A Summary of Unification Thought

Preface

Theory of the Original Image
I.   Content of the Original Image
II.  Structure of the Original Image
III. Traditional Ontologies and Unification Thought

Ontology: A Theory of Being
I. Individual Truth Being
II Connected Being

Theory of the Original Human Nature
I.   A Being With Divine Image
II.  A Being with Divine Character
III. A Being with Position
IV.Conclusion
V. A Unification Thought Appraisal of the Existentialist Analysis of Human Existence

Axiology: A Theory of Value
I.   Meaning of Axiology and Significance of Value
II.  Divine Principle Foundation for Axiology
III. Kinds of Value
IV. Essence of Value
V. Determination of Actual Value and Standard of Value
VI.Weaknesses in the Traditional Views of Value
VII.Establishing the New View of Value
VIII.Historical Changes in the View of Value

Theory of Education
I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for a Theory of Education
II.  The Three Forms of Education
III. The Image of the Ideal Educated Person
IV. Traditional Theories of Education
V. An Appraisal of Traditional Theories of Education from the Standpoint of Unification Thought

Ethics
I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for Ethics
II.  Ethics and Morality
III. Order and Equality
IV.Appraisal of Traditional Theories of Ethics from the Viewpoint of the Unification Theory of Ethics

Theory of Art
I.   The Divine Principle Foundation for the New Theory of Art
II.  Art and Beauty
III. The Dual Purpose of Artistic Activity: Creation and Appreciation
IV. Requisites for Artistic Appreciation
V. Technique, Materials, and Style in Artistic Creation
VI. Requisites for Artistic Appreciation
VII.Unity in Art
VIII.Art and Ethics
IX. Types of Beauty
X.  A Critique and Counterproposal to Socialist Realism

Theory of History
I.   The Basic Positions of the Unification View of History
II.  The Laws of Creation
III. The Laws of Restoration
IV. Changes In History
V. Traditional Views of History
VI. Comparative Analysis of Providential View, Materialist View, and Unification View

Epistemology
I. Traditional Epistemologies
II. Unification Epistemology
III. Kant's and Marx's Epistemologies from the Perspective of Unification Thought

Logic
I.   Traditional Systems of Logic
II.  Unification Logic
III. An Appraisal of Traditional Systems of Logic from the Perspective of Unification Thought

Methodology
I.   Historical Review
II.  Unification Methodology - The Give-and-Receive Method
III. An Appraisal of Conventional Methodologies from the Perspective of Unification Thought

Appendix
I.   Principle of Mutual Existence, Mutual Prosperity and Mutual Righteousness
II.  Three Great Subjects Thought
III. Significance of the Four Great Realms of Heart and the Three Great Kingships

Notes

Bibliography

Theory of the Original Image

As was stated in the Preface, Unification Thought is the thought which has appeared to lead humankind eternally by fundamentally solving all the difficult problems of humanity. Yet, the fundamental solution of all these difficult problems is possible only through a correct and full understanding of the attributes of God.

The theory concerning the attributes of God, in Unification Thought, is called the Theory of the Original Image. “Original Image” means the attributes of God, the causal being. The attributes of God consist of “form” and also of “function” including nature, character, ability, etc. We call the former aspect the “Divine Image” and the latter aspect the “Divine Character.”

In such historical religions as Christianity and Islam, the attributes of God have been expressed in various ways: omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, supreme good, supreme beauty, supreme truth, righteousness, love, creativity, and so on.

Unification Thought certainly affirms such characteristics as these as included among the attributes of God. Yet, we can not solve actual problems fundamentally by limiting ourselves to this traditional way of understanding God’s attributes.

Unification Thought considers such attributes as those mentioned as belonging to the Divine Character of God. A more important aspect of the attributes of God, however, is the Divine Image. The Divine Image consists of dual characteristics, as is explained in the Divine Principle. Only through a correct and full understanding of the Divine Image, as well as the Divine Character, will we be able to fundamentally solve the problems of human life, society, history, and the world.

The Divine Image of God in Unification Thought refers to the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang, and Yang and Yin, and to the Individual Images. The Divine Character in Unification Thought refers to Heart (Shimjung), Logos and Creativity. In this Theory of the Original Image, the content of the Divine Image and the Divine Character will be explained in the section “Content of the Original Image,” and the relationship between sungsang and hyungsang will be dealt with in the section “Structure of the Original Image.”

I. Content of the Original Image

The content of the Original Image refers to the attributes of God. Here, the content of the Divine Image-sungsang and hyungsang, Yang and Yin, and the Individual Images-and the content of the Divine Character- Heart, Logos and Creativity-will be explained in detail.

A. Divine Image

Divine Image refers to the “form” attribute of God. We can not see God. Yet, He has definite forms. Strictly speaking, He has the potential to take definite forms, or He has a determinativeness. This is called Divine Image. Divine Image includes sungsang and hyungsang, Yang and Yin, and the Individual Images. First, I will explain sungsang and hyungsang.

1. Sungsang and Hyungsang

God has the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang as His attributes. God’s sungsang and hyungsang are also called Original sungsang and Original hyungsang in order to differentiate them from the sungsangs and Hyungsangs of all creation. The relationship between God and all things is that of Creator and created, that is, cause and effect. Therefore, Original sungsang is the root cause of the intangible, functional aspect of all created beings, and Original hyungsang is the root cause of the tangible, material aspect of creation.

The relationship between God and human beings is that of father and children. We were created in the image of God according to the principle of “creation in likeness,” Original sungsang corresponding to the minds of human beings, and Original hyungsang corresponding to their bodies. sungsang and hyungsang are not separate, different attributes, but are harmonized as one in a reciprocal relationship.1 This is what is meant in the Divine Principle when it states that “God is the Subject in whom the dual characteristics of original internal nature [Original sungsang] and original external form [Original hyungsang] are in harmony” (Exposition of the Divine Principle, hereafter cited as DP , 19).2 Thus, God is a being with the dual characteristics of Original sungsang and Original Hyungsang  harmoniously united.

From an ontological viewpoint, the concept of Divine Image is neither just spiritual nor just material: it can be described as a “Theory of Oneness” or “Unification Theory.” It can be said that spiritualism, in limited perspective, regards only Original sungsang as the cause of the universe, whereas materialism regards only Original hyungsang as the cause of the universe. Let us consider the content of sungsang and hyungsang, and explain them in more detail.

a) Sungsang (Original Sungsang)
Original Sungsang and Created Beings

God’s sungsang corresponds to the mind of a human being. Therefore, Original sungsang is the mind of God, and it is the root cause of the intangible, functional aspects of all created beings. Thus, God’s sungsang is the root cause of the human mind, animal instinct, vegetable life, and mineral physicochemical character. In other words, God’s sungsang is manifested in space and time on various levels, forming mineral physicochemical character, vegetable life, animal instinct, and the human mind; all according to the principle of “creation in likeness.”

Even on the lowest level of the chain of being, God’s sungsang is manifested in inorganic materials and minerals as law. In plants, God’s sungsang manifests itself as life on a higher dimension (recently experiments have shown that plants have mental functions able to react to a human mind). In animals, God’s sungsang manifests itself in a still higher form of mental function as instinct. According to recent research by scholars, we can see that animals also have functions of intellect, emotion and will; they have consciousness as humans do. Yet, animals do not have the selfconsciousness which humans have.

Inner Structure of the Original Sungsang

God’s sungsang has the duality of Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang. Inner sungsang refers to the functional, subjective part, and Inner hyungsang refers to the objective part. I will explain God’s Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang, taking a human being as an example, inasmuch as the human mind resembles that of God.

Inner Sungsang

The Inner sungsang, the functional part within the sungsang, refers to the faculties of intellect, emotion and will. Intellect, which is the faculty of cognition, consists of perception, understanding and reason; emotion is the faculty of feeling joy, anger, sadness and happiness; and will is the faculty of desiring, intentionality, or determining. These faculties all work actively on the Inner hyungsang. Inner sungsang is the subjective part within the sungsang.

The perception faculty of the intellect refers to one’s ability to perceive external objects just as they are reflected on one’s five senses, or one’s ability to perceive intuitively; understanding refers to one’s ability to perceive logically following cause and effect; and reason refers to one’s ability to comprehend universal truths, and one’s capacity for conceptualization.

These three functions can be explained by taking as an example the process of Isaac Newton’s discovery of universal gravitation. First, Newton perceived as fact that an apple had fallen from an apple tree. Next, he reflected about the cause of the apple falling, and came to understand that the earth and the apple attracted each other. Finally, by studying, experimenting, and observing, he inferred that, in the universe, all material bodies with mass-aside from the earth and the apple-attract one another. In this process, the first stage in Newton’s cognition is perception, the second stage is understanding, and the third stage is reason, which can be called universal cognition.

Inner Hyungsang

Inner hyungsang refers to the objective part within the Original sungsang, and contains elements that have form. These important elements include ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles.

i) Ideas: Ideas are concrete representations or images of individual created beings within God’s sungsang. We human beings also have concrete pictures of individual created beings in the objective world within our minds as images, and those images are our ideas. Our ideas come from our experiences, but in God, the absolute being, ideas have existed within Him from the beginning.

ii) Concepts: A concept is an abstract and universal image, which arises from the common elements among a group of ideas. Common elements among the ideas of dog, chicken, cow, and pig include, for example, “movement” and “senses.” These are collected into an image, and we obtain an abstract image of “animal,” which is a concept. Concepts may be further differentiated as specific concepts and generic concepts.

iii) Laws (Principles): Laws or principles in the Inner hyungsang are the original laws at the root of natural laws and norms (laws of value). In other words, it is in and through the numerous natural laws of nature and norms of human life that these original laws find their expression. It can be seen that, as the seed of a plant germinates, and its trunk and branches grow, and many leaves develop, these natural laws, and human norms as well, all derive from the original laws in God.

iv) Mathematical Principles: Mathematical principles are the ultimate cause for the mathematical phenomena inherent in the natural world. All numbers, mathematical values and formulas, which lie in mathematical phenomena, come ultimately from the mathematical principles in the Inner hyungsang. Pythagoras (ca. 570-496) asserted that numbers are  the root of all things. The British physicist Paul Dirac (1902-84), who contributed to the formulation of quantum mechanics, held that “God is a high-level mathematician using high-level mathematics in forming the universe.” 3 The numbers and mathematics referred to here are the mathematical principles in the Inner hyungsang.

Divine Principle and Biblical Foundation for the Inner hyungsang

I would like to explain about the foundation for the Inner hyungsang as it can be found in the Divine Principle and in the Bible.

i) Inner hyungsang: In the Divine Principle it is written, “The inner quality, though invisible, possesses a certain structure which is manifested visibly in the particular outer form. The inner quality is called internal nature, and the outer form or shape is called external form” (DP , 17). This passage means that prior to the visible forms, there exists a form within the sungsang. This refers to the Inner hyungsang.

ii) Ideas and Concepts: The Bible says, “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:27, Revised Standard Version) (hereafter Biblical quotations are from RSV). On each day, God said, “Let there be….” And it was so. And God saw that it was good (Gen. 1:3-31). This means that all things were created according to the ideas and concepts He had in His mind.

iii) Laws (Principles): In the Divine Principle it is written, “God made the world and carried out His providence according to the Principle” (DP , Korean version, 108)4, “[God is] the Author of the Principle” (DP , 43), “Although God created human beings based on the Principle, He governs us through love” (DP , 66). Thus God first established the Principle and then He created human beings and all things.

iv) Mathematical Principles : In the Divine Principle it is written, “The universe unfolds and manifests God’s original internal nature and original external form based on mathematical principles. Hence, we can infer that one aspect of God’s nature is mathematical” (DP , 41), and “God exists upon His Principle, which has a numerical aspect” (DP , 294). We can, therefore, understand that all of the elements that constitute the Inner hyungsang have a reference in the Divine Principle and in the Bible.

So far, I have explained about the functional part (Inner sungsang) and objective part (Inner hyungsang) in God’s Original sungsang through comparisons with a human mind. It is for the purpose of solving actual problems that I have explained God’s Original sungsang in some detail. For example, when we say that intellect, emotion and will are centered on Heart, this means that the values of truth, beauty, and goodness-the values which correspond to intellect, emotion and will, respectively-are based on love. Inner hyungsang is objective to Inner sungsang consisting of intellect, emotion, and will; and at the same time, together with Original hyungsang, it is the cause of the tangible aspects of all created beings. From this, it may be concluded that, in our actual life, we should give priority to a life of value (truth, goodness, and beauty) over a material life of food, clothing and shelter.

Next, I would like to explain about God’s hyungsang in more detail.

b) hyungsang (Original hyungsang)

Original hyungsang and Created Beings

In terms of a human being, God’s hyungsang corresponds to the human body. It is the fundamental cause of the corporeal, material aspect of all created beings: the human body, the animal body, plant cells and tissues, and the atoms and molecules of minerals. In other words, God’s hyungsang was manifested in different forms in time and space. This, again, reflects the principle of “creation in likeness.”

Thus, the fundamental cause of the corporeal aspect of all created beings is God’s hyungsang, and it has two characters. One is the material element, and the other is the potential for a limitless number of forms.  (The origin of the actual forms of all things exists in the Inner hyungsang.)

Here, I can explain the potential for a limitless number of forms by taking the example of water. Water itself has no definite shape of its own. However, it takes various shapes according to its container. In a circular container, it appears as circular; in a rectangular container, it appears rectangular; and in a tall container, it appears columnar. It is because water itself is shapeless and has the potential for a limitless number of forms that an accomodation into any shape is possible. In other words, water exists in countless shapes. In an analogous manner, God’s hyungsang has no specific form of its own, and yet it possesses the nature of adjusting itself to any image, or adapting itself to countless forms. Thus, the fundamental cause of the corporeal aspect of created beings has two characteristics: the material element and the potential for a limitless number of forms.

In human creative activities, visible materials (plaster or marble in the case of a sculpture, for example) are transformed in such a way as to conform to the design of the artist’s mind. In other words, it can be said that the creative activity is the transformation of materials according to the artist’s design. A similar thing can be said for God and His creation. God put the material elements of the Original hyungsang, having the potential for a limitless number of forms, into the mold of the Inner hyungsang in making all things with definite concrete forms. This was the manner of God’s creation.

Original hyungsang and Science

The fundamental material element, which is the fundamental cause of the corporeal aspect of created beings, is also the fundamental cause of the “matter” that science has been pursuing. Let us look more closely at the fundamental material element as seen by science.

According to today’s science, the fundamental cause of matter is energy (physical energy) which gives rise to elementary particles: That energy has both particle and wave natures. However, since science only conducts its research within the parameters of the phenomenal, resultant world, the energy science is describing is not yet the fundamental and primary cause of matter. The Theory of the Original Image holds that the ultimate cause of matter lies in the Original hyungsang. Thus, the Original hyungsang is the stage just prior to the physical energy being described by science, and so it can be called “prior-stage energy” or simply “pre-energy.” 5

Original hyungsang and Force

In God’s creation, two kinds of energy-”forming energy” and “acting energy” -are generated from the pre-energy in the Original hyungsang through give and receive action (which will be explained in the next section “Structure of the Original Image”). Forming energy is that energy which becomes particles and creates material. On the other hand, acting energy is that energy which acts upon all things and is manifested as the force that causes give and receive action (i.e., centripetal force and centrifugal force) among all things. This causal force is called “Prime Force” in Unification Thought. When Prime Force acts horizontally as the acting force among all things, it is called “Universal Prime Force.” 6

Forming energy and acting energy both appear from the Original hyungsang when it is engaged in give and receive action with the Original sungsang. Heart, the root of love, is the base of give and receive action and therefore, the two energies are both the unity of physical energy and the force of love. Thus, the force of love is contained in Prime Force, and in Universal Prime Force as well. (Since his New Hope Banquet speech in May, 1975, Rev. Sun Myung Moon has often mentioned that the force of love is acting in Universal Prime Force.)

Difference and Homogeneity between sungsang and hyungsang

The question of whether sungsang and hyungsang are essentially heterogeneous or homogeneous, that is, the question concerning the difference between sungsang and hyungsang should be considered. What position does the “theory of the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang” occupy among the ontologies of traditional philosophies? Is the “theory of the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang” a monism or a dualism? Is it materialistic or idealistic?

Here, monism refers either to monistic materialism, which asserts that the origin of the universe is solely matter, or to monistic spiritualism (idealism), which asserts that the origin of the universe is solely spirit. Marxist materialism is an example of the former, and Hegelian idealism is an example of the latter. Dualism holds that matter and spirit are separate entities, which gave rise to the universe. For example, Cartesian dualism recognizes the two distinct substances of thought (spirit) and extension (matter).

Given this, is the “theory of the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang” in Unification Thought monistic or dualistic? Stating the question in different terms, are sungsang and hyungsang in the Original Image homogeneous or heterogeneous? If we say they are completely heterogeneous, God becomes a dualistic being, and so we must examine this issue closely.

We must ask whether the Original sungsang and the Original hyungsang are two heterogeneous elements, or if they are simply two expressions of one homogeneous element. Unification Thought holds that the Original sungsang and the Original hyungsang are two forms of expression of one homogeneous element.

As an analogy we can say that steam and ice are the two different forms of expression of one entity, water (H2O). In water, the attraction and repulsion of molecules are balanced, but when it is heated, the repulsive force becomes predominant and water vaporizes into steam; when it is cooled, the attractive force becomes predominant and water turns into ice. Steam and ice are but two states of water; in other words, they are simply different expressions of the relative relationships between attraction and repulsion of water molecules. Therefore, they are not totally heterogeneous entities.

In the same way, the sungsang and hyungsang of God are the forms of expression of God’s absolute attribute. This absolute attribute refers to mind possessing energy, or on the other hand, to energy possessing mind. That is to say, energy and mind are not totally different elements, but are originally united as one. This absolute attribute manifests itself as sungsang, the mind of God, and as hyungsang, the body of God.7

sungsang consists primarily of mental elements, but there is some element of energy in it as well. In sungsang, the mental element is predominant over the element of energy. Likewise, hyungsang is made of energy, but there is some mental element included in it. Thus, sungsang and hyungsang are not totally heterogeneous elements. Both have the mental element and the element of energy in common.

In the created world, sungsang and hyungsang are manifested as the elements of spirit and matter. Yet, there are still some common elements between them. This can be understood from the following example. If an electrical impulse is applied to the nerve of a leg muscle removed from a frog, the muscle will contract. On the other hand, we can move the muscles of our hands and legs by our thinking (mind): Our thought stimulates our nerves and moves our muscles. This means that our mind has the same kind of energy as the physical electrical energy. The fact that there are people who can move another person’s body through hypnotism also indicates that there is some energy in the mind.

On the other hand, we can say that there is some sungsang element in energy. According to recent scientific understanding, elementary particles are formed in a vacuum state through the vibration of energy. When the particles are formed, however, the vibration of energy is not continuous, but occurs at graded levels, or states. Just as there are scales in music, there are graded states in the vibration of energy and, as a result, different types of elementary particles come into being at graded states. It is concluded that a sungsang aspect exists behind energy which determines the stages of the vibration of energy, in the same way that scales in music are determined by our mind.

Thus, there is some hyungsang element in the sungsang, and likewise there is some sungsang element in the hyungsang. In the Original Image, sungsang and hyungsang are united into one. They are at the root one and the same absolute attribute, from which are engendered the different sungsang and hyungsang. When this absolute attribute is manifested in the created world through creation, it becomes two different elements. This is analogous to the drawing of two straight lines from a single point. One of the lines, in this case, corresponds to sungsang (or spirit), and the other corresponds to hyungsang (or matter) (see fig.1.1).


It is written in the Bible that one can understand the nature of God by observing created beings (Rom. 1:20). If we observe created beings, we will notice that they have the dual aspects of mind and body, of instinct and body, of life and body (which is made of cells and tissues), and so on. From this we can infer that God, who is the absolute causal being, is, likewise, of dual aspects. These are the dual characteristics of God. In God, however, the dual characteristics are essentially one. In reference to this point, the Divine Principle states that “God is the Subject in whom the dual characteristics of original internal nature [Original sungsang] and original external form [Original hyungsang] are in harmony” (DP , 19). We call this viewpoint “Unification Theory.” 8 This is also called “Theory of Oneness,” 9 referring to God’s absolute attribute.

For Aristotle (384-322 BC), substance consists of eidos (form) and hylē  (matter). Eidos refers to the essence that makes a substance into what it is; and hylē  refers to the material that forms the substance. Aristotle’s eidos and hylē, which became two basic concepts in Western philosophy, correspond to sungsang and hyungsang in Unification Thought. There are, however, fundamental differences between the two views, as follows.

According to Aristotle, when we trace eidos and hylē  back to their ultimate origin, we arrive at “pure eidos” (or prime eidos) and “prime hylē .” Pure eidos, or God, is pure activity without any form; it is nothing but thinking itself. Thus, God was regarded as pure thinking, or the thinking of thinking. “Prime hylē , “ however, was considered to be entirely independent of God. Hence, Aristotle’s ontology was dualistic and thus different from Unification Thought; it is also different from the Christian view that God is the Creator of all things.

