Monism attributes oneness or singleness (Greek:μόνος) to a concept, such as to existence. Various kinds of monism can be distinguished:
Priority monism states that all existing things go back to a source that is distinct from them; e.g., inNeoplatonism everything is derived fromThe One.[1] In this view only the One is ontologically fundamental or prior to everything else.
Existence monism posits that, strictly speaking, there exists only a single thing, theuniverse, which can only be artificially and arbitrarily divided into many things.[2]
Substance monism asserts that a variety of existing things can be explained in terms of a single reality or substance.[3] Substance monism posits that only one kind of substance exists, although many things may be made up of this substance, e.g., matter or mind.
Dual-aspect monism is the view that the mental and the physical are two aspects of, or perspectives on, the same substance.
Neutral monism believes the fundamental nature of reality to be neither mental nor physical; in other words it is "neutral".
The wide definition: a philosophy is monistic if it postulates unity of the origin of all things; all existing things return to a source that is distinct from them.[1]
The restricted definition: this requires not only unity of origin but also unity ofsubstance andessence.[1]
Although the termmonism is derived from Western philosophy to typify positions in themind–body problem, it has also been used to typify religious traditions. In modern Hinduism, the term "absolute monism" has been applied toAdvaita Vedanta,[4][5] though Philip Renard points out that this may be a Western interpretation, bypassing the intuitive understanding of a nondual reality.[6] It is more generally categorized by scholars as a form of absolutenondualism.[7][8][9]
Material monism can be traced back to thepre-Socratic philosophers who sought to understand the arche or basic principle of the universe in terms of different material causes. These includedThales, who argued that the basis of everything was water,Anaximenes, who claimed it was air, andHeraclitus who believed it to be fire. Later,Parmenides described the world as "One", which could not change in any way.Zeno of Elea defended this view of everything being a single entity through his paradoxes, which aim to show the existence of time, motion and space to be illusionary.
Baruch Spinoza argued that 'God or Nature' (Deus sive Natura) is the onlysubstance of the universe, which can be referred to as either 'God' or 'Nature' (the two being interchangeable). This is because God/Nature has all the possible attributes and no two substances can share an attribute, which means there can be no other substances than God/Nature.[10]
Monism has been discussed thoroughly in Indian philosophy andVedanta throughout their history starting as early as theRig Veda. The termmonism was introduced in the 18th century byChristian von Wolff[11] in his workLogic (1728),[citation needed] to designate types of philosophical thought in which the attempt was made to eliminate the dichotomy of body and mind and explain all phenomena by one unifying principle, or as manifestations of a single substance.[11]
Monism was later also applied to the theory of absolute identity set forth byHegel andSchelling.[clarification needed][15] Thereafter the term was more broadly used, for any theory postulating a unifying principle.[15] The opponent thesis ofdualism also was broadened, to include pluralism.[15] According to Urmson, as a result of this extended use, the term is "systematically ambiguous".[15]
The mind–body problem has reemerged in social psychology and related fields, with the interest in mind–body interaction[17] and the rejection of Cartesian mind–body dualism in theidentity thesis, a modern form of monism.[18] Monism is also still relevant to thephilosophy of mind,[15] where various positions are defended.[19][20]
Substance monism, "the view that the apparent plurality of substances is due to different states or appearances of a single substance"[15]
Attributive monism, "the view that whatever the number of substances, they are of a single ultimate kind"[15]
Epistemological monism, where "ultimately, everything that can be thought, observed and engaged, shares one conceptual system of interaction, however complex."[22]
Partial monism, "within a given realm of being (however many there may be) there is only one substance"[15]
Existence monism, "the view that there is only one concrete objecttoken (The One, "Τὸ Ἕν" or theMonad)"[23]
Priority monism, "the whole is prior to its parts" or "the world has parts, but the parts are dependent fragments of an integrated whole"[21]
Property monism, "the view that all properties are of a single type (e.g., only physical properties exist)"
Genus monism, "the doctrine that there is a highest category; e.g., being"[21]
Views contrasting with monism are:
Metaphysical dualism, which asserts that there are two ultimately irreconcilable substances or realities such as Good and Evil, for example,Gnosticism andManichaeism.[22][1]
Metaphysical nihilism, negates any of the above categories (substances, properties, concrete objects, etc.).
