The Transcendental Panentheism of Xavier Zubiri in Nature, History, God and Man and God
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Xavier Zubiri Review, Vol. 13, 2013-2015, pp. 107-132 The Transcendental Panentheism Of Xavier Zubiri In Nature, History, God And Man And God C. Eduardo Sanchez Gauto, Th.M. Asunción, Paraguay Abstract Xavier Zubiri (1898-1983) was perhaps the most original and systematically rigorous think- er in contemporary Spanish philosophy; but he may also be the least known, due to cir- cumstances of his life that prevented him from occupying the center stage in Spain’s intel- lectual life. This paper intends to show that Xavier Zubiri’s theology is in fact a form of panentheism, a view of God where the world is in God via an ontological link, and yet God and the world are not identical. After a summary review of literature relevant for under- standing the question and some basic notions on panentheism, we analyze Zubirian theol- ogy as shown in two of Zubiri’s most important works: Nature, History, God and Man and God. The conclusion of this study is that Zubiri’s theology may be in fact a form of tran- scendental panentheism. Resumen Xavier Zubiri (1898–1983) fue quizás el pensador más original y más sistemáticamente ri- guroso de la filosofía española contemporánea; pero también es el menos conocido, debido a circunstancias de su vida que le impidieron ocupar un lugar central en la vida intelectual de España. Este trabajo busca mostrar que la teología de Xavier Zubiri es de hecho una forma de panenteísmo, una visión de Dios en donde el mundo está en Dios mediante un vínculo ontológico, y aun así Dios y el mundo no son idénticos. Después de una breve rese- ña de la literatura pertinente para comprender la cuestión y algunas nociones básicas de panenteísmo, se hace un análisis de la teología zubiriana tal como se muestra en dos de las obras más importantes de Zubiri: Naturaleza, Historia, Dios, y el Hombre y Dios. La con- clusión de este estudio es que la teología de Zubiri puede ser en realidad una forma de pa- nenteísmo transcendental. There is unanimous consensus that 1. Introduction for Zubiri the problem of God was one of three problems that challenged him during Panentheism (or Lack Thereof) in Zubiri his entire life, and he devoted considerable Scholarship thought to it.1 Surveys of Zubiri’s views on God are Since this is a study examining the offered by Garagorri,2 Cescon,3 Juan José panentheism in the philosophy of Xavier García,4 Zárraga Olavarría,5 and Melero Zubiri, it is convenient to give a cursory Martínez,6 among others. examination to how this problem was pre- However, most studies treat Zubiri’s sented by the students of Zubiri’s philoso- theology from existential lines, or simply phy. assume that Zubiri’s theology is just an- 107 108 C. Eduardo Sanchez Gauto ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ other version of classical theism. However, osophical system is directed, and without there are some hints that Zubiri’s theology it would not be understandable.14 He im- might be considered as a form of panen- plicitly recognizes a panentheism in Zubiri theism. Rivera Cruchaga, in an obituary when he states: “God is effectively in eve- for Zubiri, unconsciously alludes to the rything, but not “exactly” as the pantheist possibility of panentheism in Zubiri’s phi- would have it”.15 losophy. He remembers an anecdote where Despite all these hints, at the present Zubiri said to him: “When we are in the time the author is not aware of any identi- truth, we are in the Word of God, we live fication of Zubiri as a panentheist, save in God”.7 Cescon hints that Zubiri could perhaps a brief, ambiguous and inconclu- have understood the God-world relation- sive mention by Franciscan theologian ship in panentheistic fashion, without Félix Alluntis.16 using the specific term. Since Zubiri un- Panentheism derstood each thing as a manifestation of God, because it is not God and yet it is Panentheism can be described as “a formally constituted in God,8 Cescon con- ‘vision’ of God in the world and the world cludes that for Zubiri a separation be- in God”. This quote, which for now shall tween God and the world was inconceiva- remain unattributed, shows how according ble.9 to this particular view of the God-world A thorough study of the concept of relationship, God and the world are joined religation and his correlation with human together in some sort of ontological link. experience of God is done by Correa Panentheism can be generically de- Schnake.10 Without realizing it, Correa fined as the view of God where “God and describes religation in strongly immanent- the world are ontologically distinct and ist terms that might hint at panentheism: God transcends the world, but the world is “religation is a presence of God in