Incorporating Aristotle’s thought into Christianity; Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) considered pure eidos, or the thinking of thinking, to be God. Just as Augustine (354-430) had done before him, Aquinas claimed that God created the world from nothing. God created everything, including hylē , and since no element of hylē  existed within God, Aquinas had to affirm the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo (“creation out of nothing”). The doctrine that matter (energy) comes from nothing, however, is unacceptable to modern science, which holds that the universe is made of energy.

René Descartes (1596-1650) held that God, spirit, and matter are three different types of substance. He believed that God is the only real substance. Spirit and matter are totally independent from each other, though each of them is dependent on God. Hence, Descartes proposed a dualism. As a result, it became difficult for him to explain how spirit and matter can interact with each other.

The Flemish philosopher A. Geulincx (1625-69), succeeded Descartes in developing the doctrine of dualism. He sought to solve the problem of how mind and body interact with each other by explaining that God mediates between the two. In other words, the occurrence of a mental state gives God the occasion to cause a physical action corresponding to it; and the occurrence of a physical state gives God the occasion to cause a mental state corresponding to it. This was the essence of occasionalism.10 This explanation, however, is unacceptable expediency, which no philosopher now takes seriously. The root of Descartes’ problem was that he conceived of spirit and matter as totally heterogeneous entities.

It is clear from the above discussion that the concepts of eidos (form) and hylē  (matter), as well as spirit and matter, as held in Western thought, have presented a difficult impasse. These difficult problems have been resolved by the Unification Thought theory of sungsang and hyungsang, namely, the theory that the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang are the two forms of expression of one and the same essential element.

This concludes my explanation of “sungsang and hyungsang” of the Divine Image. Next, I would like to explain “Yang and Yin,” which is another aspect of the Divine Image.

2. Yang and Yin

Yang and Yin Are Also Dual Characteristics of God

Yang and Yin are also dual characteristics of God. However, the dual characteristics of Yang and Yin are different in dimension from those of sungsang and hyungsang, which were previously dealt with. sungsang and hyungsang are God’s direct attributes, while Yang and Yin are God’s indirect attributes; in other words, Yang and Yin are the attributes of both sungsang and hyungsang, respectively. To put it another way, God’s sungsang has Yang and Yin as its attributes, as does God’s hyungsang.

The dual characteristics of Yang and Yin are completely harmonized, as are the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang. This is what the Divine Principle means in saying that “God, as the Subject partner, has dual characteristics of Yang and Yin in perfect harmony [Chung-hwa]” (DP , 18-19). The Korean term Chung-hwa, as used for Yang and Yin, as well as for sungsang and hyungsang, means harmony and unity. The dual characteristics were united into oneness before creation was designed. From this oneness, Yang and Yin attributes were separated at the time of creation. Looking at Yang and Yin from this perspective, I Ching, or the Book of Changes, is correct in saying that “The Great Ultimate, or T’aichi, generates the two primary elements of yin and yang.”

The concept of yang and yin in Unification Thought looks similar to that in the I Ching, but they are actually different. In the Oriental concept yang means light or brightness, while yin means shade or darkness. These basic meanings are extended, and used in various ways. For example, yang is used to refer to the sun, a mountain, heaven, day, hard, hot, high, and so on, while yin is used as referring to the moon, a valley, earth, night, soft, cold, low and so on.

However, in Unification Thought yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang. This is why sungsang and hyungsang make up an individual or substance, while yang and yin only appear as the attributes of a substance. For example, the sun (an individual) is a union of sungsang and hyungsang, and the brightness of the sun is yang. In the same way, the moon itself is an individual (substance) consisting of sungsang and hyungsang, and the paleness of the moon is yin.

I would like to explain the concept of substance in Unification Thought. The concept of substance, as used in Unification Thought, originates in the Divine Principle. There, many terms with the word “substance” are used, such as “foundation of substance,” “substantial offering,” “substantial temple,” “substantial world,” “substantial embodiment,” “substantial object,” “substantial course” and so on, whereas the term “substance” traditionally refers to a created being, an individual, a human being with physical body, a material being, and so on.


Every created being, including human beings, is the united being of sungsang and hyungsang. In other words, in a created being sungsang and hyungsang are components of that individual (substance). Moreover, sungsang and hyungsang themselves each have the character of substance. It is like saying that an automobile is a product (substance) as are each of its parts, such as the tires, the transmission, and so on. Thus, especially in human beings, both sungsang and hyungsang are included in this general concept of substance in Unification Thought.

To be precise, Yang and Yin in the Original Image are called Original Yang and Original Yin, respectively (DP , 19). “sungsang and hyungsang” and “yang and yin” in a human being resemble the “Original sungsang and Original hyungsang” and “Original Yang and Original Yin” in the Original Image. As explained above, in the created world sungsang and hyungsang have the character of substance, while yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang; in other words, yang and yin are the attributes of an individual being which is the united being of sungsang and hyungsang. The unity of the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang and the dual characteristics of Yang and Yin in the Original Image is shown in fig. 1.2.


In order to know correctly the relationship between sungsang and hyungsang and the relationship between Yang and Yin in the Original Image, we need to study the relationship between the sungsang and hyungsang of a person, and the relationship between yang and yin as his or her attributes. The relationship between sungsang and hyungsang, and that between yang and yin, in human beings are shown in table  1.1.

As shown in the table, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will of the sungsang (mind) have the attributes of yang and yin. The yang aspects of the intellect are clarity, distinctiveness, and so on. The yin aspects of the intellect are vagueness, unclear ideas, and so on. The yang aspects of emotion are pleasantness, joy, and so on. The yin aspects of emotion are unpleasantness, sorrow, and so on. The yang aspects of will are activeness, creativeness and so on. And the yin aspects of will are passivity, conservativeness and so on. Needless to say, the hyungsang (physical body) also has yang aspects (protuberant parts, protrusions) and yin aspects (sunken parts, orifices).

To clarify, what is explained in the above table applies only to human beings. God is the causal being centered on Heart. Prior to the creation, He has Yang and Yin, the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang, as potentials to realize harmonious interactions. Once creation starts, Yang and Yin as potentials become active and bring about harmonious changes to the faculties of intellect, emotion, and will, and also harmonious changes to hyungsang.

Relationship between Yang and Yin, and Man and Woman

We will next examine the relationship between yang and yin with regard to man and woman. In the Orient, from ancient times, man and woman have been equated with yang and yin. In Unification Thought, however, man is considered as a “yang substantial being” and woman as a “yin substantial being.” The oriental philosophical view and the viewpoint of Unification Thought concerning man and woman seem to be, but are not, the same.

In Unification Thought, man is the “union of sungsang and hyungsang with yang characteristics” and woman is the “union of sungsang and hyungsang with yin characteristics.” Thus, man is described as a “yang substantial being” and woman as a “yin substantial being.”

It should be noted here that the meaning of yang when used in calling man a yang substantial being and the meaning of yin when used in calling woman a yin substantial being are not identical with the meanings of yang and yin as described in table 1.1. In other words, the yang and yin in sungsang and in hyungsang, as described in table 1.1, are not related to man and woman. Let me explain this point more concretely.

First, let us consider the difference between yang and yin in the hyungsang, in man and woman. In the hyungsang (body), both man and woman have the yang protuberant parts and protrusions, and the yin sunken parts and orifices, but these characteristics are not the same in man and woman. Man has more defining protuberant parts than woman does, and woman has more defining sunken parts than man does. Also, there is a difference between man and woman in the average height, and in the average size of their hips. Thus, the difference between yang and yin in a man’s and in a woman’s hyungsang is a quantitative one. In other words, man has more defining yang elements expressed while woman has more defining yin elements expressed.

Then, how about the sungsang aspect? The difference between yang and yin in a man’s and in a woman’s sungsang is not quantitative but qualitative (There is no quantitative difference in this respect between man and woman). For example, man and woman both possess clarity (yang) in the intellectual faculty of sungsang, but the character is different as between man and woman. Generally, clarity in man is expressed more in terms of comprehensive thinking, while clarity in woman is oriented more towards details. A similar thing can be said for other aspects of the intellect.



Looking at the emotional faculty, man’s sorrow (yin) tends to be of a painful kind, whereas woman’s sorrow tends to be of a grieving kind. As for the activeness (yang) of will, man’s activity generally gives an impression of hardness while woman’s activity gives a softer impression to others. Such differences between man and woman are characteristic. This can be summarized in table 1.2.

Thus, between men and women there are characteristic differences between yang and yin in the sungsangs of both. Such differences can be likened to the differences found in vocal music. In the high vocal ranges there is a difference between tenor (male) and soprano (female), and in the low vocal ranges there is a difference between bass (male) and alto (female).

Given the above, we can understand that the yang and yin of the sungsang represent characteristic differences between man and woman, and so we express man’s yang and yin as masculine, and woman’s yang and yin as feminine. Thus, we have the concepts of “masculine yang and yin” and “feminine yang and yin.”

Since the differences between man and woman in terms of hyungsang are quantitative, it is easily accepted that man is a yang substantial being and woman is a yin substantial being. In terms of sungsang, however, the differences between man and woman are characteristic. Then, why is man called a yang substantial being and woman a yin substantial being?

Concerning this point, it can be explained as follows: whether quantitative or qualitative, the difference in yang and yin between man and woman is the difference between subject and object. As will be explained below, the character of the relationship between subject and object is that of active and passive, initiating and responding, and so forth.

For example, in a yang aspect of the intellectual faculty, namely clarity, man’s comprehensiveness and woman’s orientation toward details are in the relationship of subject and object, and in a yin aspect of the emotional faculty, namely sorrow, the relationship between man’s painful sorrow and woman’s grieving sorrow is that of subject and object. Also, in a yang aspect of the volitional faculty, in other words, activeness, the relationship between man’s hardness and woman’s softness is that between subject and object. This concludes my explanation that the relationship between man and woman is that between yang and yin, and that man is called a yang substantial being and woman, a yin substantial being.

Solution of Actual Problems through Understanding that Yang and Yin Are the Attributes of Sungsang and Hyungsang

From the explanation above, it has been clarified that yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and Hyungsang. The reason why this is important is that this also becomes the standard for the solution of actual problems. Actual problems here refers to the problems between man and woman, such as degradation of sexual morality, disharmony between husband and wife, destruction of the family, and so on.

That yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and Hyungsang means that the relationship between ‘sungsang and Hyungsang’ and ‘yang and yin’ is one of substance and attribute. Between substance and attribute, substance is more important, for it is the attribute’s foundation. Without substance attribute has no meaning. Hence, without sungsang and Hyungsang , yang and yin have no meaning. Thus, sungsang and hyungsang are substances and so they are the foundations for yang and yin.

In human beings, the sungsang and hyungsang task is to realize unity between mind and body, or between spirit mind and physical mind; in other words, to attain the perfection of character. The yang and yin task, likewise, is to unite man and woman (husband and wife). Here, there are two tasks to achieve: the perfection of one’s character and the unity between man and woman. According to the statement that “yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang” it is concluded that man and woman have to perfect their characters before they get married.

In the three great blessings (perfection of indivduality, perfection of the family, and the perfection of dominion) explained in the Divine Principle, the perfection of individuality (perfection of character) is placed prior to the perfection of the family, or the unity between husband and wife. The reason for this lies in the statement that “yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang.”

In Confucius’s Eight Articles of The Great Learning, it is written that “Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated. Their families being regulated, their States were rightly governed. Their States being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy.”11 Here, the cultivation of the person is placed prior to the regulation of the family. This is because the author of The Great Learning understood this pattern, even if unconsciously.

Today, there are many social problems, including degradation of sexual morality, disharmony and destruction of the family, divorce, and so on, which are all connected to the relationship between man and woman. These problems occur because the perfection of character is not achieved prior to the perfection of the family. In other words, the “cultivation of the person” is not achieved before the “regulation of the family”.

In conclusion, the problem of man and woman, which is one of the most difficult of all actual problems today, can only be solved through the perfection of character in both man and woman before starting a family (before they get married); namely, through the cultivation of the individual prior to the regulation of the family. Thus, the statement that “yang and yin are the attributes of sungsang and hyungsang” is another way of viewing the standard for the solution of actual problems.

3. Individual Image

What Is the Individual Image?

Sungsang and Hyungsang, and Yang and Yin, are the dual characteristics of God, and these two correlative attributes are universally manifested in every being in the created world. What is meant here is explained in the Bible: Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity [Divine Image and Divine Character] has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made (Rom. 1:20). Thus, since all things universally have sungsang and hyungsang, and yang and yin, both sungsang and hyungsang, and yang and yin are called the “Universal Image.”

In addition to this, there are many kinds of minerals, plants and animals and all existing things have their unique individual natures. All heavenly bodies, whether fixed stars or planets, have their own characteristics. Especially in the case of human beings, each person has remarkably unique natures in his or her build, constitution, looks, character, disposition, and so on.

The origin of such individual characteristics of all things and human beings lies in the Inner hyungsang within God’s Original sungsang, and it is called the “Individual Image.” In other words, the Individual Images in God which are manifested in created beings are called the individual images of those created beings.

Since in human beings characteristics are different from person to person, the individual image of human beings is called the “personal individual image” and since all things (other than human beings) are different from species to species, the individual image of all things is called the “species individual image.” Thus, in human beings, the individual image refers to the characteristics of an individual, while the individual image of all things (animals, plants, and minerals) refers to the characteristics of a species, which is the specific difference on the lowest taxonomic level. The reason for differences in individual images is that human beings are created as the object partners of joy for God, and as His children, while all things are created as the object partners of joy for human beings.

Individual Image and Universal Image

At this point, the relationship between the individual image and the universal image of created beings can be explained. The individual image, which is the unique characteristic of an individual, does not exist independently of the universal image; actually, the individual image is the universal image which has been individualized.

For example, the particular look of a person is the individualization or particularization of the universal image of the human body, and the unique character of a person is the individualization or particularization of the universal image of the human mind. In human beings, the individual image is the universal image which is individualized for each individual person, and in other created beings, it is the universal image individualized for each species.

The reason that the individual image is the individualized universal image is that the Individual Images (in the Inner hyungsang), which are the cause of the individualization of created beings, are working through the give and receive actions between sungsang and hyungsang, and between Yang and Yin in the Original Image.

The Universal Image of God is also called the “Original Universal Image,” and the Individual Image within the Inner hyungsang of God is also called the “Original Individual Image.” The universal image and individual image of created beings derive from the Original Universal Image and the Original Individual Image, respectively.

Individual Image and Mutation

Let me now discuss the individual image and the gene. According to the theory of evolution, the appearance of the individual image of a living being, which is the specific difference, is understood as the appearance of a new character caused by mutation. Furthermore, the appearance of the individual image of a person is understood as having been caused by the mixing or combination of his or her parents’ DNA.

However, as understood from Unification Thought, the theory of evolution is merely a phenomenological understanding of the process of creation. In fact, the appearance of a new character in a living being, seemingly caused by mutation, is instead the creation of a new being with a new individual image through gene recombination; that is, the appearance of a new character by the mixing of the parents’ DNA is the creation of a new being with a new individual image achieved through the mixing of the hereditary information. To be precise, the creation of a new individual image in living beings or in human beings means that an Original Individual Image is given to a species or to a person.

Individual Image and the Environment

In order for an individual being, which has an individual image, to grow and develop, it must be continuously engaged in reciprocal relationships with its environment. In other words, an individual being changes, grows, and develops while being engaged in give and receive action with the environment. This is in accordance with the give and receive law that a new being or a change is caused by give and receive action.

As a matter of fact, the characteristic (individual image) of a being is, in principle, native, but some aspects of the individual image change through the influence of the environment. This is why some people misunderstand and think that characteristics are acquired a posteriori.

Also, there are different ways of change in the characteristics among people in the same environment. This means that the way one adjusts to the environment differs from person to person. This difference also derives from the individual image of a being. Such a character, which sometimes has the appearance of an a posteriori character, is the modification of an individual image, and it can be called a “transformed individual image.”

Preciousness of Human Individuality

The characteristics of created beings thus derive from the Individual Images in God, and therefore they are precious. Especially human individuality is more remarkable than others and is far more holy and precious. This is because a human being is the lord of creation, and is at the same time a united being of spirit self and physical self, wherein the spirit self lives eternally even after the death of the physical self. Human beings have been created to pursue the ideal of creation while practicing love through their individualities; therefore, human individualities are very precious and holy. Humanism also asserts the preciousness of human individuality, but so long as it does not recognize that such human individuality has come from God, it is difficult to overcome the materialistic view of human beings, which regards humans as animal like beings. Thus, the theory of the Individual Image becomes the answer to another actual question, that is, why should human individuality be respected? This concludes my explanation of the Divine Image.

B. Divine Character

In addition to the aspect of form in God’s attributes, there is the aspect of function, nature, or ability, which is called “Divine Character.” Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, supreme good, supreme truth, supreme beauty, righteousness, love, creatorship, logos, and so on, as taught in Christianity and Islam are attributes that belong to the Divine Character. Unification Thought also affirms these as belonging to the Divine Character.

However, such concepts, as given, are not so helpful in solving actual problems since they do not seem to be so related to the aspect of form (Divine Image), and they are not directly related to God’s creation. Instead, Unification Thought proposes Heart, Logos, and Creativity, which are directly related to the solution of actual problems, as constituting the Divine Character. Among these, Heart is the most important aspect of the Divine Character, never before clearly taught in any other school of thought. Let me explain these three aspects of the Divine Character and clarify how they can help us in solving actual problems.

1. Heart

What Is Heart?

Heart, or Shimjung, is the core of God’s sungsang. It is the “emotional impulse to seek joy through love.” In order to offer a correct and clear understanding of the concept of Heart, I will explain it using the convenient case of human beings.

Everybody seeks joy by their very nature. To be sure, there is no one who does not desire to be joyful. Everybody wants happiness, which is the same as seeking to be joyful. Although everybody always has the impulse to become joyful, it seems true that, until today, most people have been unable to obtain genuine and eternal joy. This is because people have tried to achieve happiness through the acquisition of money, power, and/or knowledge. But these can never bring true joy. Then, how can we obtain true joy? True joy can be obtained only through a life of true love. A life of true love means an altruistic life of service, a life lived for the sake of others, and a life lived by pleasing others with a warm heart.

Heart Is an Emotional Impulse

Let me explain the concept of emotional impulse. An emotional impulse is the irrepressible desire that wells up from within us: Normal desires might be repressed through one’s will, but emotional impulses can not be so repressed.

We know, through our daily experiences, that it is difficult to repress our impulse to seek to be joyful. We want money, a high position, knowledge, and power, because we want to be joyful; children earnestly seek to learn everything, through their curiosity, because they want to be joyful; even criminals commit crimes according to their impulse to be joyful, but in this case, in the wrong direction.

Thus, it is not possible to repress the impulse to seek joy. One’s desire will be satisfied when it is fulfilled. However, for most people the desire to seek joy remains unfulfilled. This is because they do not realize that joy can only be obtained through love. The reason why joy can be obtained only through love is that the foundation of joy lies in God.

God Is the God of Heart

God possesses Heart, or the emotional impulse to seek joy through love, and such an impulse of God was far more irrepressible than that of human beings. However incompletely, human beings have inherited the Heart of God according to the law of likeness. Accordingly, even though we are fallen and have lost true love, we still have the impulse to seek joy, and it is impossible to repress it.

In God, this emotional impulse to seek joy is grounded in the impulse to seek love, since true joy can not be obtained other than through true love. Thus, the impulse to seek love is stronger than the impulse to seek joy. The impulse to seek love is the desire one possesses wherein one can not help loving others. In other words, one can not help but seek partners of love.

The impulse to seek joy is triggered by this impulse of love: the impulse of love is primary, and the impulse of joy is secondary. Thus, love is an unconditional impulse, rather than the means for joy. The necessary result of love is joy. Thus, love and joy are two sides of a coin, and the impulse to seek joy is the impulse to seek love that has manifested.

Thus, God’s Heart can also be expressed as the “emotional impulse to love infinitely.” Love necessarily requires an object partner. Especially, the love of God is an irrepressible impulse and therefore, an object partner of love was absolutely necessary for God. Thus, creation was necessary, inevitable, and can never be considered as merely accidental.

Creation of the Universe and Heart

With Heart serving as the motive, God created human beings and all things as His object partners of love. Human beings were created as His direct object partners of love, and all things were created as His indirect object partners. The fact that all things are indirect object partners of God’s love means that all things were created to be direct object partners of love for human beings. Seen from the motive of creation, human beings and all things are object partners of God’s love, but seen from the result, human beings and all things are the object partners of God’s joy.

This theory of the creation of the universe having Heart as the motive (which is called the “Heart Motivation Theory”) is able to solve the philosophical problem of whether the creation theory or the generation theory is correct. In other words, the Heart Motivation Theory can resolve and bring an end to the controversy between the creation theory and the generation theory concerning the beginning of the universe. In generation theories, such as Plotinus’ emanation theory, Hegel’s theory of the self-development of the Absolute Spirit,
Gamow’s theory of the Big Bang, and the Confucian theory of Heaven giving birth to all things, the negative aspects of crime, evil, and confusion in the world are considered to have occurred naturally and the way to solve these problems is closed. The creation theory presented here, on the other hand, holds that such negative aspects have a cause and are thus capable of being eliminated at their very root.