Monism in modernphilosophy of mind can be divided into three broad categories:
Idealist, mentalistic monism, which holds that only mind or spirit exists.[1]
Neutral monism, which holds that one sort of thing fundamentally exists,[24] to which both the mental and the physical can be reduced
Material monism (also calledPhysicalism andmaterialism), which holds that the material world is primary, and consciousness arises through the interaction with the material world[25][24]
While the lack of information makes it difficult in some cases to be sure of the details, the followingpre-Socratic philosophers thought in monistic terms:[26]
Stoics taught that there is only one substance, identified as God.[28]
Middle Platonism under such works as those byNumenius taught that the Universe emanates from the Monad or One.
Neoplatonism is monistic.Plotinus taught that there was an ineffable transcendent god, 'The One', of which subsequent realities were emanations. From The One emanates the Divine Mind (Nous), the Cosmic Soul (Psyche), and the World (Cosmos).
Pantheism is the belief that everything composes an all-encompassing,immanent God,[34] or that theuniverse (ornature) is identical withdivinity.[35] Pantheists thus do or do not believe in apersonal oranthropomorphic god, but believe that interpretations of the term differ.
Pantheism was popularized in the modern era as both a theology and philosophy based on the work of the 17th-century philosopherBaruch Spinoza,[36] whoseEthics was an answer toDescartes' famous dualist theory that the body and spirit are separate.[37] Spinoza held that the two are the same, and this monism is a fundamental quality of his philosophy. He was described as a "God-intoxicated man," and used the word God to describe the unity of all substance.[37] Although the term pantheism was not coined until after his death, Spinoza is regarded as its most celebrated advocate.[38]
Pantheists are "monists" ... they believe that there is only one Being, and that all other forms of reality are either modes (or appearances) of it or identical with it.[39]
Pantheism is closely related to monism, as pantheists too believe all of reality is one substance, called Universe, God or Nature.Panentheism, a slightly different concept, is explained below in the next section.[40] Some of the most famous pantheists are theStoics,Giordano Bruno andSpinoza.
Panentheism (fromGreekπᾶν (pân) "all";ἐν (en) "in"; andθεός (theós) "God"; "all-in-God") is a belief system thatposits that the divine (be it amonotheisticGod,polytheisticgods, or an eternal cosmic animating force) interpenetrates every part of nature, but is not one with nature. Panentheism differentiates itself frompantheism, which holds that the divine is synonymous with the universe.[41]
In panentheism, there are two types of substance, "pan" theuniverse and God. The universe and the divine are notontologically equivalent. God is viewed as the eternal animating force within the universe. In some forms of panentheism, thecosmos exists within God, who in turn "transcends", "pervades" or is "in" the cosmos.
While pantheism asserts that 'All is God', panentheism claims that God animates all of the universe, and also transcends the universe. In addition, some forms indicate that the universe is contained within God,[41] like in the Judaic concept ofTzimtzum. MuchHindu thought is highly characterized by panentheism and pantheism.[42][43]
Pandeism or pan-deism (fromAncient Greek:πᾶν,romanized: pan,lit. 'all' andLatin:deus meaning "god" in the sense ofdeism) is a term describing beliefs coherently incorporating or mixinglogically reconcilable elements of pantheism (that "God", or a metaphysically equivalentcreator deity, is identical toNature) andclassical deism (that the creator-god who designed the universe no longer exists in a status where it can be reached, and can instead be confirmed only by reason). It is therefore most particularly the belief that the creator of the universe actually became the universe, and so ceased to exist as a separate entity.[44][45]
Through thissynergy pandeism claims to answer primary objections to deism (why would God create and then not interact with the universe?) and to pantheism (how did the universe originate and what is its purpose?).