things in God ontologically.”17 According to precisely in order to constitute them as Palmquist, “panentheism typically refers to real, and specifically in the human person a synthesis between traditional theism as that which is constituting its mission to and pantheism, whereby the whole world the ground of its own personal reality in (and everything in it) is believed to be in the configuration of himself.”11 God, though God transcends the bounda- Marquínez Argote sees a remarkable ries of the natural world and is more than similarity between the theologies of Zubiri nature.”18 and another panentheist thinker, Paul That is, the world and everything in it Tillich, despite evidence that Tillich was is in the being of God or ontologically in not aware of the thought of the other. God. Marquínez attributes this similarity to the The notion that the world is in the be- fact that both were disciples of ing of God, that is, ontologically in God, is Heidegger.12 For Marquínez, the similarity key for panentheism and it serves to dis- lies specifically in the analogy between the tinguish it from modern statements of devices of the “depth of the ultimate” in classical theism which strongly emphasiz- Tillich and religation in Zubiri. Corominas es the notion of divine immanence. Cooper also point out the deep influence of explains that for the classical theist, God Heidegger in the formulation of Zubiri’s is not only immanent; he could be abso- theology, making it instrumental in the lutely immanent because God’s transcend- abandonment of Zubiri’s previously held ence is absolute.19 modernistic convictions.13 David H. Nikkel offers a thorough Zárraga Olavarría, after offering an characterization of the concept: elaborate explanation of Zubiri’s view of “Panentheism” literally means “all in God, states that the problem of God was God.” (The word was coined by the for Zubiri the “north” to which all his phil- early nineteenth-century German phi- XAVIER ZUBIRI REVIEW 2013-2015 The Transcendental Panentheism Of Xavier Zubiri In NHD And Man And God 109 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ losopher, Karl Christian Friedrich other thinkers have a panentheistic Krause.) It holds that the non-divine theology while avoiding use of the individuals are included in God, are term or simply not using it. fully within the divine life. God knows 2. Personal or nonpersonal panen- all that exists without externality, me- theism. Some panentheistic diation, or loss (though God’s thinkers see God as nonpersonal knowledge and valuation are more while others see God as personal. than the creaturely experiences that 3. Part-whole or relational panen- are wholly included in the divine ex- theism. Some panentheists regard perience). God empowers all that ex- the world as part of God, without ists without externality, mediation, or fully being God. Others see God loss (though there is genuine indeter- distinct from the world, but minacy and freedom of choice and ac- ontologically linked in a symbiotic tion which God empowers in the crea- fashion. turely realm). This is in contrast to traditional theism, which has tended 4. Voluntary or natural panentheism. to regard God as utterly distinct from Some panentheist thinkers regard the creation and the creatures. Deism creation of the world as necessary is an extreme of this tendency. On the for God. Others see the world as other hand, panentheism also distin- the product of a free creative act guishes itself from pantheism (literally from God. “all [is] God”). It holds that God is not 5. Classical or modern panentheism. reducible to the nondivine individuals, Classical panentheism affirms to the universe as a whole, or to the most theistic attributes of God structure of the universe; but rather including omnipotence, while the God transcends them, having a reali- modern panentheism states that ty—an awareness and a power—that God is affected by creaturely includes but is not exhausted by freedom. thereality of the creation and the ex- This paper will use Cooper’s distinc- periences and actions of the crea- tions as useful tools for the analysis of 20 tures. Zubiri’s doctrine of God. The ontological link between God and world is well described in the explicitly Note on Versions Employed panentheistic theology of Jürgen Molt- In order to write this study, both Na- mann, who states: “God’s essence has in ture, History, God and Man and God were itself the idea of the world from all eterni- examined in their original Spanish, in the 21 ty”. Since God’s essence is also His ex- latest editions available to this writer.25 istence, creation is necessary and an ex- Now, expressing the plenitude of Zubiri’s tension of the divine Being, instead of the thought in English can be a very difficult utterly contingent characterization of crea- undertaking.