Heart and Culture

In Unification Thought, the relationship between Heart and culture is explained based on the proposition that “Heart is the core of God’s sungsang.” God’s sungsang consists of Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang, wherein the Inner sungsang is more internal than Inner hyungsang, and Heart is the core in the Inner sungsang. Such relationships apply also to the sungsang of the original human being. This is illustrated in fig. 1.3.

This means that heart is the driving force behind human intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities. In other words, heart is the emotional impulse, which constantly stimulates the intellectual, emotional, and volitional faculties, resulting in intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities.

Such academic fields as philosophy and science are developed through human intellectual activity; artistic fields such as painting, music, sculpture and architecture are developed through emotional activity; and such normative fields as religion, ethics, morality and education are developed through volitional activity.

In a true human society consisting of original human beings, the motive force behind intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities is heart and love; therefore, all academic studies, artistic efforts, and normative behavior will be motivated by heart, and their aim will be the actualization of love.12 The totality of all academic fields, artistic fields, and normative fields, in other words, the totality of all intellectual, emotional and volitional activities constitutes culture. Thus, culture should originally be motivated by heart, and its aim is the actualization of love. Such a culture will last forever and, in Unification Thought, is called the “culture of heart,” the “culture of love,” or the “culture of harmony.”

Due to the fall of the first human ancestors, however, the cultures of humankind have become unprincipled, having various negative aspects, and such cultures have continued until today, all the while repeating the cycle of rising and falling. This is because heart, which should have been the core of the human sungsang, was blocked, and the impulse of heart was distorted into an impulse for egotism, or selfishness.

The best way to rectify present-day culture, which seems increasingly chaotic, is to eradicate egotism, and revitalize the impulse of heart in the core of the sungsang of human beings. Doing so can transform all the fields of culture so that they can be motivated by heart, and can pursue the actualization of love. In short, a new culture of heart and love can be established. The proposition that “Heart is the core of God’s sungsang” thus becomes a standard for solving yet another problem: how to salvage culture from its present-day crisis.

Heart and Prime Force

Let me now explain about Heart and Prime Force. All things of the universe continue to receive some force from God even after their creation. Based on this force, created beings give and receive some force among themselves. The former is a vertical force, and the latter is a horizontal force. In Unification Thought, the former is called “Prime Force,” and the latter “Universal Prime Force.” 13

In fact, Prime Force itself is a new reality formed through the give and receive action within the Original Image, in other words, through the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang. To be more precise, Prime Force is a new force formed through the give and receive action between the impulse of Heart within the sungsang and the pre-energy within the hyungsang. When Prime Force works upon all things, it becomes the horizontal Universal Prime Force, which causes give and receive actions between all things. Thus, Universal Prime Force is an extension of Prime Force.14

The fact that Universal Prime Force is an extension of Prime Force, which is formed by the impulse of Heart and pre-energy, means that the force of love, as well as physical force (energy), is at work among all things in the universe.15 Therefore, for human beings to love each other is more in accordance with the Way of Heaven, which everybody should follow, than for people to believe they can do just as they like. Thus, this theory concerning “Heart and Prime Force” becomes yet another standard for solving actual problems. It offers answers to such questions as “Should we love others without fail?,” or “Is struggle or violence necessary at certain times?,” or “Should we love our enemies or attempt to defeat them?”

2. Logos

What Is Logos?

According to the Divine Principle, Logos means “Word” or “reason-law” (i.e., “rational principle”) (DP , 170). In the first chapter of the Gospel of John it is written that all things were created by the Word of God: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made” (John. 1:1-3).

In Unification Thought, Logos as “Word” means the thought, design, or plan of God, and Logos as “reason-law” means the unity of reason and law. Reason belongs to the intellectual faculty of the Inner sungsang within the Original sungsang. However, this reason in Logos, which created all things, is different from the capacity of reason in the human mind. Human reason, the character of which is freedom, is the faculty for conceptualization, and for pursuing universal truth. Reason in Logos, on the other hand, is merely a free intellectual faculty with the power of thought.

Law, which is the other aspect of Logos, is characterized solely by a mechanical and necessary nature, without any element of freedom or purpose. Law works with precision always and everywhere, transcending time and space. Just as the hour and minute hands of a watch, which is a mechanical device, keep time always and everywhere, law functions regularly and mechanically.

Logos Is Reason-Law

Logos as reason-law needs some explanation. Reason-law means the unity of reason and law. This concept is for the purpose of establishing another standard for solving actual problems. The problem at issue is that of how the collapse of values, which is causing great confusion in society today, can be stopped.

According to the Divine Principle, Logos is the object partner of God, and at the same time has dual characteristics (DP , 170-171). This means that Logos is a kind of created being, a new being which resembles the dual characteristics of God, and which can be regarded as similar to the union of sungsang and hyungsang.

Since Logos is the Word, or plan, of God, and since all things were created by and through it, Logos itself can not be a created being on the same level as all other beings. Logos, which is the object partner of God, and which resembles His dual characteristics, is a being resulting from His thinking. It is a comprehensive design, a blueprint formulated in the mind of God. When we make a building, we first make a detailed blueprint for that building. In the same way, when God created all things, He first made a comprehensive blueprint or plan for each created being, and this is Logos.

Though a blueprint is not yet a building or a product, it is a resultant created being. Therefore, Logos, which is a design or a blueprint, is a resultant being, a new being, and a created being. All things are created resembling the dual characteristics of God. Then, what dual characteristics of God does Logos, as a new being, resemble? It resembles the dual characteristics of Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang within the Original sungsang.16 In other words, the unity between Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang centering on purpose forms the dual characteristics of Logos, in the same way that the unity between Original sungsang and Original hyungsang forms the dual characteristics of God (Divine Image).

As mentioned above, Logos is “reason-law” as well as “Word.” Then, what are the dual characteristics of Logos as reason-law? They are reason and law. The relationship between reason and law is the same as the relationship between the Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang, which are subject and object; therefore, the relationship between reason and law is subject and object.

Logos Is the Union of Reason and Law

Since all things were created by Logos (reason-law), all created beings contain elements of reason and law. Accordingly, while all things exist and perform movements, these two elements work together. Yet, the lower the level of the created being, the more predominantly does the element of law operate; the higher the level of the created being, the more predominantly do we find the element of reason operating.

In minerals, which are the lowest level of created beings, it seems that only the element of law operates, and in human beings, who are the highest level of created beings, it seems to be only the rational element operating. In reality, however, law and reason operate in tandem in both cases.

Thus, freedom and necessity, purposefulness and mechanicalness operate in an integrated fashion in the existence and movement of all things. In other words, freedom functions in connection with necessity, and purposefulness operates together with mechanicalness. Until now, the relationship between freedom and necessity has often been understood as one of antinomy: freedom and necessity were regarded as opposite concepts in the same way that liberty and restraint might be understood to be in tension.

In Unification Thought, however, reason and law in Logos are seen not as being in a relationship of antinomy, but of unity. I can explain this point by using the example of a train running along a rail as an analogy. That a train should run on rails is a rule that must be observed by all means; once it derails, not only will the train be damaged, but it might also injure people and destroy buildings. Therefore, the train must run on its rails without fail and, in this way, a train obeys the law necessarily. Yet, it is the freedom of the locomotive engineer to make a train run fast or slow. It might seem that a train runs totally mechanically but, in reality, it operates under the united influences of freedom and necessity.

Let me offer a second example. A person can drive a car when the traffic light is green, but must stop when the traffic light turns red. This is a traffic rule that everyone must necessarily obey. Yet, once the traffic light has become green, the driver can accelerate freely, as long as the car is running properly. Thus, freedom and necessity are united in driving a car as well.17

Using the examples of a train and a car, I have explained that freedom and necessity operate in unison. We can thus understand that reason and law, as the dual characteristics of Logos, function not in a relationship of antinomy but in a relationship of unity.

Since Logos is the unity of reason and law, and since all things, from the astronomical bodies in the macroscopic world to atoms and subatomic particles in the microscopic world, are created through Logos, reason and law operate unitedly in all of them without exception. In this way all things exist, move, and develop through the unity of reason and law, freedom and necessity, or purposefulness and mechanicalness.

This idea is in full agreement with the current views of science. Consider, for example, the Backster Effect. This phenomenon has shown, through an examination of the reaction of a plant, to the leaves of which the electrodes of a lie detector have been attached, that even a plant has a kind of consciousness.18 There is also the theory of complex relativity, proposed by Jean E. Charon (1920-), which claims that even electrons and photons are equipped with mechanisms of memory and thinking.19 That a plant possesses consciousness and that an electron has a mechanism of thinking support the notion that reason and law, and freedom and necessity, are operating together in all created beings.

Logos, Freedom, and License

Let me now clarify the true meaning of freedom, and the problem of license, as related to Logos. Through a correct understanding of freedom and license significant actual problems can be solved. Today, various acts of delinquency that serve to destroy the social order are carried out in the name of freedom. What is an effective countermeasure against such acts that cause social confusion? In order to solve this problem, let us first clarify the true meaning of freedom, and the nature of license.

In the Divine Principle, it is written that “There is no freedom outside the Principle,” that “There is no freedom without responsibility,” and that “There is no freedom without accomplishment” (DP , 74). In other words, there are three conditions for freedom: “to be within the Principle,” then “to bear responsibility,” and then “to make accomplishment.” Here, “to be within the Principle” means that one should not deviate from the Principle or law; “to bear responsibility” means to complete one’s portion of responsibility; and “to make accomplishment” means to complete the purpose of creation and bring about good results. The completion of one’s portion of responsibility, the completion of the purpose of creation, and bringing about good results are all principled acts in accordance with the Way of Heaven, or laws (norms).

These three requisites for freedom-”to be within the Principle,” then “to bear responsibility,” and finally “to make accomplishment” -can be expressed in a word, as being/acting “within the Principle.” It can be concluded, therefore, that true freedom can only be achieved in full conjunction with law and necessity. Law refers here to the laws of value (norms) operating in human life as well as to the natural laws operating in nature. Norms, or values, are sustained only in the context of order. Therefore, in the original world, to disregard norms, or to destroy order, can never result in freedom.

Freedom in its strict sense means freedom of choice, and one’s choice is determined through reason. Consequently, freedom starts with rational choice and then it is carried through into practice. The motivating power, that which expresses freedom in practice is one’s free will, and when freedom is exercised together with one’s free will, the result is free action. These are the concepts of free will and free action as found in the Divine Principle (DP , 74).

Thus, rational choice, the exercise of free will, and the resultant free action should never be done merely arbitrarily. They should only be carried out within the parameters of the Principle or law (laws of value), as necessary. In this way, freedom is the freedom of reason, and reason always operates within law. In other words, originally, true freedom can be realized only within reason-law, in other words, within Logos, and it can not be realized apart from the Logos. It is sometimes argued that laws tend to restrict freedom, but that is a misunderstanding arising from one’s ignorance of the original meaning of law and freedom.

Originally, law and freedom were intended to function for the realization of love. That is to say, law and freedom only truly operate within the context of true love. True love is the source of our life and joy. Accordingly, in the original world, through observing laws one can joyfully enjoy freedom. This is because Logos is based on Heart.

Arbitrary thinking and arbitrary action which are apart from Logos are exercised through a false freedom, which is license. Freedom and license are absolutely different concepts. Freedom is an affirming and constructive concept that brings about good results, whereas license is a destructive concept bringing about evil results. Freedom and license must be strictly distinguished, but in reality they are often confused and misunderstood. This is because people do not have a proper understanding of Logos, which is the true foundation for freedom. Once one understands the correct meaning of Logos, and knows the true meaning of freedom, then all kinds of license masquerading under the name of freedom, can be abolished; it will finally become possible to end social confusion. Thus, the theory of Logos, again, becomes a standard for solving actual problems.

Logos, Heart, and Love

Here, the relationship between Logos, Heart, and love will be explained. As already defined, Logos is the Word or plan and at the same time it is reason-law. Word and reason-law are not two different things. Reason-law is included within the Word, as an internal part. The relationship can be compared to physiology being included within biology, as a subfield within it. In other words, physiology is one field of biology, which consists of the various fields of anatomy, biochemistry, ecology, embryology, physiology, and so on. In the same way, reason-law is a part of the Word, wherein limitless amounts and kinds of knowledge about God’s creation are included. Reason-law, which is a part of the Word, is that part which deals specifically with the interactions and relationships among all things. Thus, Word and reason-law are not different things. Furthermore, Heart is the basis for both Word and reason-law. In the same way that the investigation of organisms is common to all the fields of biology, God’s Heart is the common foundation for both Word and reason-law.

Heart is the emotional impulse to seek joy through love. The fact that Heart is the basis for both the Word and for reason-law in God’s creation means that all phenomena, including existence, change, motion, and the development of created beings, are supported and permeated by the impulse of love. Accordingly, whether we are concerned with natural law or ethical law, love is necessarily operating, and must be operating, behind law. Generally, natural law is understood as solely physicochemical law, but this is an incomplete understanding; love is operating, without fail, behind all law, although the level of love may be different among different creatures. Clearly, love is operating in the ethical laws (norms) of human beings.

In my earlier explanation of Logos, I primarily discussed it in the sense of its being reason and law, or freedom and necessity. Yet, in the actual operation of reason-law, love is significantly more important than reason or law, and love often stands superior to them.

A life of reason-law, but without love, easily becomes like that of a cold and formal barracks, in which solders live according to strict rules, and this way of life easily withers like an immature ear of wheat. Only in a life of reason-law filled with warm love, can the peace of a spring garden, in which all kinds of flowers bloom, and bees and butterflies fly, realistically come about. This criterion of a life of warm love becomes another standard in solving actual problems. The question is: what is the true guideline for bringing peace into a family and society? The answer can only be the theory of Logos based on Heart.

3. Creativity

What Is Creativity?

Generally, creativity is defined as “the ability to create new things.” In the Divine Principle, God’s creativity is expressed as “God’s creative nature” and “God’s power of creation” (DP , 43).

Yet, we do not have an accurate understanding of God’s creation with just these concepts alone. As already explained, the purpose in understanding the attributes of God is to arrive at a fundamental solution to actual problems. Accordingly, all our explanations about God must be as accurate and concrete and concise as possible. Our understanding of God’s creativity is no exception. It is difficult to understand God’s creativity accurately with mere commonsense explanations. Hence, the characteristics and requisites of God’s creativity must be clarified.

God’s creation was neither accidental nor spontaneous. It was accomplished based on an irrepressible, inevitable motive with a clear and purposeful intention. This may be called the theory of creation motivated by Heart or, simply, the Heart Motivation Theory.

In creation, the inner and outer four position foundations, and give and receive actions, which will be explained fully in the next section, “Structure of the Original Image,” are all necessarily formed centering on the purpose of creation. Consequently, God’s creativity can be described as “the ability to form the inner and outer four position foundations centering on purpose.” In the case of human creative activity, such as the production of commodities, the formation of the inner four position foundation corresponds to planning, the development of an idea, making a blueprint, and so on; the formation of the outer four position foundation corresponds to the actual production of the commodity through the use of machines and appropriate materials, according to the blueprint.

In God, the formation of the inner four position foundation is the formation of Logos centered on purpose, and the formation of the outer four position foundation is the creation of all things, through the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang centering on purpose. Thus, God’s creativity is the ability to form such inner and outer four position foundations, namely, the ability to form Logos and to create all things. The reason we seek to explain God’s creativity in such detail is to establish a standard for the fundamental solution of the various actual problems that are related to creative activity, including such things as pollution, the reduction or abolition of armaments, how scientific and artistic endeavors should be carried out, and so on.

Human Creativity

Let me now explain about human creativity. Human beings have the ability to produce new things, in other words, they are creative. Human creativity is what God gave to human beings in accordance with the law of resemblance. Originally, human beings should have inherited God’s creativity (DP , 43, 67, 167), and human creativity should have resembled God’s creativity completely. Due to the fall, however, human beings have only incompletely inherited God’s creativity.

It is because God was to bequeath His creativity to human beings (DP , 78, 167) that human creativity was to resemble God’s creativity. Then, why did God want to give His creativity to human beings? It was in order to bless human beings as the lords of creation (DP , 78), and to give to them the qualification to enjoy dominion over all things (DP , 67, 78). Here, dominion over all things refers to one’s treating all things as one wishes, while yet always regarding them as being precious. In other words, treating all things with a heart of love is truly one’s dominion over all things, and all fields of human life are included. For example, economy, industry, art and so on, all are included in the concept of dominion over all things. Since human beings on earth live in their physical bodies, they are dealing with matter in all fields of their lives. Therefore, it is not too much to say that one’s entire human life is a life of dominion over all things.

Dominion over all things, as originally intended, is possible only when human beings fully inherit God’s creativity. Original dominion means to utilize things creatively, with a heart of love, in various activities, including cultivation, manufacturing, production, reforming, construction, invention, safekeeping, transportation, storage, artistic activity, and so on. Religious and political activities are also included, since material things and economic concerns are indispensable in these activities as well. New creative ideas, as well as love, are requisites for human beings to deal with things. In other words, God’s creativity is required for the original dominion of things by human beings.

If human beings had not fallen their creativity would have completely resembled God’s, and they would have been able to exercise their original dominion over all things. However, due to the fall of the first human ancestors, human beings lost their original nature. Hence, human creativity became distorted, and their dominion over all things became imperfect and non-principled.

Here, the following question may arise: “If God created human beings according to the law of likeness, they would have received original creativity from the very beginning, at their birth, and, accordingly, regardless of the fall, would that creativity not have remained until today? In fact, numerous scientists and technicians are today displaying a very high level of creative ability.” How might we answer this question?

Creation in Likeness

I would like to explain specifically how creation in likeness applies in the world of time and space, since God’s creation means that each created being has appeared in the world of time and space. After God’s creation was carried out in His mind, and the Logos (or plan) was formed, transcending time and space, each created being then appeared in the world of time and space, starting from a small and immature, young stage, then passing through the process of growth, and finally reaching its full maturity.

After it has thus grown and completed itself, a created being completely resembles God’s plan and His attributes. This period of time prior to its completion is its immature stage, during which time each created being is coming to resemble the image of God. According to the Divine Principle, this growing period is divided into three ordered stages of growth: the formation stage, the growth stage, and the completion stage (DP , 42).

The human ancestors fell at the top of their growth stage (DP , 43). Consequently, they inherited only “two-thirds” of their originally intended creativity. No matter how much scientists may display of their gifted creativity, it still falls far short of the degree God originally intended to bestow on human beings.

Among all created beings, only human beings fell. All things have grown to perfect themselves without falling, and thus they resemble the attributes of God at their own given levels. Here, the following question arises: Why did human beings, who are the lords of creation, fall? The fall occurred because, while all things are created to grow requiring only the autonomy and dominion of the Principle, human beings were given their own portion of responsibility for their growth, in addition to the autonomy and dominion of the Principle.

Creativity and the Portion of Responsibility

The autonomy of the Principle refers to the life force of an organism, and dominion refers to the influence of the life force over an organism’s environment. For example, a tree grows in accordance with the life force within it, and dominion refers to the influence of the life force of the tree over the environment. During the growth of human beings, the autonomy and dominion of the Principle also operate. However, in human beings, only the physical self grows in accordance with this autonomy and dominion; the spirit self does not. The growth of the spirit self requires a different condition: fulfillment of the human portion of responsibility.

It should be noted here that growth of the spirit self does not mean the growth in its height. Since the spirit self is united with the physical self, it naturally grows in size along with the physical self. However, the growth of the spirit self referred to here is the maturation of its spirituality: the improvement of one’s character, or of one’s heart. In other words, the growth of the spirit self is the growth of the mind in such a way that we are able to practice God’s love.

The growth of the spirit self can be achieved only through the fulfillment of one’s human portion of responsibility. This fulfillment of the human portion of responsibility refers to the continuous practice of love, all the while holding fast to one’s faith in God and firmly observing His commandments. In this way we can overcome the numerous trials that may come to us, through our own decisions and without any help from others.

It was not an easy matter for Adam and Eve to fulfill such a portion of responsibility, since God was unable to intervene, and they had no parents to teach them. Nevertheless, they were expected to fulfill such a responsibility. However, tempted by Satan, Adam and Eve failed to fulfill their portion of responsibility, and fell. Why did God give Adam and Eve such a heavy responsibility, one that they might fail to fulfill? Why could God not enable them to grow easily, like all other things? The reason is because God wanted to give human beings the qualification to have dominion over all things, and to make them the lords of creation (Gen. 1:28, DP , 78).

Dominion is, in principle, only the dominion over one’s possessions or things that one has created, and one is not allowed to exercise one’s dominion over the possessions of others or over things created by others. Since human beings were created after all things had been created, logically they can not be the possessors or creators of all things. Yet, since God created human beings as His children, He intended to endow them with the qualifications of being a creator, so as to make them the lords of creation. Hence, He intended to have human beings fulfill a certain extra condition; thereby, human beings would be recognized as having participated in God’s creation of the universe.