The central problem in Asian (religious) philosophy is not the body-mind problem, but the search for an unchanging Real or Absolute beyond the world of appearances and changing phenomena,[46] and the search for liberation fromdukkha and the liberation from thecycle of rebirth.[47] In Hinduism,substance-ontology prevails, seeingBrahman as the unchanging real beyond the world ofappearances.[48] In Buddhism,process ontology is prevalent,[48] seeing reality asempty of an unchanging essence.[49][50]
Characteristic for various Asian philosophy, technology and religions is the discernment of levels of truth,[51] an emphasis on intuitive-experiential understanding of the Absolute[52][53][54][55] such asjnana,bodhi andjianxing: (Chinese; 見性), and the technology ofyin and yang used withinEast Asian medicine with an emphasis on the integration of these levels of truth and its understanding.[56][57][58][59]
Vedanta is the inquiry into and systematisation of the Vedas and Upanishads, to harmonise the various and contrasting ideas that can be found in those texts. Within Vedanta, different schools exist:[60]
Achintya Bheda Abheda, a school ofVedanta founded byChaitanya Mahaprabhu representing the philosophy ofinconceivable one-ness and difference. It can be understood as an integration of the strict dualist (dvaita) theology ofMadhvacharya and the qualified monism (vishishtadvaita) ofRamanuja.
The colonisation of India by the British had a major impact on Hindu society.[62] In response, leading Hindu intellectuals started to study western culture and philosophy, integrating several western notions into Hinduism.[62] This modernised Hinduism, at its turn, has gained popularity in the west.[52]
A major role was played in the 19th century bySwami Vivekananda in therevival of Hinduism,[63] and the spread of Advaita Vedanta to the west via theRamakrishna Mission. His interpretation of Advaita Vedanta has been calledNeo-Vedanta.[64] In Advaita, Shankara suggests meditation andNirvikalpa Samadhi are means to gain knowledge of the already existing unity ofBrahman andAtman,[65] not the highest goal itself:
[Y]oga is a meditative exercise of withdrawal from the particular and identification with the universal, leading to contemplation of oneself as the most universal, namely, Consciousness. This approach is different from the classical Yoga of complete thought suppression.[65]
Vivekananda, according toGavin Flood, was "a figure of great importance in the development of a modern Hindu self-understanding and in formulating the West's view of Hinduism."[66] Central to his philosophy is the idea that the divine exists in all beings, that all human beings can achieve union with this "innate divinity",[67] and that seeing this divine as the essence of others will further love and social harmony.[67] According to Vivekananda, there is an essential unity to Hinduism, which underlies the diversity of its many forms.[67] According to Flood, Vivekananda's view of Hinduism is the most common among Hindus today.[68] This monism, according to Flood, is at the foundation of earlier Upanishads, to theosophy in the later Vedanta tradition and in modern Neo-Hinduism.[69]
According to thePāli Canon, both pluralism (nānatta) and monism (ekatta) are speculativeviews. ATheravada commentary notes that the former is similar to or associated withnihilism (ucchēdavāda), and the latter is similar to or associated with eternalism (sassatavada).[70]
TheDharmakāya orTruth body which embodies the very principle ofenlightenment and knows no limits or boundaries;
TheSambhogakāya orbody of mutual enjoyment which is a body of bliss or clear light manifestation;
TheNirmāṇakāya orcreated body which manifests in time and space.[73]
ThePrajnaparamita-sutras andMadhyamaka emphasize thenon-duality of form and emptiness: "form is emptiness, emptiness is form", as theheart sutra says.[74] In Chinese Buddhism this was understood to mean that ultimate reality is not a transcendental realm, but equal to the daily world of relative reality. This idea was well-situated for the existing Chinese culture, which emphasized the mundane world and society. But this does not tell how the absolute is present in the relative world:
To deny the duality of samsara and nirvana, as the Perfection of Wisdom does, or to demonstrate logically the error of dichotomizing conceptualization, as Nagarjuna does, is not to address the question of the relationship between samsara and nirvana -or, in more philosophical terms, between phenomenal and ultimate reality [...] What, then, is the relationship between these two realms?[74]
Sikhism complies with the concept of Absolute Monism. Sikh philosophy advocates that all that our senses comprehend is an illusion; God is the ultimate reality. Forms being subject to time shall pass away. God's Reality alone is eternal and abiding.[77] The thought is that Atma (soul) is born from, and a reflection of, ParamAtma (Supreme Soul), and "will again merge into it", in the words of the fifth guru of Sikhs,Guru Arjan, "just as water merges back into the water."[78]
God and Soul are fundamentally the same; identical in the same way as Fire and its sparks. "Atam meh Ram, Ram meh Atam" which means "The Ultimate Eternal reality resides in the Soul and the Soul is contained in Him". As from one stream, millions of waves arise and yet the waves, made of water, again become water; in the same way all souls have sprung from the Universal Being and would blend again into it.[79]
According toMaimonides, God is anincorporeal being that caused all other existence.[80] According to Maimonides, to admitcorporeality to God is tantamount to admitting complexity to God, which is a contradiction to God as thefirst cause and constitutesheresy.[80] WhileHasidic mystics considered the existence of the physical world a contradiction to God'ssimpleness, Maimonides saw no contradiction.[note 5]
A very strong Jewish belief is that "[t]he Divine life-force which brings [the universe] into existence must constantly be present ... were this life-force to forsake [the universe] for even one brief moment, it would revert to a state of utter nothingness, as before the creation ..."[81]
Simultaneously, Judaism holds asaxiomatic that God is an absolute unity, and that he is perfectly simple, thus, if his sustaining power is within nature, then his essence is also within nature.[citation needed]
Christians maintain that God created the universeex nihilo and not from his own substance, so that the creator is not to be confused with creation, but rathertranscends it. There is a movement of "Christian Panentheism".[82]
InOn Free Choice of the Will,Augustine argued, in the context ofthe problem of evil, that evil is not the opposite of good, but rather merely the absence of good, something that does not have existence in itself. Likewise,C. S. Lewis described evil as a "parasite" inMere Christianity, as he viewed evil as something that cannot exist without good to provide it with existence. Lewis went on to argue against dualism from the basis ofmoral absolutism, and rejected the dualistic notion that God andSatan are opposites, arguing instead that God has no equal, hence no opposite. Lewis rather viewed Satan as the opposite ofMichael the archangel. Due to this, Lewis instead argued for a more limited type of dualism.[83] Other theologians, such asGreg Boyd, have argued in more depth that the Biblical authors held a "limited dualism", meaning that God and Satan do engage in real battle, but only due to free will given by God, for the duration that God allows.[84]
Latter Day Saint theology also expresses a form ofdual-aspect monism viamaterialism andeternalism, claiming that creation was ex materia (as opposed to ex nihilo in conventional Christianity), as expressed byParley Pratt and echoed in view by the movement's founderJoseph Smith, making no distinction between the spiritual and the material, these being not just similarly eternal, but ultimately two manifestations of the same reality or substance.[85]
Parley Pratt implies avitalism paired with evolutionary adaptation noting, "these eternal, self-existing elements possess in themselves certain inherent properties or attributes, in a greater or less degree; or, in other words, they possess intelligence, adapted to their several spheres."[86]
Parley Pratt's view is also similar to Gottfried Leibniz'smonadology, which holds that "reality consists of mind atoms that are living centers of force."[87]
Brigham Young anticipates a proto-mentality of elementary particles with his vitalist view, "there is life in all matter, throughout the vast extent of all the eternities; it is in the rock, the sand, the dust, in water, air, the gases, and in short, in every description and organization of matter; whether it be solid, liquid, or gaseous, particle operating with particle."[88]
