according to the life within. The earth, where man, the dominator of the universe, lives, may be likened to the fruit of a seed: it is the final goal in the development of the universe, just as the fruit is the final goal in the growth of the seed.

I said before that developmental motion is limited to living beings; now I have just explained that the inorganic universe has also developed over the course of billions of years. In the light of the ideas explained here, I would like to amplify what I said before and state that all things develop according to the autonomy and dominion of the Principle (Principle of Creation).

4. Purpose and Direction

There is purpose in every development. Communists, however, will not recognize purpose. They say that there is only law, necessity, and direction in development. Why are they so adamant in their denial of purpose in development? When one recognizes purpose, the next obvious question is, “Who has established this purpose?”—for only will or reason is able to do that. The development of the universe, then, would strongly suggest the existence of God, which is anathema to the communists. So, they cannot but deny purpose. Unification Thought recognizes direction, necessity, and law in development. We emphasize, however, the existence of purpose. Direction, necessity, and law cannot be separated from purpose. Direction should be toward purpose, and there is no direction without purpose. The necessity of phenomena (i.e., the working of physical laws) is also related to purpose. For example, the necessity of the sprouting of a seed is identical to the necessity of the attainment of its goal (purpose): to develop to the fruit-bearing stage. The physical laws at work within it are for the realization of its purpose. Laws have been prepared beforehand by God for realizing the Purpose of Creation.

There are numerous physiochemical activities in our body. If we examine our blood with scientific instruments, we will be able to see these physiochemical activities, but never life itself. The direction of these physiochemical activities is controlled by life. All laws directing these physiochemical activities, therefore, are for the realization of the purpose of the body. Should we disregard the purpose, the laws would become meaningless.

Materialists generally deny any purpose in the development of the universe. The heavenly bodies and the earth are supposedly formed by chance; plants, animals, and man appeared accidentally. These processes, they insist, are merely the results of physiochemical actions and have not been controlled by reason or will.

What is the significance of this “accidental” man? What basis is there for morals, values, and ethics in an “accidental” human society? Such would be a world of survival of the fittest, where the strong and powerful prey upon the weak. There would be no eternal peace on earth. Actually, the dignity of man’s life has no meaning until we accept that man and all things have purpose.

Let me refer again to the example of the chicken and the egg. The embryo of the egg grows into a chicken. Materialists may say that this happens purely through the necessity of physiochemical laws. When I discussed “subject and object,” however, I mentioned that all elements of the egg have a common purpose. The shell is created to protect the contents. The yolk and the white are created as nourishment for the growing embryo. The embryo, which contains life, grows into a chicken. All cooperate for the common purpose of bringing a new chicken into life. If these elements existed accidentally, there would be no necessity of having a yolk and a white in the egg. There could just as easily be stones or sand in it. I am sure none of you have ever seen an egg with stones and sand instead of yolk and white. We should recognize the purpose of the egg. Direction, necessity, and law in the growth of an embryo cannot be reasonably explained until we do.

In the “Theory of the Original Image,” the first step of Creation is the formation of the Logos (Inner Developing Quadruple Base) by the give-and-take action between the Inner Sung Sang(reason ) and Inner Hyung Sang (law), centering on Purpose. In this Quadruple Base, the center (Purpose) is first established by Heart. Next, reason and laws come to be engaged in the give-and-take action, as subject and object, in order to form Logos, centering on this Purpose. Laws are located in the Inner Hyung Sang in order to realize the Purpose of Creation. Accordingly, it is the Unification Thought view that laws are prepared beforehand, in expectation of the realization of the Purpose of Creation.

IV. Cosmic Law (Heavenly Way, Cheon-Do) and a New View of Value

A. The Seven Natures of Cosmic Law

The cosmos is vast and boundless, containing innumerable heavenly bodies. This vast and boundless cosmos, nevertheless, is controlled by one single law, namely, the Give-and-Take Law. This law is characterized by seven natures, which I would like to discuss next.

1. Correlative Elements (Paired Elements)

In order for give-and-take action to be established, there must be correlative elements of subject and object. This is a prerequisite for the cosmic law, because when there is only a single element, no give-and-take action can take place.

2. Purpose and Centrality

In order for give-and-take action between subject and object to occur, there must be a common purpose and a center between them. Since purpose and center are located in the subject, give-and-take action is performed centering on the subject.

3. Order and Locality

Since the subject’s position differs from that of the object, another prerequisite of the cosmic law is the establishment of order and locality. Every being has a specific position from which to engage in give-and-take action, and cannot perform principled give-and-take action apart from its position. If a teacher in a school, for example, leaves his position, he is no longer a teacher. The establishment of position is a necessary condition for give-and-take action. In making quadruple bases, purpose (Heart), which is the center of the subject and of the object, obviously occupies the first position; subject and object are in the second and third positions; and the united body (or multiplied body), which will be established after the give-and-take action takes place, will be in the fourth position.

4. Harmony

When the above three requirements are met, harmonious give-and-take action can be carried out; harmony, therefore, is the fourth nature of cosmic law. The materialistic dialectic attempts to explain relationships in terms of opposites, or of struggle, but this can never be the essence of give-and-take law. From celestial bodies in the cosmos all the way down to particles in an atom, all actions we see are harmonious give-and-take actions.