Human Perfection and One’s Portion of Responsibility

The extra condition required of Adam and Eve was to be responsible for their own perfection. That is, if Adam and Eve had perfected themselves without any help from others, God would have regarded them as having qualifications equal to His as the creator of the universe. As a matter of fact, the value of a person is the same as the value of the whole universe, as described in the Divine Principle: Every human being is an embodiment (or encapsulation) of all elements in the cosmos (DP , 30, 47), and a microcosm (DP , 47), and only when human beings have perfected themselves will the creation of the entire universe also be perfected. Along the same lines, Jesus said, “For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? Or what shall a man give in return for his life?” (Matt. 16:26) Thus, when Adam and Eve had perfected themselves, they would have been regarded as equal in position to the creator of the universe.

Creation will be carried out as the responsibility of the creator. Hence, God created the universe as His own responsibility; and Adam and Eve, who were to inherit creatorship, should have perfected themselves through their own responsibility. That is why God gave Adam and Eve their portion of responsibility.

Yet, God is a God of love, and He did not want to assign Adam and Eve one hundred percent responsibility; rather, He retained most of the responsibility for their growth, and only gave them a very small portion -five percent figuratively speaking. God then intended, after their fulfilling their own five percent portion of responsibility, to regard them as having fulfilled the entire one hundred percent. In spite of such a great blessing from God, Adam and Eve failed to fulfill even their own small portion of responsibility, and fell. Thus, they became unable to fully inherit God’s creativity.

If human beings had not fallen, what would have become of them? If they had perfected themselves without falling, first, they would have inherited God’s Heart, the emotional impulse to seek joy through love, and they would have become loving persons just as God is a God of love, and second they would have inherited completely God’s creativity centered on Heart.

This means that, from now on, all the activities of dominion over all things should become based on Heart and love. As already mentioned, politics, economy, industry, science, religion, and so on, all belong to the dominion over all things since they deal with material things, and activities in all these areas will become a dominion of love through creativity (perfect creativity) inherited from God.20

Original Creativity and Cultural Activity

Culture is the totality of the achievements of the intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities of human beings. Since intellectual, emotional, and volitional activities commonly deal with material things, cultural activity can be regarded as the activity of dominion over all things with creativity.

Today, the quality of cultures around the world is rapidly declining. In virtually every field, including politics, economy, society, science, art, education, media, ethics, morality, religion, and so on, there are whirlpools of confusion wherein people lack a true sense of direction. Unless some epoch-making proposal is introduced, salvaging the vanishing culture will become an almost hopeless task.

The Communist dictatorial system, which had solidified its formidable foundation with the iron curtain, began to collapse through the open door policy and, today, Communist countries are hastening to introduce the capitalist economic method. Seeing this trend, people in the capitalist camp may be tempted to become proud of the supremacy of the capitalist economic system, and of their scientific technology. This is, however, a shortsighted illusion. They are ignoring the chronic ills of capitalism that will surely lead to its decline and fall: labor disputes arising from structural contradictions within the capitalist economy, the increasing gap between the rich and the poor, degradation of values, rampant social crime, the advancement of criminal techniques accompanying the advancement of science and technology, increasing pollution accompanying industrial development, and so on.

Seen from the viewpoint of dominion over all things, we must seek to find the root cause of today’s cultural crisis at the very beginning of human history. Due to the fall of the first human ancestors, human beings inherited not God’s Heart, love, and creativity, but self-centeredness and egotism which have now spread worldwide. This is the fundamental cause of today’s cultural crisis.

The only way to save contemporary culture from such a crisis is to eradicate egotism, and instead advance all human activities of creation and dominion centering on God’s love. In other words, when all the leaders in various fields and at various levels begin to work centering on God’s love, the complex and difficult problems in the various cultural fields such as politics, economy, society, education, science, religion, philosophy, media and so on, will finally come to be solved fundamentally and totally, thereby allowing a new and true culture of peace to blossom worldwide. Such a new culture will be neither Communist nor capitalist. It will be the culture of Heart, the culture of love, and the culture of harmony. This, I hope, clarifies that the theory of God’s creativity can become a standard for solving actual problems. This concludes my explanation of the content of the Original Image. Let me now turn attention to its structure.

II. Structure of the Original Image

I will from this point discuss the structure of the Original Image. In the section “Content of the Original Image,” each attribute of the Divine Image and the Divine Character was explained, while in this section, the relationships between the dual characteristics of the Original Image-mainly the relationship between sungsang and hyungsang-will be explained. The purpose of such an explanation is to set forth the standards necessary for solving, fundamentally, various actual problems, in this case, problems of relationship.

A. Give and Receive Action and Four Position Foundation

1. Give and Receive Action between sungsang and hyungsang

Reciprocal Relationship between sungsang and hyungsang

In the Principle of Creation of the Divine Principle, it is written that “All beings exist through the reciprocal relationships between their dual characteristics of internal nature and external form” (DP , 17). Furthermore, “[every living being] maintains its life through the reciprocal relationship of yang and yin elements within itself” (DP , 16). The reason for this is that, since God, the First Cause of all things, is the harmonious Subject of the dual characteristics of sungsang and hyungsang, and of Yang and Yin (DP , 19), all things were created according to the law of likeness and, without exception, resemble the dual characteristics of God. A reciprocal relationship means a relationship of two elements or two individuals that are facing each other. For example, when two persons seek to engage in conversation, or to engage in buying and selling, the situation wherein the two partners are facing each other first needs to be established before a conversation or trade takes place. The reciprocal relationship should necessarily be a mutually affirming relationship, and never a mutually negating one.21

When such a reciprocal relationship is established, something is given and received between the two partners. In human beings, people are giving and receiving words, money, power, influence, love, and so on. In the natural world, universal gravitation acts among heavenly bodies, carbon dioxide and oxygen are exchanged between animals and plants, and so on. The action of giving and receiving something between the two partners is called “give and receive action.”

The establishment of a reciprocal relationship does not necessarily mean that a give and receive action will take place. In order for a give and receive action to take place, a “common base” must be established. This common base is a reciprocal relationship established centering on a common element, or a common purpose. Thus, correctly speaking, once two parties are engaged in a reciprocal relationship and a common base is formed, give and receive action will take place.

In God as well, give and receive action takes place between sungsang and hyungsang according to this principle. sungsang and hyungsang are engaged in a reciprocal relationship centering on a common element (Heart or purpose), and so a common base is formed, and a give and receive action does take place. sungsang gives to hyungsang ideas, emotional elements, and so on; and hyungsang gives to sungsang an energetic element (pre-energy). Through this give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang, the attributes of God either form a harmony (union), or give rise to creation (new beings).

What Is the Give and Receive Action Between sungsang and hyungsang?

In the Original Image, when sungsang and hyungsang enter into a reciprocal relationship, give and receive action does take place. As mentioned above, however, a common base has to be formed centering on a common element. In God, the common element is Heart, or the purpose of creation, which is established by Heart. When give and receive action takes place, a result necessarily appears. Thus, a center and a result necessarily accompany a give and receive action. When Heart is the center, a union is realized as a result, and when purpose is the center, a new being or a multiplied being appears as a result. Union here refers to a unified state, whereas a new being refers to a created being. Accordingly, in the Original Image the appearance of new beings means the creation of all things.

Concepts of Union and New Being

Here, I will discuss the concepts of union, and of new being in the created world. In the created world, union connotes existence, survival, duration, unity, a spatial circular movement, maintenance, and so on, whereas new being refers to a newly born result or product, a new character, a new element, a new individual, or a new phenomenon. In other words, the appearance of a new being is a phenomenon of development in the created world.

The reason that all things maintain their existence, survival, and duration, and at the same time move and develop is that give and receive actions similar to those in the Original Image (between sungsang and hyungsang) are carried out among the myriads of individuals from heavenly bodies to atoms. In accordance with the law of resemblance, the natures of all things resemble the attributes of God, and the relationships and interactions among all things resemble the structure of the Original Image, namely, the relationship and give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang. In other words, all created beings should necessarily resemble the give and receive action within the Original Image in order for them to exist, live, move, and develop.

Round, Harmonious and Smooth Nature of the Give and Receive Action

Whether it is centered on Heart or purpose, give and receive action in the Original Image is round, harmonious and smooth. Heart is the emotional impulse to seek joy through love, and Heart is the source of love. It is love that makes the give and receive action harmonious. Therefore, the give and receive action centered on Heart, from which love wells up, is harmonious. The same thing can be said when the give and receive action is centered on purpose, because purpose itself is established based on Heart.

There is no contradiction, opposition, or conflict in the round, harmonious, and smooth give and receive action within the Original Image. If there is no center or common element such as Heart or purpose, and there is no love, then contradiction, opposition, or conflict can appear. In other words, if the give and receive action is not centered on love, it may not be harmonious, but rather it easily becomes conflictive.

This round, harmonious nature of the give and receive action in the Original Image becomes another standard for solving actual problems. The great confusion of today’s world has been brought about by the fact that most, if not all, relationships have a conflictual tendency. In other words, struggles have been developing in virtually all relationships, such as those between nations, those between ideologies, those between the Communist camp and the free camp, those between peoples, those between religions, those between political parties, those between managers and laborers, those between teacher and student, those between parents and children, those between husband and wife, those between persons, and so on. The result of the accumulation of such numerous conflicting relationships is the great confusion in today’s world. Consequently, the way to remove such worldwide confusion is to transform all conflicts into round and harmonious relationships. This becomes possible once these relationships are established through the give and receive actions centered on God’s love. Thus, the round, harmonious, and smooth nature of the give and receive action in the Original Image becomes another standard for solving actual problems.

2. Subject and Object, and the Four Position Foundation

What Is the Four Position Foundation?

As already explained, give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang is carried out centering on Heart or purpose, giving rise to union or to a new being. Hence, these four elements, the center, sungsang, hyungsang, and the result, always participate in a give and receive action.22 The relationship of these four elements is the relationship of positions. The center, sungsang, hyungsang and the result, each occupy a position and, at the same time, they are related to each another. The foundation of these four positions, whereupon give and receive action takes place, is called a “four position foundation.” Whether in the Original Image or in the created world, no matter what type of give and receive action it may be, without exception give and receive action takes place within the context of a four position foundation. Hence, the four position foundation is the fundamental foundation upon which all things and human beings exist. Give and receive action and the four position foundation in the Original Image is illustrated in fig. 1.4.

When sungsang and hyungsang are engaged in give and receive action, they are not in the same position. Position here refers to the position with the qualification to rule all things (DP , 78). In other words, position is related to the degree of activity: When we say that sungsang and hyungsang are different in position, it means that sungsang is in a more active position than hyungsang, or hyungsang is in a more passive position than sungsang. An element or an individual that is in a more active position is called “subject,” and an element or an individual that is in a more passive position is called “object.” Accordingly, when sungsang and hyungsang are engaged in give and receive action, sungsang is subject, and hyungsang is object.

The four position foundation consists of the four positions of center, subject, object, and result, and give and receive action always takes place based on the four position foundation. This means that the structure of the four positions of center, subject, object, and result is fixed and unchanging, whereas the actual element to be established in each position is different for each four position foundation.


For example, in the family four position foundation, the purpose (or the motto) of  a family, or the grandparents who represent it, is in the center, the father is in the subject position, the mother is in the object position, and the peaceful environment of the family, or the multiplication of children is the result. In a four position foundation of dominion, such as in business activity, the goal or the ideal of an enterprise is in the center, various personnel (managers and employees) are in the subject position, material elements (machines and raw materials) are in the object position, and products (commodities) are the result. In the solar system, the center is the purpose of creation, the sun is in the subject position, the planets are in the object position, and the result is the existence of the solar system. In a human being, the center is the purpose of creation, mind is the subject, body is the object, and the result is an individual (union of mind and body). Thus, in the four position foundation, the elements or beings to be established (which may be called the “settled beings”) are different depending on each four position foundation, but the structure, which consists of center, subject, object, and the result, are always fixed and unchanging.23

Concept of Subject and Object

Let me discuss the concept of subject and object more concretely. By doing so the character of give and receive action may be understood more concretely. As already explained, the subject is “active” in relation to the object, whereas the object is “passive” in relation to the subject. To explain in more detail, the relationship between a subject and an object is characterized as “central” and “dependent,” “dynamic” and “static,” “initiating” and “responding,” “creative” and “conservative,” “outgoing” and “modest” as well as “active” and “passive.”

In the created world, from the heavenly bodies to atoms, there are various kinds of subject and object relationships. For example, the relationship between the sun and planets in the solar system, and the relationship between the nucleus and electrons in an atom are the relationship of central and dependent; the relationship between parent animals and their young, and that between a protector and the protected are relationships of dynamic and static; the relationship between an educator and the educated, and that between the giver and the receiver are relationships of initiating and responding, or activity and passivity. In a family, in many cases, the husband works hard to support his family and the wife keeps the house with affectionate care: the relationship between them is rather creative and conservative, or outgoing and modest.

It should be noted here that the concept of subject and that of object are not fixed, but relative, concepts. A subject being becomes an object being when it relates to a higher level being, and an object being becomes a subject being when it relates to a lower level being.

Subject and Object Occupy Different Positions

As explained above, the subject is central, dynamic, initiating, creative, active, and outgoing in relation to the object, whereas the object is dependent, static, responding, conservative, passive, and modest in relation to the subject. The cause of this difference between subject and object lies in the subject-object relationship within the Original Image.

Give and receive action takes place only between subject and object. That is to say, give and receive action takes place when there is a difference in position. When two elements occupy the same position, give and receive action does not take place, but rather a repulsion will appear between them. For example, repulsion appears between two positive charges.

When there is a difference in position between subject and object, a certain order is established. Thus, give and receive action takes place where there is order. This theory of subject and object becomes another standard for solving actual problems. As mentioned above, the world today is experiencing increasing chaos, which is very difficult to control. The reason for such increasing chaos is that most relationships are not based on harmonious give and receive action, so they have instead become conflicting relationships. In other words, the relationships are not those of subject and object, but rather, they have become those repulsive relationships of subject and subject.

The best way of solving our social chaos is to reestablish order. In order to establish order, conflictual relationships between subject and subject should be changed into harmonious relationships. Thus, it is necessary to explain the concept of subject and object, and the standard for the relationship between subject and object should be clarified. The theory of the four position foundation in the Original Image, or the theory of give and receive action between subject and object can meet this demand. Thus, the theory of subject and object in the Original Image becomes a standard for solving actual problems.

Correlatives and Opposites

I will now discuss the concepts of correlatives and opposites in relation to subject and object. The original relationship between subject and object centered on purpose is harmonious and never conflicting. When two elements or two individuals are engaged in a harmonious relationship, these two elements or individuals are called “correlatives” in Unification Thought. This differs from Marxist Thought, where two elements or individuals are “opposites,” because they engage in struggle with each other. Development can be realized only through harmonious correlatives, whereas in the case of struggling opposites, development is blocked and can come to a complete deadlock. Communism has tried to reform politics, economy, and culture based on its materialistic dialectic -the theory of contradiction, or the theory of opposites-and, as a result, they have come to a deadlock which can never be controlled.

Development is achieved through the give and receive action of correlatives centered on purpose, and never through the conflict between opposites where there is no common purpose. The theory of correlatives is a theoretical method which today can provide a fundamental solution to the chaos of Communist countries, as well as of the free world. Thus, the theory of correlatives becomes yet another standard for solving actual problems.

B. Formation of the Four Position Foundation

1. Constituents of the Four Position Foundation


As already explained, give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang in the Original Image gives rise to two different results, depending on the center. When the center is Heart, the result is union, and when the center is purpose (purpose of creation), the result is a new being. The same thing can be said about the give and receive action between created beings, since the give and receive action of created beings resembles that in the Original Image.

There are two kinds of give and receive action: One is the give and receive action centered on Heart whereby a state of unity is realized; the other kind is the give and receive action which is centered on purpose, whereby new beings are produced. The former is the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang which gives rise to harmony (union) (DP , 19) and the latter is the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang which multiplies substantial object partners (DP , 24), i.e., the creation of all things. This is illustrated in fig 1.5.

The characteristics of the give and receive action in the Original Image manifest themselves in created beings, especially in human beings. A human being is the union of mind and body, or the union of sungsang and hyungsang, which are engaged in give and receive action centering on purpose (purpose of creation). An artist makes a plan or has an idea in his or her mind, and then he or she paints a picture or carves a statue with his or her hands using artistic instruments. This is the multiplication of a new being through the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang centering on a purpose (the purpose of producing a work of art).

In the give and receive action whereby unity is realized, the sungsang and hyungsang before, and the sungsang and hyungsang after the give and receive action are not essentially different. The same sungsang and the same hyungsang have simply become unified. For example, when a man and a woman marry, the man is the same man before and after the marriage, and the woman is the same woman before and after the marriage. The only difference is that the man and the woman are united in oneness after the marriage. On the other hand, in the give and receive action whereby a new being is produced, the sungsang and hyungsang before give and receive action and the result (new being) which has appeared after give and receive action are different.

The give and receive action through which unity is realized, is called an “identity-maintaining give and receive action”; and the give and receive action through which a new being is produced, is called a “developmental give and receive action.”

Seen from the viewpoint of change or motion, the former is called a “static give and receive action” since the sungsang and hyungsang undergo no change either before or after the give and receive action; and the latter is called a “dynamic give and receive action,” since a new being appears as the result of the give and receive action. Seen from the viewpoint of position, give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang is that between subject and object, whereby, together with the center and the result, a four position foundation is established. Accordingly, the identity-maintaining give and receive action gives rise to an identity-maintaining four position foundation, and the developmental give and receive action gives rise to a developmental four position foundation. Therefore, we have two kinds of four position foundation: the identity-maintaining four position foundation, in which a union is formed, and the developmental four position foundation, in which a new being is formed.


2. Inner Four Position Foundation and Outer Four Position Foundation

There are another pair of four position foundations. These are the “inner four position foundation” and the “outer four position foundation.” These two four position foundations arise from inner give and receive action and outer give and receive action, respectively.

I explained earlier, in the section on the “Content of the Original Image,” that the Original sungsang consists of the functional part and the objective part, or the Inner sungsang and the Inner hyungsang. In other words, there are another sungsang and hyungsang within the Original sungsang.

Seen from just the position of the Original sungsang, there are sungsang (Inner sungsang) and hyungsang (Inner hyungsang) internally within itself, and then there are this sungsang (Original sungsang) together with the hyungsang (Original hyungsang) externally. When sungsang and hyungsang enter into a reciprocal relationship centering on a common element, give and receive action necessarily takes place. Hence, give and receive action takes place both internal to the Original sungsang, between Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang, and externally between the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang. The former is called the inner give and receive action and the latter the outer give and receive action. In these give and receive actions, center (Heart, or purpose) and result (union, or new being) are involved necessarily, giving rise to the four position foundation: The inner four position foundation is formed through an inner give and receive action, and the outer four position foundation is formed through an outer give and receive action. These are illustrated in fig. 1.6.

In human beings, the inner and outer give and receive actions correspond to one’s internal life and external life. The internal life refers to one’s individual spiritual life, and the external life refers to one’s social life wherein he or she associates with others. The internal life is the give and receive action that takes place within one’s mind, and the external life is the give and receive action that takes place in one’s relationship with other people. Such inner and outer give and receive actions in humans are modeled after the Original sungsang’s inner and outer give and receive actions. The inner and outer give and receive actions manifest themselves in every created being as well as in human beings.

As already explained, the relationship between sungsang and hyungsang is that between subject and object, and give and receive action between subject and object, with the involvement of the center and the result, result in the formation of a four position foundation. Accordingly, seen from the viewpoint of position, the inner give and receive action becomes an inner four position foundation, and the outer give and receive action becomes an outer four position foundation. Thus, the Original sungsang is engaged in the formation of four position foundations both internally and externally. The Inner four position foundation together with the outer four position foundation in the Original Image is called the “two stage structure of the Original Image.” Taking after this structure of the Original Image, four position foundations are formed internally and externally in each and every created being. This structure in created beings is called the “two stage structure of existence.”

3. Two-Stage Structure of the Original Image and Two-Stage Structure of Existence

In all created beings, without exception, the inner and outer four position foundations, which are derived from the Original Image, are formed. In other words, in order for any created being to exist, it must necessarily form both the inner and outer four position foundations. The give and receive action in the Original Image is round and harmonious centered on Heart, or on the purpose of creation. Accordingly, in all things, the inner and outer four position foundations are to be formed, without exception, through round and harmonious inner and outer give and receive actions centering on the purpose of creation.24 Human beings, however, failed to form the inner four position foundation and the outer four position foundation centering on Heart (love) or the purpose of creation, in their internal life (spiritual life) and external life (social life). Instead, they have deviated into self-centeredness, giving rise to such social dysfunctions as friction, conflict, opposition, struggle, and so on.



Therefore, the fundamental way of solving social problems (actual problems) is for human beings to reestablish original four position foundations internally and externally. Thus, the theory of the inner four position foundation and the outer four position foundation becomes another standard for settling actual problems. In this way, the inner four position foundation and the outer four position foundation in the Original Image become the standard for the existence of all created beings.

This discussion has been concerned with the “two-stage structure of the Original Image,” which consists of inner and outer four position foundations in the Original Image, and the “two-stage structure of existence,” which consists of inner and outer four position foundations in created beings. The “two-stage structure of existence” resembles the “two-stage structure of the Original Image” according to the law of resemblance. These structures are illustrated in figures 1.7 and 1.8.