The LDS conception of matter is "essentially dynamic rather than static, if indeed it is not a kind of living energy, and that it is subject at least to the rule of intelligence."[89]
John A. Widstoe held a similar, more vitalist view, that "Life is nothing more than matter in motion; that, therefore, all matter possess a kind of life... Matter... [is] intelligence... hence everything in the universe is alive." However, Widstoe resisted outright affirming a belief inpanpsychism.[90]
Vincent Cornell argues that theQuran provides a monist image of God by describing reality as a unified whole, with God being a single concept that would describe or ascribe all existing things.[91]
But most argue that Abrahamic religious scriptures, especially the Quran, see creation and God as two separate existences. It explains that everything has been created by God and is under his control, but at the same time distinguishes creation as being dependent on the existence of God.[91]
Some Sufi mystics advocate monism. One of the most notable being the 13th-century Persian poetRumi (1207–1273) in his didactic poemMasnavi espoused monism.[92][93] Rumi says in theMasnavi,
In the shop for Unity (wahdat); anything that you see there except the One is an idol.[92]
Other Sufi mystics however, such asAhmad Sirhindi, upheld dualistic Monotheism (the separation of God and the Universe).[94]
The most influential of theIslamic monists was the Sufi philosopherIbn Arabi (1165–1240). He developed the concept of 'unity of being' (Arabic:waḥdat al-wujūd), which some argue is a monistic philosophy.[citation needed] Born inal-Andalus, he made an enormous impact on the Muslim world, where he was crowned "the great Master". In the centuries following his death, his ideas became increasingly controversial.Ahmad Sirhindi criticised monistic understanding of 'unity of being', advocating the dualistic-compatible 'unity of witness' (Arabic:wahdat ash-shuhud), maintaining separation of creator and creation.[95][96][97][98] Later,Shah Waliullah Dehlawi reconciled the two ideas maintaining that their differences are semantic differences, arguing that the universal existence (which is different in creation to creator) and the divine essence are different and that the universal existence emanates (in a non-platonic sense) from the divine essence and that the relationship between them is similar to the relationship between the number four and a number being even.[99][100]
Although theteachings of theBaháʼí Faith have a strong emphasis on social and ethical issues, there exist a number of foundational texts that have been described as mystical.[102] Some of these include statements of a monist nature (e.g.,The Seven Valleys and theHidden Words). The differences between dualist and monist views are reconciled by the teaching that these opposing viewpoints are caused by differences in the observers themselves, not in that which is observed. This is not a 'higher truth/lower truth' position. God is unknowable. For man it is impossible to acquire any direct knowledge of God or the Absolute, because any knowledge that one has, is relative.[103]
^Strawson, G. (2014 in press): "Nietzsche's metaphysics?". In: Dries, M. & Kail, P. (eds): "Nietzsche on Mind and Nature". Oxford University Press.PDF of draft
^Stepaniants, M. (2002). Introduction to Eastern Thought. United States: AltaMira Press. p. 155.
^Roberts, M. V. (2010). Dualities: A Theology of Difference. Presbyterian Publishing Corporation.ISBN9780664234492. p. 21. Discusses why Advaita Vedanta is nondual while Kashmir Shaivism is monist.
^Frawley, D. (2015). Shiva: The Lord of Yoga. United States: Lotus Press.
^Nadler, Steven (2024),"Baruch Spinoza", in Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.),Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2024 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved2024-07-31
^ab"monism", Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Retrieved 29 October 2014.
^Robert M. Young (1996)."The mind–body problem". In Olby, R. C.; Cantor, G. N.; Christie, J. R.; Hodges, M. J. S. (eds.).Companion to the History of Modern Science (Paperback reprint of Routledge 1990 ed.). Taylor & Francis. pp. 702–711.ISBN0-415-14578-3.