5. Individuality and Relationship

No being can exist or develop (change) without being engaged in give-and-take action internally and externally. Though every being relates with other beings and with the environment—and thus can be said to have relationships—each being, nevertheless, has its own individuality. For example, in the cosmos there are countless stars and planets, which are related to one another, but each one is different from the other. Likewise, in human society people are related to one another, yet every person is different from the others, both in mind and in physical constitution, and shows remarkable individuality.

6. Identity-Maintenance and Development

As explained in the “Theory of the Original Image,” there are two kinds of Quadruple Base in God. One is the Identity-maintaining Quadruple Base and the other, the Developing Quadruple Base.⁷ Accordingly, every existing being has such quadruple bases, showing unchangeability and changeability. Traditional philosophies have generally been one-sided, stressing either the aspect of unchangeability or that of changeability. By contrast, Unification Thought considers that every existing being has both aspects in harmonious unity.

Here I would like to add an explanation about development. Unquestionably, multiplication is development, but so is withering away. It may be regarded as negative development. Once I asked Reverend Sun Myung Moon if growing old is development. He answered, “Yes, it is.” Then, why? Man has a physical man and a spirit-man. Even though the physical man may be growing old and infirm, the spirit-man is still developing. Moreover, when a person is maturing, his children and grandchildren are growing up. On the whole, then, aging is development.

7. Circular Motion

When the subject and object enter into give-and-take action, a circular motion is produced, whereby the object goes around the subject. Every motion in the cosmos is circular motion-either actual or modified, and either in space or in time-expressing harmony, eternity of existence, and duality of purposes. The materialistic dialectic, also, asserts that all things move, yet it has been unable to clarify either what kind of motion they have or the reason for such motion.

This concludes my explanation about the seven natures of cosmic law (give-and-take law). These seven natures rule the cosmos and can be called secondary laws of the cosmos, when we consider the give-and-take law the primary law of the cosmos.

B. The Establishment of a New View of Value Based on Cosmic Law

The Vertical Order and the Horizontal Order

The characteristic of order and locality is one of the seven natures of the cosmic law. There are two kinds of order in the cosmos: vertical order and horizontal order. (Fig. 13)

The cosmos was made in the image of man; as regards the relationships among heavenly bodies, they were patterned after the image of a family. Accordingly, the order of the cosmos and the order of the family are similar, and we can derive the view of value, or the standard of conduct, of man by observing the cosmos. The law of nature—which is the law of force—and the law of the family—which is the law of love—correspond to each other. (Fig. 14)

In the cosmos there is vertical order; in the F family, likewise, there is vertical order and vertical love: parental love (downward) and children’s love (upward). A school, a commercial company, a social organization, and a nation are extended forms of a family in the Unification Principle view. Accordingly, they should display the same kind of order. In a school, teachers should observe the duties of teachers and should love their students (downward); students should respect and obey their teachers (upward). In a commercial company, a superior official should give directives to his subordinates with love and dignity (downward); subordinates should obey their superiors (upward). In a social organization, seniors should take care of juniors (downward); juniors should respect their seniors (upward). In a nation, the government should have clemency toward the people (downward); the people should express loyalty to the nation (upward). These are the vertical views of value, or vertical standards of conduct in human relationships.

As there is horizontal order in the cosmos, so there are horizontal order and horizontal kinds of love in the family: conjugal love as well as love among siblings. Horizontal order can be perceived among neighbors, colleagues, brethren, and human beings in general. Accordingly, our lives should reflect the virtues of reconciliation, tolerance, justice, sincerity, courtesy, modesty, compassion, helpfulness, service, and understanding. These are horizontal views of value, or horizontal standards of conduct, in human relationships. The order and the values (different kinds of love) thus established in a family become the basis of all order and values in society, nation, and world; they can be called “Basic order and values.” On the other hand, the order and the values established in society, nation, and world can be called “applied order and values,” or “order and values of resemblance,” since society, nation, and world resemble the family.

According to individuality and relationship, which are characteristics of the cosmos, every being in the cosmos has relationships with others and, at the same time, has its own characteristics, occupies its own position, and rotates around its axis to maintain its existence. In human society we should likewise establish our individuality and perfect our personality, by realizing the values of purity, honesty, righteousness, temperance, courage, wisdom, self-control, endurance, self-reliance, self-help, independence, dignity, diligence, innocence, integrity, etc. These virtues, then, should become part of our daily lives. These are individual views of value, or individual standards of conduct, which every individual should endeavor to keep. Thus, there are three kinds of views of value: vertical, horizontal, and individual. Oriental society has generally emphasized the vertical view of value, whereas Western society has emphasized the individual view of value. To a certain extent, however, both societies have recognized other views of value.

Today, there is a lot of confusion in the family, society, nation, world, as well as within ourselves, chiefly because the views of value taught by traditional religions have lost their persuasive power. Since the views of value of traditional religions offer no reasonable explanations for the teachings, it is increasingly difficult for them to be accepted by people today, who are inclined to think in a logical and analytical way. Unification Thought, however, can establish a solid basis for such views and can unite them into a new view of value, by offering philosophical explanations such as those presented above. Cosmic law is absolute and unchanging; if we fail to obey it, we will be harmed as a result. Likewise, if we disregard values in our lives, there will be harmful and detrimental consequences to our family, society, nation, world, and to ourselves. We should, therefore, establish order and realize values in our lives, in order to realize happiness, peace, and prosperity—the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.