C. Kinds of Four Position Foundations

I would like now to discuss the kinds of four position foundations. As I have already explained, there are inner and outer four position foundations as well as the identity-maintaining and developmental four position foundations. Hence, we have four different kinds of four position foundations. In combination we have the following foundations: inner identity-maintaining four position foundation, outer identity-maintaining four position foundation, inner developmental four position foundation, and outer developmental four position foundation. These are illustrated in fig. 1.9. I would like now to explain each of them in turn.

1. Inner Identity-Maintaining Four Position Foundation

The inner identity-maintaining four position foundation is the combination of the inner four position foundation and the identity-maintaining four position foundation. It is an inner four position foundation, within the Original sungsang, which maintains itself and is unchanging.

The identity-maintaining four position foundation is formed when the sungsang and hyungsang are engaged in give and receive action, and unity is realized as a result. The identity-maintaining four position foundation is formed internally within the sungsang and, at the same time, externally between sungsang and hyungsang. We human beings live our lives while thinking various things in our mind. Thinking is carried out internally through give and receive action between inner sungsang and inner hyungsang whereby inner four position foundations are formed. We also live our lives externally through give and receive action with other people, whereby outer four position foundations are formed.


When one’s thinking is reflective and quiescent, and the result of thinking is a certain state of mind; i.e., a union of inner sungsang and inner hyungsang, it is said that an identity-maintaining four position foundation is formed internally within one’s mind; thus, an inner identity-maintaining four position foundation is formed.

Within every created being, give and receive action takes place, and thereby an inner identity-maintaining four position foundation is formed. In this inner identity-maintaining four position foundation, the center is heart and, at the same time, it is the purpose of creation established by heart,25 and give and receive action between subject and object is carried out harmoniously, bringing about the result, which is a union (united being). The prototype of such an inner identity-maintaining four position foundation in created beings lies in the inner identity-maintaining four position foundation in the Original sungsang.

2. Outer Identity-Maintaining Four Position Foundation

The outer identity-maintaining four position foundation is the combination of the outer four position foundation and the identity-maintaining four position foundation. It is an outer four position foundation formed outside the Original sungsang, and its character is immutability. It is the harmonious state of God’s attributes prior to the creation of all things, namely, the harmonious state of sungsang and hyungsang. In a family or in a society, we live with other people helping each other or relying on one another. Here, outer identity-maintaining four position foundations are formed between members of a family or a society.

The outer identity-maintaining four position foundation is accompanied by the inner identity-maintaining four position foundation. A good example is a married couple. While husband and wife each live their own lives, thus forming their own inner identity-maintaining four position foundations, they live in harmony and help each other, and in this way the unity of husband and wife is realized. This unity of husband and wife is the formation of an outer identity-maintaining four position foundation. Thus, an outer identity-maintaining four position foundation is inseparable from an inner identity-maintaining four position foundation. In other words, an outer identity-maintaining four position foundation is established on the basis of an inner identity-maintaining four position foundation.

Let me now explain the relationship between all things, taking the relationship between the sun and the earth as an example. The sun and the earth are engaged in the giving and receiving of universal gravitation (under the operation of the Universal Prime Force). The sun is the subject and the earth is its object; the sun is the center, while the earth is dependent on the sun.

In the created world, the give and receive action between subject and object gives rise to a circular motion in which the object revolves around the subject. This circular motion is the expression of the round and harmonious nature of the give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang within the Original Image. In other words, where there is a circular motion, there is a give and receive action between subject and object.

In the relationship between the sun and the earth, the earth rotates around its own axis while revolving around the sun. This is to maintain both its own identity and the solar system: maintaining itself through rotation, and maintaining the solar system through revolution. In other words, a give and receive action is taking place internally within the earth in order to maintain the earth, and a give and receive action is taking place externally between the earth and the sun in order to maintain the solar system. The sun itself is maintaining its identity by its rotation. At the same time, in the solar system the sun is exercising its dominion over the earth, as subject and its center: the sun gives universal gravitation (under the operation of the Universal Prime Force) and light to the earth; thereby the sun helps the earth revolve around the sun while maintaining life on the planet. At the same time, the sun, as an object, revolves around the center of the galaxy, its subject. Thus, both the inner identity-maintaining four position foundation and the outer identity-maintaining four position foundation are established for the sun as well as for the earth. These inner and outer identity-maintaining four position foundations are inseparable.

Circular motion which manifests the inner identity-maintenance (namely, rotation) and the circular motion which manifests the outer identity-maintenance (namely, revolution) are also seen in the original way of human life. Yet, since human life is spiritual, circular motion in this case is not physical, but it is a round, harmonious, and smooth give and receive action centered on love, which is the same as in the Original Image. In humans, the inner identity-maintaining four position foundation is manifested as one’s peaceful and loving personality. As for the object partner, the outer identity-maintaining four position foundation consists of its revolution around the subject, which means  obedience and gratitude to the subject. As for the subject partner, the outer identity-maintaining four position foundation is manifested as its dominion over the object through truth and love: the subject continuously loves and educates the object.

So far I have explained the inner identity-maintaining four position foundation and the outer identity-maintaining four position foundation in the original world. Yet, in fallen society today we can hardly recognize such an ideal case. Instead, we witness only the over-all collapse of values and increasing social crimes. Thus, the theory of inner and outer four position foundations in the Original Image becomes another important standard for solving actual problems.26

3. Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

The inner developmental four position foundation is the combination of the inner four position foundation and the developmental four position foundation; namely, it is the inner four position foundation, which has the character of development and movement.27 Here, developmental four position foundation refers to the four position foundation which is established through give and receive action between subject and object, centering on the purpose of creation, whereby a new being is produced.

Internally and externally, developmental four position foundations are formed in the Original Image. Yet, unlike the case of the identity-maintaining four position foundations, inner and outer developmental four position foundations are not formed simultaneously, but rather successively: the inner developmental four position foundation is formed first, and then the outer developmental four position foundation is formed after that.

In the case of the production of a commodity or a work of art by human beings, an idea or a plan is made first and then a commodity or a work of art is produced or created using machines and tools. Thus, planning comes first and production is second. Planning, which takes place in the mind, is internal, whereas production, which is made with machines or tools, is external. Both planning and production are made through the formation of four position foundations. The result of planning is a new being, and the result of production is also a new being. The plan is not vague, and it is made with a clear purpose of producing a definite commodity. Needless to say, production is made with a clear purpose as well. Thus, four position foundations both in planning and in production are centered on purpose. Four position foundations accompanied by a purpose and a new being are developmental four position foundations. Developmental four position foundations are formed internally and externally; the inner developmental four position foundation for planning, and the outer developmental four position foundation for production.

The prototype of the process of planning in human productive activity is the structure of the Original Image. It is the inner developmental four position foundation (the formation of Logos) which is established through give and receive action between Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang centering on purpose within the Original sungsang. Thus, the inner developmental four position foundation in the Original Image is the prototype for all inner developmental four position foundations in created beings.28

Next, I will explain in detail about the inner developmental four position foundation in the Original sungsang, under the topics: “purpose as the center,” “Inner sungsang as subject,” “Inner hyungsang as object,” “inner give and receive action,” and “a plan as the result.”

a) Purpose as the Center

The center of the inner developmental four position foundation is purpose (purpose of creation), which is based on Heart, the emotional impulse to love. Since God’s creation is motivated by Heart, the purpose of creation is to have object partners of love and to realize a loving world. God therein wanted joy and comfort. Human beings were created as God’s object partners of love, and all things were created as human beings’ object partners of love. Accordingly, the “purpose for being created” for we human beings is that we love each other and love all things, thereby giving joy and comfort to God. The “purpose for being created” for all things is that they give beauty and joy to we human beings, while at the same time realizing harmony with each other. Due to the fall, however, human beings became unable to love each other, and they became unable to fully love all things and appreciate their beauty. As a result they made God sorrowful and made all things groan in travail (Rom. 8:22).

Human beings were created after the pattern of God, according to the law of likeness. This applies also to their purpose of creation. Originally, the purpose of all human activities of creation (production, manufactur-ing, artistic creation, and so on) is to realize God’s love according to the purpose of creation. Due to their fall, however, human beings became self-centered, and they became unable to realize God’s love. As a result, they went against the Way of Heaven, and human societies have fallen into chaos. Accordingly, the way to settle the great confusion of today’s world is for all people to bring the purpose of all their activities of creation into complete harmonization with God’s purpose of creation. This theory concerning purpose at the center of the inner developmental four position foundation, thus becomes another standard for solving actual problems.

b) Inner sungsang as Subject

What Is Inner sungsang?

In the inner developmental four position foundation, Inner sungsang is in the subject position. Inner sungsang consists of intellect, emotion and will. These three faculties are not independent of each other, but rather they are connected to each other. In the intellect, emotion and will are included; in the emotion, intellect and will are included; and in the will, intellect and emotion are included. In other words, these three faculties function as one; and from their unity, the intellectual faculty works relatively strongly at one time, the emotional faculty works relatively strongly at another time, and the volitional faculty works relatively strongly at yet another time. It is necessary for us to understand the three faculties of the mind as such. These three united faculties of the mind were mobilized for the formation of the inner developmental four position foundation in God’s sungsang.

When we understand the three faculties of intellect, emotion and will in this way, we realize that the three values of truth, beauty and goodness, which correspond to these three faculties, respectively, also have some common elements between them. Furthermore, the three major fields of culture (the academic field, the artistic field, and the field of religion and morality), which correspond to the three values of truth, beauty and goodness, also have some common element between them. It should be noted here also that there are intermediate fields among the three major fields mentioned.

This point bears an important actual significance. Motivated by Heart, God established the purpose of creation, and He mobilized the three faculties of intellect, emotion and will centering on that purpose, whereby He invested all His power in His creation (Rev. Moon once said, “God invested all of Himself in His creation of heaven and earth”). In His providence of re-creation as well, He mobilized all His faculties of intellect, emotion and will. Furthermore, in the history of restoration, especially today, when the chaos of the Last Days prevails, the three great fields of culture-the academic field, such as science and philosophy; the artistic field, such as music, dance, painting, sculpture, poetry and so on;  and the field of life norms, such as religion, morality and ethics-have to be mobilized for the purpose of the realization of God’s ideal world, namely, the world of the unified culture, or the world of the culture of heart.

Nevertheless, today, almost all cultural fields have lost their proper direction, and they are sinking into degeneracy. In our time, pseudo-revolutionary thoughts such as Marxism and Kim Il-Sung’s Juche Idea advocate proletarian art and folk art. In fact, however, they are vulgarizing and making sterile all the cultural fields, especially the arts.

It is evident, therefore, that intellectuals, and scholars who are engaged in the various cultural fields today, have an urgent mission to accomplish. They should understand God’s purpose of creation and advance forward with firm determination to realize it, and construct the ideal world of creation, the world of the unified culture (culture of heart). Thus, the fact that the three faculties of intellect, emotion and will in the Inner sungsang were mobilized, centering on purpose, in the formation of the inner developmental four position foundation in God’s Creation, is also an important standard for solving actual problems.

Inner sungsang Is the Union of Spirit Mind and Physical Mind

It should be noted here that the intellect, emotion and will of both the spirit self and the physical self are contained in the human mind. Since a human being is a dual being (united being) of spirit self and physical self, the human mind is the union of spirit mind and physical mind. Hence, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will of the spirit mind and those of the physical mind are combined and united in the human inner sungsang. The physical mind has an instinctive level of intellect, emotion and will. The intellect, emotion and will of the spirit mind is creative and developmental, whereas the intellect, emotion and will of the physical mind is not.

The intellectual faculty of the physical mind is capable of sensibility and perception with a low level of understanding, whereas the intellectual faculty of the spirit mind is capable of the functions of perception, understanding and reason, through which abstract and universal truths can be attained. The spirit mind thinks of, and reflects upon, oneself; namely, it possesses self-consciousness. When the neuro-physiologist John Eccles and the biologist Andree Goudot-Perrot say that only human beings possess self-consciousness, they are referring to the spirit mind.

The emotional faculty of the physical mind is also of a lower level than that of the spirit mind. The emotional faculty of the physical mind has the ability to feel joy, anger, sorrow, and easiness, and to show an altruistic nature, to a lesser extent than does the spirit mind. The emotional faculty of the spirit mind is of a higher level, and with it we are able to engage in artistic activities, and to love our nation and humankind, often even at the risk of our lives.

The volitional faculty of the physical mind is also of a lower level than that of the spirit mind. The volitional faculty consists of desire, the power of practice, and the power of decision, with all of which the purpose of creation (the purpose for the individual and the purpose for the whole) can be realized. An animal’s purpose of creation is achieved primarily through material life (food, shelter, multiplication, and so on), while the purpose of creation in human beings is achieved through one’s spiritual life (a life of truth, goodness and beauty). Thus, in the volitional faculty as well, there is a distinction between animals and human beings. The volitional function of an animal is solely related to food, clothing, shelter, and sex; but the volitional function of human beings is a combination of that of the physical mind together with that of the spirit mind. In an original human being, the spirit mind is superior to the physical mind; therefore, we should put our priority on pursuing a life of value, and only then should we be concerned with our material life.

I have explained above that human intellect, emotion and will are the union of these faculties of the spirit mind with those of the physical mind: Intellect is the union of the intellect of the spirit mind with that of the physical mind, and the same thing can be said about emotion and will. Furthermore, these three faculties of intellect, emotion, and will are not separate from each other, but rather they are unified. In Unification Thought epistemology, this unified inner sungsang is called “spiritual apperception.” Spiritual apperception is the unified faculty of cognition which is centered on the spirit mind. This concept of the inner sungsang as the union of intellect, emotion, and will can provide solutions to the historically unsolved problems concerning freedom.29

c) Inner hyungsang as Object

What Is Inner hyungsang?

Next, I will discuss the Inner hyungsang, which is in the object position in the inner developmental four position foundation. As already explained, the Inner hyungsang, the aspect of form in the Original sungsang, consists of ideas, concepts, principles, and mathematical principles. An idea is a concrete image of each created being that will be created, or already has been created. A concept is a universal image of features abstracted from a group of ideas. Principles are the root cause of the natural laws of the universe and the norms of human life. Finally, mathematical principles are the ultimate cause of the numerical phenomena in the natural world.

Let me explain here about the elements of the Inner hyungsang in relation with creation. What kind of role did the Inner hyungsang play in God’s creation? Figuratively speaking, it performed the role of a mold. A mold can be understood as a container into which molten metal is poured in order to make a certain metallic product. It can be said that the Original hyungsang, or pre-energy, corresponds to this molten metal during the process of God’s creation. In other words, in a manner analogous to that of making iron products by pouring molten iron into a mold, God created all things by pouring the spiritual molten metal (Original hyungsang) into the spiritual mold (Inner hyungsang).30

Inner hyungsang Is a Kind of Mold

A mold of Inner hyungsang is not simply a mold concerned with external appearances, as in the case of an artificial mold. A mold of Inner hyungsang is vastly more detailed and includes internal structure as well. For example, the mold for the creation of a human physical body includes the intimately detailed structure of internal viscera, organs, tissues, and cells. A mold of Inner hyungsang is made up of ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles. Living beings which belong to a certain species have a common peculiar shape and a common character and they obey certain laws and mathematical principles. It is because of this that all things are created taking after the Inner hyungsang, the spiritual mold, in a way analogous to that by which an iron product resembles its mold.

A spiritual mold of Inner hyungsang, as just explained, is directly related to a created being. It should be noted, however, that there are many other ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles which are the molds not for created beings but rather for abstract beings. For example, such ideas or concepts as “God,” “I,” “parents,” “beauty,” “ideal,” “purpose,” and so on are not molds for things that appear in the world of time and space; they take part in creation but they are not molds for created beings as such.

d) Inner Give and Receive Action

What Is Inner Give and Receive Action?

An inner developmental four position foundation is formed in the Original sungsang through the inner give and receive action, centering on the purpose of bringing forth a new being. This inner give and receive action is carried out between subject and object in the Original sungsang; namely, between the unified faculty of intellect, emotion and will, and Inner hyungsang. The inner give and receive action centered on the purpose of creation, is the “thinking” or “planning” that takes place in God’s mind.

Why do we regard “thinking” as a give and receive action? Thinking, as we commonly understand it, is constituted by such functions of the mind as memory, reflection, judgment, interest, planning, opinion, understanding, imagination, conjecture, inference, hoping, meditation, interpretation, and so on. To be honest, even an illusion can be included in the concept of thinking, since it is also a phenomenon in the mind.

Thinking can, in turn, be classified into three categories: thinking of the past, thinking about the present, and thinking of the future. Thinking of the past is related to memory, thinking about the present is related to opinion, inference, understanding, and so on, and thinking of the future is related to planning, hoping, and so on. It should be noted here that ideas (or images) are necessarily involved in any kind of thinking. These ideas in our mind were acquired through our past experiences. For example, we have the images of birds or flowers in our mind because we have seen and experienced them. Thus, thinking always includes ideas (images), with which give and receive action is made in our mind.

Operation of Ideas

What does the expression “thinking necessarily requires ideas” mean? It means that any kind of thinking we do-whether it is related to the past, the present, or the future-is possible only with the use of ideas acquired from our past experiences. The richer our experiences in the past, in other words, the more ideas we can have, the more thinking we can do. This is similar to being able to increase one’s living expenses, when it is necessary, if one has saved money. Also, it is like our being able to use a necessary good at any time, if we have stored up a lot of goods. To deepen our knowledge is, in other words, to store up various ideas in the storehouse of our memory. Thus, ideas are drawn from the storehouse of memory and they are dealt with appropriately in our thinking, just as we select goods from the storehouse and use them fittingly, for example, in arranging a room. This process is called the “operation of ideas” in Unification Thought.

An idea is an image in the mind. An idea corresponding to a being is called a “simple idea,” whereas an idea consisting of two or more simple ideas in combination is a “complex idea.” Here, it should be noted that “simple” and “complex” are relative concepts. An operation, as in an operation of ideas, is something like the operation of machines. The operation of machines includes the following procedures: preparation of the machines and parts, construction of machines, overhaul of machines, assembly of parts into a machine, change of parts within a machine, assembly of a machine into a unified system, and so on.

Operation of Ideas is Give and Receive Action

The operation of ideas is carried out in a manner similar to the operation of machines. The “recollection” of an idea corresponds to the preparation of a machine. The “association” or “composition” of ideas corresponds to the construction of machines. The “analysis” of an idea corresponds to the overhaul of a machine. The “formation” of a new idea corresponds to the assembly of a new machine. “Conversion” corresponds to the exchange of parts within a machine. The “synthesis” of ideas corresponds to the assembly of machines into a unified system. There is another operation of ideas, which is called “obversion,” during which an affirmative form of judgment is changed into a negative form of judgment. Thus, the operation of ideas refers to recollection, association, analysis, formation, conversion, synthesis, obversion, and so on, with which various ideas are dealt with.

Recollection is to retrieve a necessary idea from one’s past experiences. Association of ideas means that one is reminded of an idea by the presence of another idea. For example, one is reminded of one’s mother when one thinks of one’s father. The formation of an idea refers to the operation with which several lower level ideas are combined to form a higher level idea. For example, an idea of a house is composed of the lower level ideas of foundation, cornerstone, pillar, crossbeam, beam, girder, rafter, roof, room, and so on. An analysis of an idea refers to the division of an idea into lower level ideas. For example, we analyze our body as consisting of the nervous system, digestive system, sense organs, circulatory system, respiratory system, muscular tissue, urinary organs, endocrine glands, lymph nodes, and so on. Synthesis of ideas refers to the operation in which various lower level ideas are united into a higher level idea. For example, the union of the ideas of the nervous system, digestive system, sense organs, circulatory system, respiratory system, muscular tissue, urinary organs, and so on makes the higher level idea of the human body. Conversion is the operation in which subject and object are exchanged while keeping the content of judgment. For example, the judgment “Every A is B” is changed into “Some B is A.” Obversion is the operation of changing an affirmative form of judgment into a negative form of judgment (i.e., a predicate is changed into the negative form), while keeping the meaning: “A is B” is changed into “A is not non-B.”

I have engaged in making a rather long explanation here in order to better help the reader to understand “thinking” as inner give and receive action.

Types of Give and Receive Action

As explained above, different kinds of thinking (recollection, judgment, opinion, imagination, understanding, inference, and so on) take place by operating with ideas in various ways. Give and receive action consists in the operation of ideas (see fig. 1.10). I can explain this point further. In order to understand that the operation of ideas is give and receive action, we first need to understand the types of give and receive action. There are five types: bi-conscious type, uni-conscious type, unconscious type, heteronomous type, and contrast type (or collation type).

A bi-conscious type of give and receive action is made when both the subject and the object have consciousness. A uni-conscious type is made when the subject has consciousness, whereas the object, which is an inorganic non-living being, does not. An unconscious type is one carried out unconsciously between subject and object. For example, the exchange of carbon dioxide and oxygen
between animals and plants is made unconsciously. A heteronomous type of give and receive action is made when two parties, which are non-living beings, are induced by the will of a third party to engage in give and receive action. For example, the various parts of a machine engage in give and receive action with one another according to the will of the engineer who made the machine.