^Robinson, Howard (Nov 3, 2011)."Dualism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.).Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 ed.).
^Crosby, Donald A. (2008). Living with Ambiguity: Religious Naturalism and the Menace of Evil. State University of New York Press. p. 124.ISBN0-7914-7519-0.
^Buswell, Robert E.; Lopez, Donald S., eds. (2014).The Princeton dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.ISBN978-0-691-15786-3.
^Ryan 陈明, Paul F. (2014).Chinese Medical Classics: Selected Readings. People's Medical Publishing House.ISBN9787117189316.
^Wilhelm Halbfass (1995), Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedanta, State University of New York Press,ISBN978-0791425824, pages 137–143
^Jeaneane Fowler (2012), The Bhagavad Gita: A Text and Commentary for Students, Sussex Academic Press,ISBN978-1845193461, page xxviii
^"Chapter 2".Chabad.org. Retrieved24 January 2019.
^Clayton, Philip; Peacocke, A. R. (2004).In whom we live and move and have our being : panentheistic reflections on God's presence in a scientific world. William B. Eerdmans Pub.ISBN0-8028-0978-2.OCLC53880197.
^Lewis, C. S. 1970, "God and Evil" inGod in the Dock: Essays in Theology and Ethics, ed. W. Hooper, Grand Rapids,MI: Eerdsman, pp. 21–24
^Boyd, Gregory. A 1971,God at War, Downers Grove,IL: InterVarsity Press, p. 185
^Terryl, Givens (2015).Wrestling the angel : the foundations of Mormon thought: cosmos, God, humanity. Oxford.ISBN978-0-19-979492-8.OCLC869757526.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Pratt, Parley (1855).Key to the Science of Theology. Liverpool.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^McMurrin, Sterling (1965).The Theological Foundations of the Mormon Religion. Salt Lake City.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Van Wagoner, Richard S. (2009).The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young. Salt Lake City.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Griffin, David Ray (2007).Process Theology: What It Is and Is Not. In Mormonism in Dialogue with Contemporary Christian Theologies. Macon, GA.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^Widstoe, John A. (1908).Joseph Smith as Scientist. Salt Lake City.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^abYusuf, Hamza (2009).The Creed of Imam al-Tahawi. Zaytuna Institute.ISBN978-0-9702843-9-6.
Abernethy, George L; Langford, Thomas A. (1970),Introduction to Western Philosophy:Pre-Socratics to Mill, Belmont, CA: Dickenson
Brugger, Walter, ed. (1972),Diccionario de Filosofía, Barcelona: Herder, art.dualismo,monismo,pluralismo
Buswell, Robert E. Jr.; Gimello, Robert M., eds. (1994),Paths to Liberation. The Marga and its Transformations in Buddhist Thought, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers
Chande, M.B. (2000),Indian Philosophy In Modern Times, Atlantic Publishers & Dist
Kalupahana, David J. (1992),The Principles of Buddhist Psychology, Delhi: ri Satguru Publications
Kalupahana, David J. (1994),A history of Buddhist philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publ.
Kasulis, Thomas P. (2003), Takeuchi Yoshinori (ed.), "Ch'an Spirituality",Buddhist Spirituality. Later China, Korea, Japan and the Modern World, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Liang-Chieh (1986),The Record of Tung-shan, William F. Powell transl., Kuroda Institute
Low, Albert (2006),Hakuin on Kensho. The Four Ways of Knowing, Boston & London: Shambhala
Loy, David (1988),Nonduality: A Study in Comparative Philosophy, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press,ISBN1-57392-359-1
Momen, Moojan (2009) [Originally published asThe Phenomenon of Religion in 1999],Understanding Religion: A Thematic Approach, Oxford, UK: Oneworld Publications,ISBN978-1-85168-599-8,OL25434252M