A contrast type of give and receive action is made during the process of cognition, or in a judgment. In this type, only the subject has consciousness, as in the uni-conscious type. In this type, however, the subject purposefully brings into contrast two or more objective beings or elements within an object. For example, when we see a man and woman walking on the street we recognize them as husband and wife by making a comparison of their ages and gestures. Or, again, when we see commodities in a store, we select a good one by making a comparison of their qualities. Also, when we see a house with a red tile roof in a green forest, we can appreciate beauty by sensing harmony between them. In a contrast type of give and receive action, a judgment or comparison is made unilaterally by the subject. Yet, a judgment or comparison is possible only when the object manifests its appearance to the subject, who takes an active interest in the object. This is why this is also considered to be a give and receive action.

Thinking Is a Contrast Type of Give and Receive Action

I have explained that thinking is made by give and receive action. The spiritual apperception, or the subject of cognition, which is the union of intellect, emotion and will in the mind, contrasts various ideas obtained from one’s experiences and these ideas are then stored in the inner hyungsang. When the spiritual apperception contrasts the two elements, it recognizes one element as subject and the other element as object. The focus of interest of the spiritual apperception goes back and forth between the two elements within inner hyungsang. Thus, two elements are regarded as being engaged in a give and receive action, which is a contrast type of give and receive action in a narrow sense. Thus, both the give and receive action between the spiritual apperception and the inner hyungsang and that between the two elements within the inner hyungsang are contrast types of give and receive action.

What is the result of the give and receive action (or collation) between any two elements? Sometimes, two elements are regarded as being completely the same, and at other times they are regarded as resembling each other, and at still other times they are regarded as being different from each other. There are even cases in which they might be regarded as opposites. In other words, they can be seen as being in a relationship of correspondence in some cases, and as not being so in others. Since give and receive action takes place centering on purpose, the result may be different depending on the purpose. Anticipating a certain result, our spiritual apperception carries out give and receive action toward a definite direction. This is the act of thinking. It is because of the difference in the purpose of give and receive action and the way of collation that we come to have such various kinds of thinking as recollection, understanding, judgment, inference, hope, and so on. Thus, various ways of thinking are made successively in the same way that water flows in a river.

A flow of thinking can come to a conclusion at a given point. Then, an idea (either simple or complex) which can serve as a mold for the created being is formed. This idea might be called an “idea-mold.” An idea-mold is a new being that has been formed through the contrast type of give and receive action. It is a “new idea,” a mold for creation. However, this is not yet a Logos (plan), but rather it is a stage prior to a Logos, which might be called a “pre-Logos” or “pre-plan.” A new idea, or an idea-mold is something concrete, in which concepts, laws, and mathematical principles are included. In other words, it is a concrete idea for a created being with its detailed internal structures. This new idea, or pre-Logos (pre-plan) is formed in the initial stage of the inner give and receive action. The Logos (plan) of a created being is established in the second, following stage.

Purpose Is the Center

Thinking is an inner give and receive action taking place in the mind, and the give and receive action is centered on purpose. In humans, however, thinking is often vague, not having a definite purpose. In contrast, in God, the Creator, thinking is based on purpose from the very beginning. This is the purpose of creation (purpose for the whole, and the purpose for the individual), which is based on Heart.

Prior to God’s thinking of creation, the four position foundation centered on Heart, or the identity-maintaining four position foundation, was formed in God. Since Heart is an irrepressible emotional impulse, He could not help but establish the purpose of creation. The developmental four position foundation was formed on the basis of this identity-maintaining four position foundation. In other words, the identity-maintaining four position foundation (the unchangeability and absoluteness of God) remains as the basis of the developmental four position foundation, even after His creation.

Thus, God’s planning or thinking was made centered on purpose and Heart. This is a very important point, since it becomes yet another stan-dard for settling actual problems. Originally, it is not that we were allowed to be engaged in just any kind of thinking, but rather, we were meant to think solely motivated by Heart, and for the realization of the purpose of creation. Hence, in order to settle today’s social confusion, we need to abandon our self-centered, arbitrary ways of thinking and return to the original way: to think and act in order to realize the purpose of creation, in other words, to realize the Kingdom of Heaven.31

e) A Plan as the Result

What Is the Result?

What is the plan that is to be established as a result of the formation of the inner four position foundation? In the previous section, “inner give and receive action,” I explained planning as thinking, or as inner give and receive action. Now, I will explain the plan as being the result of thinking. The plan refers to the Word, or Logos, as is written in the Bible (John 1:1), an aspect of the Divine Character in the Original Image. Though I have already explained Logos as plan and as reason-law, I have explained it mainly as reason-law, and I have yet to explain it in detail as plan. Thus, some explanation should be added here. I can first summarize what has already been explained.

According to the Divine Principle, Logos is the Word or reason-law. The Word refers to idea, plan, and thought, and reason-law refers to the union of reason and law. Reason is characterized by freedom and purpose, whereas law is characterized by necessity and mechanicalness.

Accordingly, freedom and necessity are united and purpose and mechanicalness are united in the reason-law. Since the universe was created by reason-law, this reason-law is at work in all things. The reason-law at work in the natural world takes the form of natural laws, whereas the reason-law at work in human life, manifests as behavioral norms.

The fact that freedom and necessity are united in reason-law means that freedom is the freedom within necessity, or the freedom within law (principle). In other words, freedom is the freedom of selection by reason within the principle. Freedom outside the principle or law is license. Also, as already explained, Logos is the Word, or reason-law. Since reason-law, or the Word, is the object partner of God, resembling His dual characteristics (DP , 170), it is a new being and a created being. Besides these points, I have explained the following: Since creation is motivated by Heart, reason-law is also based on love. Love is at work behind both natural laws and values (or norms). In our daily life reason-law must be observed without fail. Only in a life of reason-law filled with love, can the peace of a spring garden, in which all kinds of flowers bloom, actually come.

Logos as Pre-plan

In the summary above I explained Logos mainly as reason-law, but I have not yet explained it as Word or plan in much detail. I will do so now.

Earlier I referred to planning when I discussed the inner give and receive action. Planning is not a plan, in the strict sense of a new being (resultant being). Rather, it is an action of thinking, namely, a give and receive action, or an operation of ideas. I have also referred to the concept of a “pre-plan.” This is a concrete spiritual mold, a model for a creature, or a “new idea” (an “idea-mold”), which is formed through a contrast type of give and receive action, and which contains concepts, laws, mathematical principles, and exact internal structures

The plan (pre-plan), however, is not the plan in the sense of being the Word with which God created the universe. It is the prior stage Logos, which is a static image, similar to a photo; it is not a dynamic and living image as can be seen in a movie. In contrast, the Logos, or Word, with which God created the universe, is a new living being, or a living plan. This explanation is supported by the Biblical passage: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men (John 1:1-4).

Logos as Plan

The Word with which all things were created is a plan possessing life and vigor. It is a new idea with exact structures, an idea-mold, or a new being (formed through the operation of ideas), which is given life and has assumed a dynamic character. Then, how does a new idea, which before had a static character, come to assume a dynamic character? It does so by making the passage from the first stage to the second in the inner give and receive action. There are two stages in the inner give and receive action between the spiritual apperception (union of intellect, emotion and will) and the inner hyungsang. In the first stage, a new idea (pre-plan) is formed through the operation of ideas. And in the second stage, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will are injected into the new idea centered on Heart (love), and then the new idea becomes vigorous and dynamic, and it becomes a perfected plan.

It must be clarified here that Yang and Yin, which exist as potentials within intellect, emotion and will, surface in the second stage, and harmonize the manifestation of the three faculties. The perfected plan in the second stage is Logos, the object partner of God, or Logos with dual characteristics (DP , 171). This is Logos as the Word with which God created the universe, or it is the plan as the result of the inner developmental four position foundation.

The dual characteristics of Logos refer to the fact that the necessary elements of both the inner sungsang and the inner hyungsang are contained in the Logos, in accordance with its level and its kind. In other words, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will which are in the inner sungsang, and ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles, which are in the inner hyungsang, are contained in the Logos according to the level and kind of created being intended. Thus, in the second stage of inner give and receive action, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will, which are motivated by Heart, are injected into the pre-plan-which had been formed through the operation of ideas-to vitalize it.32

This concludes my explanation of the inner developmental four position foundation. Let me briefly summarize what has been said so far.

f) A Summary of the Explanation of the Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

Center of the Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

The inner developmental four position foundation is formed prior to the outer developmental four position foundation in God’s creation. The purpose, which is the center of the four position foundation, and which is established on the basis of Heart, is to create human beings as God’s object partners of love, in other words, to realize love through human beings. Accordingly, for humans, the purpose of being created is to love one another, to love God and all things. Due to the fall, however, human beings have lost their original nature and have brought about today’s great confusion. Hence, one way to settle this confusion is to redirect all the purposes guiding human beings toward the original purpose of their being created.

Subject of the Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

The three faculties of intellect, emotion, and will are united, and are in the subject position in the inner developmental four position foundation. The values of truth, beauty and goodness are pursued through the faculties of intellect, emotion and will, respectively, and three cultural fields can be established through realizing these three values. In His creation of the universe, to realize the purpose of creation, God invested His whole energy and all of His intellect, emotion and will. Hence, in order to restore fallen human culture, presently in crisis, and to create a new one, intellectuals and scholars in various cultural fields should come forth with a unified ideal. In the human mind the faculties of intellect, emotion and will of both the spirit mind and the physical mind are unified, and intellect, emotion, and will are also unified. This union of intellect, emotion, and will is called the “spiritual apperception.” Their spiritual apperception is what makes humans spiritual beings, and beings possessing self-consciousness. The spirit mind pursues a life of truth, goodness, beauty, and love, namely, a life of value, whereas the physical mind pursues a life of food, clothing, shelter, and sex, namely, a material life. In an original human being, priority is put on a life of value, pursued through the spirit mind, and a material life, as pursued through the physical mind, has a secondary priority.

Object in the Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

The Inner hyungsang, in which ideas, concepts, laws, and mathematical principles are included, is in the object position in the inner developmental four position foundation. In the Inner hyungsang concepts, laws, and mathematical principles are united and included in an idea. This idea plays the role of a mold (spiritual mold) in creation. At times, a simple idea becomes the mold, and at other times a complex idea becomes the mold. The spiritual mold has an exact internal structure. The molten metal (spiritual molten metal) is pre-energy or the Original hyungsang. There are countless spiritual molds used in creation, all different from each other. In other words, each mold corresponds to an individual image. Since in humans the individual image is different for each person, the role of each mold is completed when once used. In contrast, the individual image for all things is for one species, and therefore, a single mold can provide for the many creatures that all belong to that one species.

Inner Give and Receive Action

In the inner developmental four position foundation a give and receive action between Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang is carried out centering on purpose. This is thinking or planning. Thinking is classified into three categories: thinking of the past (memory, recollection, and so on), thinking of the present (opinion, judgment, inference, and so on), and thinking of the future (plan, hope, ideal, and so on). The most fundamental element in thinking is an idea, or an image in the mind, and thinking is the process of working with ideas in various ways. The operation of ideas includes recollection, association, analysis, formation, conversion, synthesis, obversion, and so on.

Inner give and receive action, which takes place in the inner develop-mental four position foundation is, in short, the operation of ideas. The Inner sungsang (spiritual apperception), the subject, and the Inner hyungsang, the object, engage in give and receive action whereby the operation of ideas is carried out in various ways. The operation of ideas is made through a comparison of ideas. In other words, inner give and receive action consists of a comparison of ideas. This is a uniconscious type of give and receive action, and at the same time, a contrast type of give and receive action.

Result of the Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

Finally, I can summarize my explanation of a plan, which is established in the position of “result.” A plan, as a result, is different from the planning in the inner give and receive action. The latter means thinking or an activity, whereas the former means a new being which appears as the result of give and receive action. The plan as a new being is Logos, or the Word with which God created all things.

Inner give and receive action consists of two stages. In the first stage, a new idea is formed through the operation of ideas in the Inner hyungsang. A new idea is a pre-plan, an early stage of a plan, which is a static image lacking vitality or dynamism. The plan, as the Word with which God created the universe, is a new being endowed with vitality, which is formed in the second stage of inner give and receive action. The faculties of intellect, emotion, and will, or the spiritual apperception is injected into a new idea, and the idea is thereby activated, becoming a perfected idea. The plan formed in the second stage is the Logos, with dual charac-teristics, and reason-law is an integral part of it. Reason-law is the union of reason and law, wherein freedom and necessity are united. I have already discussed this point in detail in my explanation of the Logos in the section on the Divine Character.

4. Outer Developmental Four Position Foundation

a) What Is the Outer Developmental Four Position Foundation?

This foundation is a combination of the outer four position foundation and the developmental four position foundation. In other words, it is the outer four position foundation that has been formed through give and receive action outside the Original sungsang, namely, between the Original sungsang and the Original hyungsang, and which has assumed a developmental or dynamic nature.

As explained previously, development means the appearance of a being with a new character, namely, a new being (development is a concept arising when creation is seen from the perspective of the result). The developmental four position foundation is formed when the subject and object are engaged in give and receive action centering on the purpose of creation, thus giving rise to a new being.

The developmental four position foundation is formed inside and outside the Original sungsang, in the same way as is the identity-maintaining four position foundation. However, with the developmental four position foundation, the inner and outer four position foundations are not formed simultaneously. The inner developmental four position foundation is formed first, and then the outer developmental four position foundation is formed second.

b) Outer Developmental Four Position Foundation Is formed on the Basis of Inner Developmental Four Position Foundation

The four position foundation is a spatial understanding of the give and receive action, between subject and object, that is centered on Heart or purpose, and giving rise to a result. Accordingly, we can discuss the inner and outer developmental four position foundations from the viewpoint of give and receive action. Since development is a concept arising when creation is seen from the result, we can best understand the developmental four position foundation if we examine how the creation is made.

In creative activity, we first have an idea or plan in our mind. When we build a house, for instance, we first have a purpose and a plan in our mind and then we make a blueprint, or specifications, which is a plan written on paper. The formation of a plan is inner give and receive action, which takes place in the first stage of creation.

In the second stage of creation, a house is actually built using materials according to the plan. After a certain period of time, the building of a house is accomplished. Building a house with materials in accordance with the plan is give and receive action which takes place outside the mind; it is an outer give and receive action.

The plan is a new being that has not existed before, and the house is also a new creation that has not existed before. The appearance of a new being is creation when seen from the cause or motive, whereas it is development when seen from the result. In the outer give and receive action, the subject is a plan (to be exact, the person who made the plan or who keeps the plan), and the object is the various construction materials. The give and receive action between them is the construction work, and the result of the give and receive action is a completed house.

For another example, when a painter wants to draw a picture, he or she first sets up a purpose and makes a plan, which is a sketch. This is the first stage. When the plan is finished, the second stage starts. The painter paints a picture just as he or she planned, using materials such as a canvas, brushes, paints, an easel, and so on, until finally the actual picture is accomplished. The planning in the first stage, and the painting in the second stage, are both carried out through give and receive actions. Both the plan in the first stage and the picture in the second stage are new results, or new beings, which have not existed before. Thus, painting is creation, and at the same time is development.

c) All Creative Activities are Made Through the Two-Stage Developmental Four Position Foundations

I have clarified the following points. First, creation is always carried out in two stages. Second, the first, internal stage is planning, and the second, external stage is building or production. Third, both first and second stage give and receive actions are made centering on the same purpose, bringing about new beings as results. Here, the first stage is the inner developmental give and receive action, while the second stage is the outer developmental give and receive action.

These same principles are applied to all kinds of creative activities, including production, manufacturing, invention, art, and so on. The prototype of such activities is the inner and outer developmental give and receive actions within the Original Image. God first set up a purpose, and planned the creation of all things, and then He created all things as He planned by making use of the materials of the hyungsang (pre-energy). Planning is carried out by the inner developmental give and receive action, while the creation of all things is carried out by the outer developmental give and receive action.

I have explained that in human creative activity, creation or production is always accompanied by planning. In other words, inner developmental give and receive action always accompanies outer developmental give and receive action. The prototype of give and receive action in human creative activity is the give and receive action within God’s Original Image.

Give and receive action always takes place on the basis of the four position foundation. Therefore, another name for the four position foun-dation is give and receive action, and another name for give and receive action is the four position foundation. Hence we may conclude: Since inner developmental give
and receive action precedes outer develop-mental give and receive action, the inner developmental four position foundation precedes the outer developmental four position foundation. In other words, the inner developmental four position foundation and the outer developmental four position foundation are formed succe-ssively in God’s creation. This structure is called the “two-stage structure of creation of the Original Image,” which is illustrated in fig.1.11. In actual human creative activity as well, inner and outer four position foundations are formed successively; in this case the structure is called the “two-stage structure of actual creation.”

Here the following question may arise. Why is there a need to use such awkward terms as “inner developmental four position foundation,” “outer developmental four position foundation,” “two-stage structure,” and so on, in Unification Thought? Would it not be more understandable if we explained using such simple expressions as, “The plan is made first in creative activity”? Are sophisticated terms preferred over easy terms in Unification Thought? The primary reason why we use such technical terms is that Unification Thought is addressing the fundamental principles of the cosmos.

Fundamental principles or fundamental reasons should apply to all phenomena, whether in the spirit world or in the physical world. Fundamental principles cover a profound and broad sphere. Yet, the terms related to these principles should be as concise as possible. One example is “dual characteristics,” or “sungsang and hyungsang.” These terms apply to the human mind and body, as well as to the correlative attributes of animals, plants, minerals, and even those of a spirit person, and all things in the spirit world. Thus, the meaning of “dual characteristics” is broad and comprehensive. However, the term “dual characteristics” is difficult to understand as it is; therefore, it is necessary to explain it plainly and in more detail. Sometimes it becomes necessary to explain using an example or a metaphor.

Furthermore, such a way of explanation of Unification Thought terms is necessary since the fundamental principles dealt with in Unification Thought are mostly having to do with God and the spirit world, which can not be perceived with the physical five senses.

However, one must realize that an explanation using an example or a metaphor is merely an expedient way of clarifying a fundamental principle, and not the explanation of a fundamental principle in itself. A concept related to a fundamental principle is God’s “dual characteristics” or “sungsang and hyungsang.” Also, “give and receive action,” “four position foundation,” and “two-stage structure” are basic concepts related to fundamental principles. Thus, these terms can not be neglected. “Inner developmental four position foundation,” “outer developmental four position foundation,” and “two-stage structure of creation” are also such concepts.

Concerning this point, it may be asked: “In this busy time, when we have to live sparing just a minute or so, why is it necessary to have to learn such involved concepts?” The reason is that the standard with which to solve various complex problems can be clarified only through a correct understanding of such basic concepts.

d) Constituent Elements of the Outer Four Position Foundation

Let me return now to my explanation of the outer developmental four position foundation. As already mentioned, in human creative activity the outer developmental four position foundation is always formed after the formation of the inner developmental four position foundation, and this two-stage process is called the “two-stage structure of actual cre-ation.” Likewise, in God’s creation, a similar two-stage structure is formed: an inner developmental four position foundation and an outer develop-mental four position foundation are formed inside and outside of the Original sungsang. This structure is called the “two-stage structure of creation of the Original Image,” since these four position foundations are formed within the Original Image at the time of creation.

I have already discussed the inner developmental four position foundation within the Original Image in detail. Hence, I will omit its discussion here except to mention the following points which we should keep in mind. First, the inner developmental four position foundation consists of the four positions of center, subject, object, and result, where purpose, Inner sungsang (spiritual apperception), Inner hyungsang, and a new being, respectively, are set up. Second, the give and receive action between the subject and object is the process of thinking, or the process of operating with ideas.

The outer developmental four position foundation also consists of the four positions of center, subject, object and result. In this case, the center is the purpose of creation based on Heart (the very same purpose of creation as in the inner developmental four position foundation), the subject is the Original sungsang, the object is the Original hyungsang, and the result is a new being (created being) formed through the give and receive action between them. I will explain more specifically about each of these positions of the developmental four position foundation. The purpose as the center is the same as in the inner developmental four position foundation. Thus, I will omit an explanation about the purpose as center, and will only explain here about the Original sungsang as subject, the Original hyungsang as object, the outer give and receive action between them, and the new created being as a result.

Original sungsang as Subject

The outer developmental four position foundation in the Original Image is the foundation for give and receive action between Original sungsang and Original hyungsang. What actually is the content of the Original sungsang in the subject position? It is the plan which was formed as the result of the inner developmental four position foundation. In other words, it is the Word, Logos, or plan, that is, a new being formed through the inner give and receive action between the Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang. Inner give and receive action is thinking, or the process of thinking.

As already explained there are two stages in the process of inner give and receive action. In the first stage, an operation of ideas is made, whereby a pre-plan is formed. In the second stage, the faculties of intellect, emotion and will of the spiritual apperception are put into the pre-plan through the operation of Yang and Yin, which are the attributes of intellect, emotion and will, and the pre-plan then becomes a completed plan with vitality, which is the Logos with dual characteristics. Thus, the Logos is formed as a new being within the Original sungsang. Logos, to which the spiritual apperception refers, is engaged as the subject in the give and receive action with the object (Original hyungsang).

Here, I must clarify the following: Even if the spiritual apperception (the union of intellect, emotion and will), which is the Inner sungsang, is put into a “new idea” in the Inner hyungsang through the inner give and receive action, the spiritual apperception remains as it is; it retains its integrity and its function as the unity of intellect, emotion and will, since its function is essentially of an infinite and permanent nature. Thus, the Original sungsang, which is engaged in the give and receive action with the Original hyungsang, is the Logos to which the spiritual apperception refers.

Original hyungsang as Object

As explained in the section on the Divine Image, the Original Hyung-sang  is the fundamental material element with the potential for a limitless number of forms. The material element refers to the fundamental cause of the corporeal aspect of all created beings, and the potential for a limitless number of forms refers to the possibility of taking any shape, in the same way that water does.

Since the material element is the fundamental cause of matter, and is thus beyond the sphere of science, it is called in Unification Thought “prior-stage energy,” or simply “pre-energy.” When water is put into a container, it conforms to the shape of the container. Likewise, when the Original hyungsang is put into the mold (spiritual mold) of the plan in the Original sungsang, a creation appears, as an actual being with a definite shape.

Outer Give and Receive Action

Next, I will explain outer give and receive action. With such an explanation we will be able to confirm the validity of the viewpoint of Divine Principle and Unification Thought that all things were created through give and receive action between the sungsang and hyungsang of God.33 Outer give and receive action also takes place based on the four position foundation. I can explain outer give and receive action as follows: subject and object, separated from each other, are united and give rise to new beings (all things). It must be realized that this kind of explanation is an expedient explanation designed to help our understanding. Since God transcends time and space, there is no actual inside or outside, up or down, far or near, or wide or narrow in God. There is no large, medium, small, and no infinity or infinitesimal. There is no before or after, and no past, or present, or future; thus, infinity and temporality are the same.

In this way, give and receive action in God transcends time and space. For the convenience of our understanding, however, we explain give and receive action in God using a spatial concept: subject and object, which are occupying the same space and overlap each other, are engaged in give and receive action. As a matter of fact, in a human being, who is the union of spirit self and physical self, spirit self and physical self are engaged in give and receive action, while they are overlapping each other; in other words, they are not spatially separated, but occupy the same space. From this point of view, I will explain outer give and receive action within the Original Image: subject (Original sungsang) and object (Original hyungsang) are engaged in give and receive action, giving rise to a new being (a creation), whereas the new being, the subject, and the object are occupying the same space, all overlapping each other.

As already explained, the subject in the outer developmental four position foundation is Logos (a new being to which the spiritual apper-ception refers) in the Original sungsang, and the object is pre-energy, the potential for a limitless number of forms, in the Original hyungsang. When subject and object are engaged in the give and receive action, while occupying the same space overlapping each other, a new being is created. The created being also occupies the same space, overlapping them. Thus, the four positions of the four position foundation are not four separated positions, but are rather united in one position where the four “settled beings” exist, overlapping each other.

Let me now explain concretely the give and receive action between Original sungsang and Original hyungsang that overlap in one position. It is the injection of pre-energy into the mold (spiritual mold) of the plan (Logos). As already explained, a mold of an idea (idea-mold), or a new idea with fine internal structure is formed in the first stage of give and receive action within the Original sungsang, and when it is given life by the impulsive force of Heart, it becomes a completed plan. This completed plan is a living idea-mold, or, a living mold.34 In other words, an idea-mold with fine internal structure in the first stage, is given life in the next stage. However, as much vitality as it may have, and as fine an internal structure it may be, it is still only a mold (spiritual mold). In making an iron product, molten iron is injected into a mold which has a spatial structure. Likewise, in God, the material element of the Original hyungsang (pre-energy), which corresponds to molten iron, is injected into an idea-mold which has a spatial structure.

The spatial structure of a mold accepts and is filled by the molten metal. The injecting which takes place between the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang, is give and receive action. In other words, it is give and receive action whereby the material element in the Original hyungsang permeates into and fills the fine spatial structure of an idea-mold within the Original sungsang. At this moment Yang and Yin, the attributes latent within the Original hyungsang as potentiality, surface and bring about a harmonious variation to the stream of permeated matter of the Original hyungsang. We can regard such a phenomenon as give and receive action, since the Original sungsang, with its spatial structure, offers the Original hyungsang an opportunity to permeate, and the Original hyungsang fulfills the purpose of the spatial structure by filling it.

I have now explained outer give and receive action using the spatial expression of a model of mold to assist our understanding: Give and receive action between subject and object is carried out while they are occupying the same position overlapping each other. This is the content of the outer developmental give and receive action which takes place within the Original Image when God creates. We may add that this give and receive action is a uni-conscious type, wherein the subject is the spiritual apperception (with an idea-mold) and the object is the Original hyungsang (matter).

Created Being as Result

A created being, as the result, is a new being formed through the give and receive action between the Original sungsang and the Original hyungsang, centering on the purpose of creation. It is the “substantial object partner” or the “individual truth being” explained in the Divine Principle. Explaining the Divine Principle 35 states as follows: “God, who is the subject of the dual characteristics of Original sungsang and Original hyungsang, manifests Himself as the substantial object partner in image, and as the substantial object partner in symbol in accordance with the principle of creation” (p. 25). Also, it is written that every creation is “the individual truth being in the image of the dual characteristics of God” (ibid., 25), and “the substantial manifestation of the dual characteristics of subject and object” (ibid., 24). Exposition of the Divine Principle notes: “Every creation is God’s substantial object partner, formed in His likeness as a discrete projection of His dual characteristics” (DP , 19), and “These object partners are called individual embodiments of truth [individual truth beings], in image and symbol” (DP , 20).

The concepts of “substantial object partner” and “individual truth being” in the Divine Principle have slightly different meanings. This difference is a difference in viewpoint when seeing a created being. “Substantial object partner” is a concept wherein the focus is on the objective, material aspect of a being: it refers to the objective, material object in three dimensional space, rather than to the idealistic being in the mind. “Individual truth being,” on the other hand, is a concept wherein the focus is on the dual characteristics of a being, which resemble those of God. Since every being, without exception, is created in accordance with the law of resemblance, it is an individual truth being.

Resemblance and Outer Give and Receive Action

When we say that all things were created in the image of God’s dual characteristics, wherein, concretely, lies the resemblance? As already explained, a creation is a new being that has appeared as the result of give and receive action between Original sungsang and Original Hyung-sang  centering on the purpose of creation. Here, Original sungsang is the spiritual apperception with a living idea-mold, and Original hyungsang is the material element. The living idea-mold is the Logos with dual characteristics.

The dual characteristics of Logos refers to the duality of Inner Sung-sang and Inner hyungsang, where Inner sungsang refers to the faculties of intellect, emotion and will, and Inner hyungsang refers to an idea-mold, namely, a new idea formed through the operation of ideas. Thus, Logos is a new being in which the faculties of intellect, emotion and will, and an idea-mold are united. A part of the spiritual apperception (Inner Sung-sang) and an idea-mold (Inner hyungsang) from the Original sungsang are embodied in a created being (a final-stage new being). The material element from the Original hyungsang is embodied as it is in a created being. This is what is stated in the following: The material element of the Original hyungsang permeates into the fine spatial structure of an idea-mold. Thus, the elements of the Original sungsang and the elements of the Original hyungsang together give rise to a creation through the outer give and receive action between them.

It should be noted here that the Original sungsang and the Original hyungsang create all things through the operation of Yang and Yin. Thus, all things assume the elements of Yang and Yin, as well as the elements of the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang.

An idea-mold within the Original sungsang is the same as an individual image. Finally, we can conclude that a creation has inherited all the attributes of God (Original sungsang and Original hyungsang, Original Yang and Original Yin, and Individual Image). Such a creation (an individual) is called an “individual truth being.” This is what is meant in the Divine Principle when it states that a creation is an individual truth being in the image of the dual characteristics of God.

Relationship between Logos and All Things

Next, I will discuss the relationship between Logos and all things. In the Bible it is written that God made all things with the Word (John 1:1-3). According to the Divine Principle, the Word is Logos (DP , 170). Also it is written that “Since God, the subject partner of the Logos, exists with dual characteristics, the Logos as His object partner should also be composed of dual characteristics. If the Logos were without dual characteristics, all things made through it would not be composed of dual characteristics” (DP , 170-171). This means that the dual characteristics of a creation resemble the dual characteristics of Logos, and that the dual characteristics of Logos resemble the dual characteristics of God. Hence, we might be inclined to believe that the dual characteristics of Logos and the dual characteristics of God are precisely the same. From the perspective of Unification Thought, however, the dual characteristics of Logos are the duality of Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang, whereas the dual characteristics of God are the duality of Original sungsang and Original hyungsang. In other words, the dual characteristics of God and the dual characteristics of Logos are not precisely the same. Thus, the resemblance of all things to the dual characteristics of God means a resemblance to the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang of God, whereas the resem-blance of all things to the dual characteristics of Logos means a resemblance to the Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang of Logos. Then, what aspect of Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang do all things resemble?

As stated before, Logos is a perfected plan, or a living plan, formed at the second stage of the inner developmental give and receive action, by means of the injection of a part of the spiritual apperception into a new idea (an idea-mold), which was formed in the first stage of the inner developmental give and receive action. Thus, the Inner sungsang of Logos is a part of the faculties of intellect, emotion and will which is put into an idea-mold, and the Inner hyungsang of Logos is that idea-mold itself.36 This is what is meant by the dual characteristics of Logos as Inner sungsang and Inner hyungsang. These are the dual characteristics of Logos which the Divine Principle says the dual characteristics of a created being resemble.

It should be noted here that a created being in the spatio-temporal world, does not resemble the dual characteristics of Logos as such. Logos is a living plan, an idea with vitality. It is something like a picture in a movie, or an image in our dream. When it is said that actual humans and other creations resemble the dual characteristics of Logos, it means that they resemble those living and moving images. In other words, humans and other creations existing as living images (i.e., in Logos) resemble actual humans and other creations except for the fact that they do not have tangible bodies. In order for them to become beings with tangible bodies, they must resemble the dual characteristics of God. In other words, they must resemble the Original sungsang and Original Hyung-sang  of God.

Then, how do they come to resemble the Original sungsang and Original hyungsang of God? They do so when the material element (pre-energy) within Original hyungsang permeates into the fine spatial structure of a living mold within Original sungsang, the process whereby outer give and receive action takes place. Through this outer give and receive action, a moving image comes to have a tangible body and it becomes an actual substantial being. Thus, a creation becomes that which resembles the dual characteristics of God.

I hope that I have now clarified how the dual characteristics of God and the dual characteristics of Logos are different from each other. I hope, too, that I have clarified the difference between them when we say that a creation resembles the dual characteristics of God, and when we say that it resembles the dual characteristics of Logos. I will now discuss origin, division, and union action, or Chung-Boon-Hap action, which is related to the give and receive action.

D. Origin, Division, and Union Action

What Is Origin, Division, and Union Action?

As already explained, give and receive action takes place on the basis of the four position foundation. In other words, in order for give and receive action to take place, the four positions of center, subject, object and result should necessarily be established. Every phenomenon takes place in time and space. Give and receive action seen from the viewpoint of space is the four position foundation. Give and receive action can also be seen from the viewpoint of time, and the temporal perception of give and receive action is “origin, division, and union action” (or Chung-Boon-Hap action). In other words, give and receive action as the process of the formation of the four position foundation is origin, division, and union action. First, the center is established, next, subject and object are established, and finally, the result is established. Thus, give and receive action in terms of three stages is the origin, division, and union action (see fig. 1.12).

In the Divine Principle, it is written that “the four position foundation is realized by God, husband and wife, and children; they complete the three stages of origin, division, and union action. Hence, the four position foundation is the root of the principle of three stages” (DP , 25). This passage indicates that the four position foundation is give and receive action when seen from the viewpoint of space, and origin, division, and union action when seen from the viewpoint of time.37 Hence, the content of origin, division, and union action is entirely the same as that of give and receive action. That is, centering on the purpose based on Heart, subject and object engage in harmonious give and receive action thereby forming a union or a new being. Therefore, the types of origin, division, and union action correspond with those of give and receive action. Hence, there are four kinds of origin, division, and union action: inner identity-maintaining origin, division, and union action, outer identity-maintaining origin, division, and union action, inner developmental origin, division, and union action, and outer developmental origin, division, and union action

Origin-Division-Union and Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis

The temporal concept of origin, division, and union action has special significance when compared with the Communist materialistic dialectic. Communism is based on the materialistic dialectic, which is a theory of the development of nature that consists of the following three laws: the law of contradiction (or the law of the unity and struggle of opposites), the law of transformation from quantity to quality, and the law of the negation of the negation. It is well-known that Marx inherited the concept of the dialectic from Hegel’s idealistic dialectic, and that he connected it to materialism. Hegel introduced the basic form of dialectic development: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, or affirmation, negation, and negation of negation.

Marxism critically inherited this dialectical form from Hegel, and made use of it in explaining the development of nature and history. According to the materialist dialectic, in development, a thing (affirmation, or thesis) necessarily comes to have an element within itself (antithesis) that negates the thing, and they come to oppose each other (this state is called opposition or contradiction). This opposition (contradiction) is negated again (negation of negation), and is transcended to a higher stage (synthesis). This is the three-stage dialectical form of development. Here, transcendence refers to the fact that when a thing is negated (and again negated), the affirmative elements within the thing are retained and the thing is elevated to a new stage.

Let us consider the process of the hatching of a chicken egg. An egg (thesis) contains within itself an embryo (antithesis), which negates the egg and, as the embryo grows, the opposition or contradiction between them becomes greater, and finally this contradiction is transcended, and the egg is negated. At this time, the yolk and the white, which are the affirmative elements, are absorbed (in other words, preserved) as nutrition into the embryo, bringing about a chick.

Marxism also applied this form of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis to its explanation of social development. For example, the development of capitalist society into socialist society is explained as follows: Capitalist society (thesis) necessarily has within itself the proletarian class (antithesis), which negates the capitalist society. With the growth of the proletarian class, the class struggle intensifies, and finally the capitalist society collapses. At this time, the affirmative elements of the capitalist society-economic development, technical development, etc-are preserved and they are inherited by socialist society, which is a higher stage of society (synthesis).

Critique of the Theory of Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis

Here, I will discuss the dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and clarify whether it is correct or incorrect. Its correctness depends on whether development in nature and society are actually in accordance with the process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, or not. In other words, what should be clarified is whether or not the dialectic form of develop-ment is in accordance with actual processes. This must be analyzed, since Marxism has claimed that the materialist dialectic is science, and that Marxism is a philosophy which has appeared in order to solve actual problems-the structural problems and ills of capitalism. In fact, neither the materialist dialectic nor the dialectic form of development is in accordance with actuality, and neither has been successful in solving actual problems. The materialist dialectic and the dialectic form of development are false. Let me analyze them more concretely to support this contention.

Let me first critique the dialectic form of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, taking the hatching of an egg as an example. First, the embryo within an egg is not something which appeared afterwards as a negative element whereby hatching is accomplished, but rather it was a part of the egg from the very beginning, together with the shell, white and yolk. The embryo, which is part of an egg, can not negate the egg. If the embryo were to negate the egg, it would have to have been something that did not originally exist within the egg, but would have to have appeared as a negation within the egg sometime afterwards. This is in accordance with the process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. In reality, however, the embryo existed as a part of the egg from the very beginning. Second, it is unreasonable to say that the yolk and white are negated in the hatching, since they are simply absorbed as nutrients by the embryo. This is actually an affirmation. Third, it is not true that the embryo becomes a chick, a new being, when the shell is broken, whereby the egg is negated. The fact is that the chick, which has already developed into a chick (a new being), comes out by pecking the shell open. Thus, the hatching of an egg does not follow the dialectic form of development-thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.

Next, I will critique the dialectic development of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis as it is applied to social development. According to this theory, capitalist society (thesis) is negated by the proletarian class (antithesis) existing within itself, whereby it is changed into a socialist society (synthesis), which is a society at a higher stage, and the achievements of capitalist society are preserved in the socialist society. However, this scenario was not the case in reality.

It was to be expected that the advanced capitalist countries, such as Great Britain, the United States, France, and Japan would first be changed into socialist countries. But this was not the case. On the contrary, socialism was established in the underdeveloped countries, to which this formula could not be applied. Second, when socialism was established in the underdeveloped countries, the early capitalistic achievements in their countries prior to revolution were not preserved, but were rather damaged, and the economy actually regressed to a still earlier stage. That is why Lenin had to carry out the New Economy Policy (NEP) after the revolution, and Deng Xiaoping, after the Cultural Revolution, acknowledged the failure of the Chinese economy.

Thus, the dialectic form of development, or thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, which was applied to social development, proved discordant with actual historical facts. The former Eastern European socialist coun-tries, along with the former Soviet Union, the suzerain socialist country, which were supposed to be economically more developed than capitalist countries, came to an economic deadlock, and as a result, they finally collapsed. This fact proves beyond any doubt the falseness of the materi-alist dialectic form of development: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Thus, the materialist dialectic theory of development totally failed in solving actual problems, since it was not in accordance with natural phenomena or with historical facts.

Theory of Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis and its Failure in Solving Actual Problems

Then, why did the theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis fail in solving actual problems? We should make an analysis of its failure. The first reason for its failure is the absence of purpose in the form of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Development without purpose has no direction; in other words, it is aimless. In a chicken egg, the purpose to become a chick is determined, and once the egg is warmed at the appropriate temperature, development takes place in time, realizing its purpose. Where there is no purpose, there can be no development. The same thing can be said about social development. If there were only the opposing thesis and antithesis, without any purpose, social development would be aimless. In a capitalist society, capitalists seek to maximize their profit, laborers seek to increase their wages and improve their labor conditions; and only a small number of professional revolutionists would have the purpose of realizing socialism. In such a conflicting society, where two classes are opposed to each other without any common purpose, social development to a new stage, which is supposed to take place according to the three stage dialectic, could not be expected from the very beginning.

A second reason for the dialectic’s failure is that the theory of thesis and antithesis, which are regarded as being in opposition, contradiction, or conflict, necessarily leads to the neglect of cooperation and harmony. Social development can only be achieved through a harmonious and cooperative relationship between members of a society. Yet, in this theory, the law (dialectic) and form (thesis, antithesis, and synthesis) of development are based on a relationship of opposition, contradiction, or conflict. Consequently, it has become almost commonsense to regard all human relationships as contradictory or in opposition, where harmony and cooperation are rare and abnormal. In such a conflictive society, how can there be development? If there were a person in such a society, with the philosophy that development comes through cooperation, he would be alienated because of his philosophy which defies that very society.

The proposal that development is made through harmonious and cooperative relationships can also be applied to development in nature. As explained already in the example of the hatching of a chicken egg, a chick is born through the cooperative interaction between the embryo on one hand, and the yolk, white and shell on the other hand. Thus, development in both nature and society is made through harmonious and cooperative relationships between elements or between persons centering on a common purpose (or goal). In the Marxist theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, however, purpose or cooperative relationships are neglected, and so it became a false theory having failed to solve actual problems.

Here, it may be understood that the counterproposal to the form of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis is the form of origin, division, and union. The theory of origin, division, and union action is, in other words, the theory of give and receive action, or the theory of the four position foundation. Only through the three-stage process of origin, division, and union, is a harmonious and cooperative relationship established, and as a result, a new being appears. This is development.

It should be noted here that the three stages of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis and the three stages of origin, division, and union do not correspond to each other at all. These theories are similar only in the fact that they each have three stages. In fact, thesis and origin are different, antithesis and division are different, and synthesis and union are different. The thesis in “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis” refers to a thing, whereas origin in “origin, division, and union” refers to purpose or Heart. Antithesis in “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis” refers to a negative element which opposes the thing, whereas division in “origin, division, and union” refers to the two elements of subject and object which exist in a correlative relationship. Finally, synthesis in “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis” refers to that which appears through the transcendence of the opposition between thesis and antithesis, whereas union in “origin, division, and union” refers to a new being that appears through the give and receive action between subject and object.

Thus, it becomes very clear that the theory of origin, division, and union action, which is the temporal perception of give and receive action, is the only successful counterproposal to the Marxist theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, which has failed to solve actual problems of development. With this I conclude my explanation of the main points of the theory of the Original Image. Let me now move on to explain some points related to the structure of the Original Image: the unity in the structure of the Original Image and the ideal of creation.

E. Unity in the Structure of the Original Image

As explained earlier, the structure of the Original Image is the correlative relationship between sungsang and hyungsang in the Divine Image. Through clarification of this structure, it has become possible to arrive at standards for solving various actual problems, since most problems are those of relationships, and they are caused by improper relationships. In other words, once the structure of the Original Image is clarified, thus clarifying the original structure of relationships in all things, then all kinds of problems have the possibility of being fundamentally and eternally solved. What should be added here, concerning the structure of the Original Image, is why the concept of structure is necessary and what the Original Image is when seen from the viewpoint of structure.

Traditionally, the word “structure” has been used in explaining the interrelations between such things as materials in a building, or in a machine. It has been used when we analyze the mechanics of material beings: the structure of the human body, the structure of the economy, the structure of a molecule, the structure of an atom, and so on. Thus, when we investigate things we commonly use the concept of structure. If the concept of structure is extended, we may use it in analyzing immaterial things such as consciousness, spirit, and so on. In fact, such terms as the “structure of mind,” “spiritual structure,” and so on have also been used.

Coming from this perspective, I used the concept of structure in treating the attributes of the invisible God. We can understand the attributes of God in detail, especially sungsang and hyungsang, by using the concept of structure. However, even when doing so and, indeed, when classifying the various kinds of give and receive action between sungsang and hyungsang, we must not forget that in reality the Original Image transcends time and space. Then, what is the reality of the Original Image which we discuss here using concepts of structure or time and space?

In a word, the Original Image is a oneness. Since there is no space, there is no position, no front or back, no right or left, no up or down, no inside or outside, no wide or narrow, no far or near, and there is no shape, such as triangle or square. Infinity and the infinitesimal are the same. The Original Image is the multidimensional world in which all spaces are overlapping in one point. At the same time, it is the world from which up and down, front and back, right and left, and inside and outside are extended infinitely.

Moreover, there is no time in the Original Image. However, if we must use a temporal concept, past, present, and future are all united in a “now.” This can be compared to a reel of motion picture film in which past, present, and future are all contained. Time is united in one point. In other words, there is eternity in a moment, and a moment is in eternity. Thus, a moment and eternity are the same. This means that the Original Image is the world of “pure continuance” (the state in which sungsang and Hyung-sang , Yang and Yin are united). In other words, “pure continuance” chara-cterizes time in the Original Image.

In short, the Original Image is “pure oneness.” Not only time and space, but the causes of all other phenomena (except for the non-principled phenomena related with the human fall) are united in a single point. In other words, all phenomena in the universe including time and space appeared from this oneness. Just as an infinite number of infinitely long lines can be drawn above and below, front and back, right and left from a single point, the world of time and space expands infinitely from this oneness into the directions of above and below, front and back, and right and left.

No matter how vast and boundless the universe may be, and no matter how complex the phenomena and movements in the universe may be, the fundamental principles which rule time and space and all phenomena in the universe lie in this single point, namely, oneness. In other words, the principle of unification, the principle of give and receive action, and the principle of love lie in this single point. Hence, space was developed from the single point of the four position foundation, and time was developed from the single point of origin, division, and union action.

F. Ideal of Creation

What Is the Ideal of Creation?

The ideal of creation is related to the structure of the Original Image since it is directly related to the purpose of creation, which is the center of the four position foundation. Generally speaking, an ideal refers to a state wherein our hope or desire is fully realized. Why do we have hope and desire? Because we want to obtain joy. How is joy produced? Joy arises when love is realized, since the basis of joy is the impulse of Heart, namely, the impulse of love. Concerning the question of how joy is pro-duced, Divine Principle explains as follows:

God wanted His creations to be object partners embodying goodness that He might take delight in them (DP , 32).

Joy is the purpose of creation, and joy can only be attained when desire is fulfilled (DP , 70).

Joy arises when we have an object partner in which our internal nature and external form are reflected and developed (DP , 33).

The three great blessings are fulfilled when the whole creation, including human beings, completes the four position foundation with God as the center. This is the Kingdom of Heaven, where ultimate goodness is realized and God feels the greatest joy. This is, in fact, the very purpose for which God created the universe (DP , 32-33).

In sum, the purpose for which God created the universe is to seek joy, and joy is attained when an object partner embodies goodness, when one’s desire is fulfilled, when an object partner resembles the subject, and when the purpose of goodness is realized. In other words, God’s joy is attained first when a creation becomes the object partner of goodness, resembling God, whereby God’s desire is fulfilled, and second, when a reciprocal relationship between God and a creation is established. The fulfillment of God’s desire is, in other words, the fulfillment of His hope or wish. It is the realization of God’s ideal. The object partner of goodness is the object partner of love, since the basis of goodness is love. The resemblance of a creation to God refers to its resemblance to the harmonious give and receive action between God’s sungsang and hyungsang, and its resemblance to God’s act of love. This is in accordance with what is written in the Divine Principle: “God’s purpose of creation can be achieved only through love” (DP , 59). Hence, the meaning of God’s ideal becomes clear. It is the state where God’s intention (or hope) at the time of creation is fully realized, and the state where God’s love is fully realized through human beings who resemble God.

Difference between Purpose of Creation and Ideal of Creation

Let me clarify the difference between the purpose of creation and the ideal of creation. The purpose of creation is to attain joy as is written in the Divine Principle. Joy is attained when desire is fulfilled. The fulfillment of desire is the fulfillment of hope or wish. The fulfillment of God’s wish is none other than the realization of the ideal of creation. Therefore, it is concluded that the fulfillment of God’s desire as well as the attainment of God’s joy can be achieved when the ideal of creation is realized. Ultimately, God’s purpose of creation is the realization of the ideal of creation. This is in accordance with what the Divine Principle states: “Had God’s purpose of creation been realized in this way, an ideal world without even a trace of sin would have been established on the earth” (DP , 36).

Here, I will clarify, for the purpose of aiding our understanding, the difference between the purpose of creation of human beings and the purpose of creation of all things. The purpose for which God created human beings and all things was to seek joy by seeing them. Yet, direct, exciting, and deep loving joy can be felt only through human beings. God also feels joy from all things. God’s joy from all things, however, can not be as exciting as that from human beings. Nevertheless, God’s joy from all things was to be attained indirectly through human beings who had perfected themselves. In fact, human beings are God’s embodied object partners in image, while all things are God’s embodied object partners in symbol (DP , 28). This means that all things were created as the direct object partners of joy for human beings. Concerning this point, Divine Principle writes as follows: “The natural world is an object partner which exhibits human internal nature and external form in diverse ways. Hence, ideal human beings receive stimulation from the world of nature. Sensing their own internal nature and external form displayed throughout the creation, they feel immense joy” (DP , 35).

Since the individual images for all things are different from kind to kind, the purposes for their creation are supposed to be different, respect-ively, from kind to kind. However, nothing is mentioned about this in the Divine Principle. For example, the purposes of creation for flowers and the purposes of creation for birds are not the same; however, there is no explanation about this. There is no explanation because there is no real need to clarify each individual purpose of creation. The purpose of creation for flowers is to make human beings joyful when seeing the beauty of flowers, and the purpose of creation for birds is to make human beings joyful when hearing the singing of birds. In the Divine Principle, the purpose of creation for all things refers to the common aspect among the various purposes of creation for all things.

In addition to the original meaning explained above, the purpose of creation in the Divine Principle sometimes refers to the purpose for being created, and the ideal of creation. The original meaning of the purpose of creation is that “God seeks joy through created beings.” In other words, the purpose of creation is “the purpose established by God, the Creator,” and at the same time “the purpose established in His creation.” In the Divine Principle, however, the purpose of creation is used also in the sense of the purpose for being created. For example, “a person who has realized the purpose of creation” (DP , 112, 167) means “a person who has realized the purpose for being created.” To be precise, the purpose of creation is the purpose of God, the Creator, to seek joy, and the purpose for being created is the purpose of human beings to return joy to God.

Our purpose in making a watch is “to know time,” and a watch is made “to tell us time,” which is the purpose of a watch being made. The purpose of making and the purpose for being made are different. Likewise, the purpose of creation and the purpose for being created are different. What we should do for God is not “to feel joy” (like God’s purpose of creation), but rather “to return joy” (the purpose for being created). Let me examine the purpose of creation in the following statement: “God could not accomplish His purpose of creation due to the human Fall” (DP , 155). The purpose of creation here clearly means that “God seeks joy,” and it is different from the purpose of creation in “a person who has realized the purpose of creation” mentioned above.

Consider an example in which the purpose of creation is used in the meaning of the ideal of creation. Divine Principle says that “God’s provi-dence to have fallen people establish the foundation upon which they could receive the Messiah, and thence complete the purpose of creation, began with Adam’s family” (DP , 181). It is unnatural to interpret “the purpose of creation” in this statement as “to seek joy.” Rather, it is more natural to interpret it in the sense of meaning the ideal of creation, which is “the state in which God’s love is fully realized.” This point also becomes clear if we examine the following statement: “This foreshadowed that when Christ comes again, he will surely be able to realize God’s ideal of creation, which will never again be withdrawn from the earth” (DP , 202). The meaning of “ideal of creation” in this sentence and “purpose of creation” in the previous sentence are the same. It is not natural to interpret “ideal of creation” in this sentence in the sense of the original meaning of the purpose of creation, namely, to seek joy. Therefore, we should interpret “purpose of creation” in the previous statement in the sense of the “ideal of creation.”

Thus, in the Divine Principle, the purpose of creation is often used in the sense of the purpose for being created, or in the sense of the ideal of creation. In Unification Thought, however, a distinction is made between these concepts. When there is no need to distinguish between them, in other words, when either the purpose of creation or the purpose for being created can be used, or when a specific purpose is mentioned, we simply use “purpose.”

I have clarified the difference between the ideal of creation and the purpose of creation. In sum, the ideal of creation refers to “the state in which the goal is realized,” and the purpose of creation refers to “the goal” which will be realized in the future. In fact, as already stated, the ideal of creation is “the state in which God’s love is fully realized through human beings who resemble God.” On the other hand, the purpose of creation is “to seek joy through the object partner,” which is the goal to attain in the future. If we speak in grammatical terms, the ideal of creation is expressed in the future perfect tense, while the purpose of creation is expressed in the future tense. Hence, the ideal of creation is “the state in which the purpose of creation has been realized,” and the purpose of creation is attained when the ideal of creation is realized.

Ideal of Creation Is the State in Which God’s Love Is Fully Realized

Then, what is “the state in which God’s love is fully realized”? To state the conclusion, it is “the state in which the ideal person, the ideal family, the ideal society, and the ideal world are realized.” Here the ideal person refers to the ideal man or woman who has realized the unity between mind and body, resembling God’s harmony of sungsang and hyungsang; the ideal man or woman who can realize God’s love to all human beings and all things; and the ideal man or woman who can serve God as the True Parents.” Such a person is one who has realized Jesus’ Words: “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48). Hence, such a person is “unique in all the cosmos,” “the lord of the entire natural world,” and the possessor of “the value of the cosmos” (DP , 166).

An ideal family is formed through the marriage of such an ideal man and woman, resembling the harmony of God’s Yang and Yin. Such a loving family will love their neighbors, society, nation, world, and all things and it will attend God as True Parents. When ideal families congregate to form a society, that society will be filled with love, resembling the image of God, and attend God as the True Parents, while realizing harmony with other societies. That is the ideal society. As ideal societies expand to form the world, this will become the world resembling the image of God, where all humankind enters into the relationship of brotherhood, while attending God as the True Parents of humankind, and they will live a life of eternal peace, prosperity and happiness. This is the ideal world, the utopia about which saints, sages, righteous people, and philosophers have dreamed since the beginning of history.

Love is realized by people living lives centered on the values of truth, goodness and beauty. Hence, the ideal world is a world of values, and will be a unified world characterized by the three major spheres of true life, ethical life and artistic life, and at the same time it will be a society of “mutual existence, mutual prosperity and mutual righteousness,” wherein God’s love is realized in politics, economy, and religion (ethics). This is the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. The ideal of creation refers to the state wherein such an ideal human being, ideal family, ideal society and ideal world are realized. Once such a state is realized, once the ideal of creation is realized, then God’s purpose of creation, namely, His original desire to seek eternal joy will be fulfilled. This concludes my explanation of the ideal of creation.

Now, let us consider the theme, “Traditional Ontologies and Unification Thought.” I would like to briefly introduce an outline of some traditional ontologies along with short comments about them in order to highlight the limitations they faced in solving actual problems. In this way, it will become more evident that Unification Thought can serve as a standard for solving actual problems.

III. Traditional Ontologies and Unification Thought

The theory of God, or the theory of the origin of the universe, that is, ontology, has traditionally been held to be the basis of a philosophical system. Hence, the way one addresses problems is generally determined by one’s ontology. Let me here introduce the fundamental ideas of past ontologies, and their impact, or lack thereof, in solving actual problems.

View of God in Augustine and Thomas Aquinas

Affirming that God is spirit, Augustine asserted that God produced matter from nothing and created the world. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas inherited Aristotle’s principle of matter and form and regarded God as the supreme “pure form,” in which there is no matter. Like Augustine before him, Aquinas maintained that God created the world out of nothing.

How does such an understanding of God relate to actual problems? Since these views regard the spirit as primary and matter as secondary, there developed the tendency to deny the physical world and to attach importance only to the spiritual world. This resulted in the view that the only thing that is important is salvation in the world after death. Such a view dominated the Christian world for a long time. Nevertheless, matter is necessary in our actual life; hence, the Christian’s life has remained in a contradictory state, with one pursuing material goods in actual life while, at the same time, holding material things to be of little value in the realm of one’s faith. Consequently, with Christian theology, the solution of actual problems on earth was impossible from the beginning, since many problems of our life on earth are related to material things.

The fundamental reasons that Christian theology could not but fail in solving actual problems are: first, it regarded God as purely spiritual, matter originating from nothing; and second, it did not clarify the motivation and purpose of God’s creation.

Li-Ch’i Theory

During the Sung dynasty, the Neo-Confucianist Chou Tun-i (Chou Lien-hsi, 1017-73) asserted that the origin of the universe is the Great Ultimate (or T’ai-chi). Chang Tsai (Chang Hêng-ch’ü, 1020-77) called it the Ultimate Vacuity (or T’ai-hsu). Both spoke of Ch’i as the unity of yin and yang. Since Ch’i can generally be equated with matter, these theories were close to materialism.

In contrast, the Li-Ch ’i Theory advocated by Ch’eng I (Ch’eng Ich’uan, 1033-1107) stated that all things are composed of Li and Ch ’i together. This theory was perfected by Chu Hsi (1130-1200). Li was seen as an intangible substance existing behind phenomena, and Ch’i was matter. Chu Hsi asserted that Li was more essential than Ch’i, and that Li was not only the law of heaven and earth but also the law within humanity. Accordingly, he saw that the law followed by heaven and earth and the ethical law of human society are manifestations of this same Li.

In daily life based on this thought system, one strove to maintain harmony and to live in accordance with the law of heaven and earth. Eventually, people came to focus on maintaining order and observing social ethics. Moreover, since everything was attributed to law, people became prone to taking a bystander’s attitude with regard to change and/or crisis in nature and society. It became unlikely for such people to opt for a creative and active way of life leading to dominion over nature and development of society. As a result, those who lived by the Li-Ch’i theory were not able to deal effectively with actual problems. The fundamental limitation of this thought system is that the motivation and purpose for which all things appeared from the Great Ultimate or from Li-Ch’i were never clarified.

Hegel’s Absolute Spirit

According to G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831), the origin of the universe is God, who is the Absolute Spirit, Logos, or Notion. Notion develops by itself through contradictions according to the dialectical form of development, i.e., the three stages of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. When Notion self-develops and achieves the level of Idea, it alienates itself (or negates itself) to become nature. Idea appears as spirit in human beings, and in human beings Idea recovers itself and, after passing through many stages of development, it finally realizes itself as the Absolute Spirit. In other words, it returns to itself (Absolute Spirit) which was/is the starting point. Thus, Hegel regarded human history as the process wherein Logos actualizes itself, and he maintained that human society, through the actualization of a rational state, would ultimately take on a rational form in which freedom would be realized to the highest degree, and human society would realize its most rational form.

In Hegel’s philosophy, the world and history are the processes of the self-actualization of Logos; therefore, human society would naturally become a rational form according to the dialectical form of development. He believed that this rational state would be actualized in Prussia. In this view, we are relegated to the status of being onlookers in the face of irrational reality, since we should entrust the actual development of society to the law of necessity.

In addition, Hegel’s view that nature is Idea, in the form of otherness, could be regarded as a type of pantheism,38 with which the solution of any actual problems becomes quite difficult. Hegel’s philosophy, more-over, could easily lead one into atheistic humanism or materialism. His perspective would also provide a foundation for the later rise of the Marxist theory of struggle, since it regarded contradiction as the impetus for development. In other words, Hegel’s philosophy failed to solve the actual problems of Prussian society; instead, it provided the basis for the appearance of atheistic philosophies like Marxism. All these consequences stem from the fact that Hegel regarded God as Logos, and the dialectical self-development of Logos as God’s creation.

Schopenhauer’s Blind Will

A. Schopenhauer (1788-1860), in opposition to Hegel’s rationalism, asserted that the essence of the world is irrational. In his view, the essence of the world is the will working blindly, without any purpose, which he called a “blind will to life” (blinder Wille zum Leben). The human being is moved by this blind will to life, and is reduced to living merely for the sake of living. Human beings thus live without any kind of satisfaction, always seeking after something. Satisfaction and happiness are merely temporary experiences; what exists more enduringly is just dissatisfaction and pain. He regarded this world essentially as a “world of pain.” What arises from the philosophy of Schopenhauer is pessimism. He advocated salvation from the world of pain through artistic contem-plation and religious asceticism; nevertheless, what he actually offered was no more than a theory of escape from reality-hardly a solution to any actual problems.

The reason why Schopenhauer failed in solving actual problems is that he did not know the reality of God’s creation and His providence of salvation, and he did not realize that the world is dominated by evil.

Nietzsche’s Will to Power

In contrast to Schopenhauer, who assumed a pessimistic attitude toward life and said that the essence of the world is the blind will to life, Friedrich W. Nietzshe (1848-1900) stated that the essence of the world is a “will to power” (Wille zur Macht), and assumed an attitude of thoroughly affirming life. The will to power is the will to seek to be strong, and to control. He established the concept of the “superman” (Übermensch) as an ideal image embodying the will to power, and asserted that the human being must endure any fate and must be ready to suffer any pain which life presents in the process of striving to achieve the status of a superman. Moreover, Nietzsche radically denied Christianity and proclaimed that God was dead. He asserted that Christian morality sympathizes with the weak, denies the strong, and opposes the essence of life and is, in effect, a slave morality.

Consequently, Nietzsche’s view represents a denial of all the traditional views of value. Furthermore, his concept of the will to power led to the adoption of force as a way of solving actual problems. Hitler and Mussolini would later make use of Nietzsche’s thought as a means of maintaining their power. In short, Nietzsche also failed in solving actual problems.

Needless to say, Nietzsche’s failure is that he denied the true God. What he should have denied is only the false God. Yet, the only God he knew was the false God, and in his denial he came to deny even the true God. Hence, he was destined to fail from the beginning.

Marx’s Materialism

Based on the materialist dialectic, Karl Marx (1818-83) asserted that the essence of the world is material and that the world develops through the struggle of opposites, or contradictory elements. Social transforma-tion, according to Marx, can not be accomplished by means of religion or justice, but only through class struggle, violently changing the material relations of production (i.e., the economic system). His revolutionary theory, based on the materialist dialectic, was another method of solving actual problems.

The human being was held to be a class-bound being, belonging either to the ruling class or to the ruled class. A person was recognized to have value as a human being only when he or she participated in revolutionary activity by joining the struggle on the side of the ruled class (i.e., the proletariat). Marx’s ideas contained no value perspective that would respect an individual’s personality as something absolute. This is why Marxists have been able, without any guilt of conscience, to carry out massive massacres of those people who were of no utility value to the revolution, or who opposed the revolution.

Today, those Communist regimes based on Marxism, have collapsed in East Europe and in Russia. The revolutionary theory based on Marx’s dialectical materialism failed completely in solving actual problems. The reasons for its failures are: first, it unconditionally denied God without knowing the true God; and second, it advocated social reform through violence, disregarding the heavenly principle that violence necessarily gives rise to violence.

Ontology of Unification Thought

As we have seen from the above discussion, the way in which one understands the origin of the universe, and the attributes of God,39 determines the way one understands the essence of the human being and the nature of society and history-and this will ultimately determine the method to be used in solving the actual problems of human life and society. Logically, then, achieving a correct view of God, or a correct ontology, can lead to a correct and fundamental solution to the actual problems of human life, society and history.

According to the ontology of Unification Thought, namely, the Theory of the Original Image, the core of the attributes of God is Heart. Within the Original sungsang, centering on Heart, Inner sungsang (i.e., intellect, emotion, and will) and Inner hyungsang (i.e., ideas, concepts, etc.) are engaged in give and receive action, and Original sungsang and Original hyungsang (pre-matter) are also engaged in give and receive action. This is the way in which God exists. When purpose is established by Heart, give and receive action becomes developmental, and creation takes place.

Traditional ontologies are centered on reason, or on will, or on an idea, or on matter itself. Moreover, some traditional ontologies are monistic (asserting either that the spirit alone is substantial or that matter alone is substantial), whereas others are dualistic (asserting that spirit and matter are substances that are mutually independent from each other), and so forth. From the perspective of Unification Thought, it can be said that traditional ontologies have not fully succeeded in correctly understanding the reality of God’s attributes nor the relationships among those attributes.

On the other hand, the ontology of Unification Thought clearly and concretely explains the motivation and purpose of creation, the content of the attributes of God, and the structure among those attributes. Hence, a standard for the fundamental solution of actual problems can be established. The only need now is for the world’s leaders to understand this and to strive to live life and to guide their societies based on this standard.


>> Go to top


© 2006 The Research Institute for the Integration of World Thought. All rights reserved.
sitemap