 |
| The Sacred Heart of Christ. Art By: Odilon Redon |
Author's
Note: I truly love religion, it
is the ultimate expression of humanity's need to understand the
universe on its most intrinsic level. I will occasionally reference
real world religions, both active and inactive, in terms of
mythology. I am using the term 'mythology' not as a way of
discrediting the truth of the religion or the truth it sought to
explain, rather the term is used refer to set of religious
explanations and beliefs. To further underscore my intention behind
my use of 'mythology', I will leave you with this quote:
After all, I believe that legends and myths are
largely made of 'truth', and indeed present aspects of it that can
only be received in this mode... - J.R.R. Tolkien
Random
Theology Generator –
Part 1: Metaphysics
This is the first of a two part theology generator that
will allow a player/GM/writer to create a religion with a
semi-detailed theology. The first part covers the metaphysical
beliefs of a religion: godly origins, origins of the world, origins
of intelligent life, form of the deity, the nature of the soul, the
nature of 'sin', forgiveness for 'sins', divine rewards, and divine
punishments. With this generator, you can construct the foundations
of belief for any religion you may wish to create.
 |
| Buddha walking among the flowers. Art By: Odilon Redon |
God
Mode – Off
You
may wish to construct a religion that does not recognize the
existence of gods/goddesses, or one that does not recognize an
objective mandate for the authority of divine beings. To create such
a religion, the player/GM/writer must make specific choices in
certain categories of the generator rather than rolling for a random
result. The guide to creating an atheistic religion is as follows:
I
Am The Great 'I AM' ...: None
In
The Beginning ...: Dependent
Origination (if the religion doesn't recognize the existence of
deities or does not believe that the universe was divinely formed)
Thus,
You Were Not, But Now Are...:
Devolution From Greater Form OR Natural Origination (For religions
that do not recognize divine origins for intelligent life)
Oh
Master, What Am I?:
Nothing/Inconsequential
Look
Upon Me in Awe...:
None
How
Hath I Offended Thee?:
Any but option 1.
Forgive
Us Our Trespasses...: Any
but option 3 (Though 'Authority' could be defined as mundane/Earthly
authority, in which case, any option would work).
I've
Got Soul, But I'm Not a Soldier...:
Any but option 5.
A
Good Life Lived...:
Any but option 5, possibly 1 and 2 as well (Paradise could be the end
result of a universal metaphysical mechanism, however, the existence
of Paradise could push the bounds of credibility for an atheistic
theology. It is up to the player/GM/writer as to how credible a
Paradise would be without a creator).
After
a Wicked Life...:
Possible exclusion of options 1 and 2 (Hell/Perdition could be the
end result of a universal metaphysical mechanism, however, the
existence of Hell/Perdition could push the bounds of credibility for
an atheistic theology. It is up to the player/GM/writer as to how
credible a Hell/Perdition would be without a creator).
 |
| The Birth of Venus. Art By: Odilon Redon |
I Am The
Great 'I AM'...
Depending on the philosophical outlook of the society
that the religion resides in, the question of a deity's origin may or
may not arise. If it does arise, different cultures may place
differing levels of emphasis on such origins. In the realm of eastern
versus western philosophy, it is the west that has examined the
concepts of divine origins in the closest manner. This is not to say
that the east has neglected such examinations, however, it has
different priorities, in general, than the west in the field of
Ontology.
- Eternal Existence
- Apotheosis
- Child of Another Deity
- Causa Sui
Eternal
Existence: The deity has always
existed, and will always exist, without regard to causality. This
differs from Causa Sui
(self-creation/cause), in that it places the deity above cause, even
causes that originate from itself. Having an eternal existence also
places the deity outside of the flow/effects of time. While
eternal/eternity have the common connotation of meaning a very long
time, the classic meaning is a state of being outside of time so that
all points are equal in “distance” from the “point” that the
deity occupies. This type of origin best fits a supreme and
unknowable type deity.
Apotheosis:
The
deity was mortal, or in some way less than they are now, and ascended
into a higher form of being. (One of my own characters have ascended
in such a manner at the end of one campaign. It was awesome...). This
type of origin best fits a deity that can be easily understood and
related to by mortals.
Child/Creation
of Another Deity: The
deity is progeny of another god or gods. These divine beings can
spring from a single parent in the case of Athena from Zeus, or come
from a coupling such a Ganesha from Shiva and Parvati (this being the
most common, but not the only explanation of Ganesha's parentage).
This origin best fits just about any type of intermediate deity or a
deity with a limited purview but still powerful and mysterious.
Causa
Sui: The
deity created themselves, having no other cause outside of that. This
differs from an eternal existence in two ways: firstly, the deity is
still subject to time and that they are still subject to causality,
even if it is only their own actions that they are subject to. This
type of origin best fits a creator deity that can be effected by the
actions of other agents while still being the most powerful being in
the universe.
 |
| The Mayan god of creation: Viracocha |
In the
Beginning...
The origins of the universe can be as important to
religions as it is to the fields of physics and quantum mechanics.
Often, creation narratives have other meanings couched within them
that reinforce the values of the religion. To a religion, the 'why'
of creation is just as important, and perhaps more important, as the
'how'.
- Ex Nihilo
- From Chaos
- Emergence
- Pantheism
- Divine Birth
- From Death or Dismemberment
- Dependent Origination
- Earth Diver
Ex
Nihilo: Latin, meaning: from
nothing. In this, the universe was created from nothing at all,
having no secondary causes provided by 'raw materials'. This form of
creation is the pinnacle of 'power', since it springs purely from a
will with literally
nothing else being needed outside of the creator. This form of
creation best fits a supreme-being type deity.
From
Chaos: In
this form of creation, the creator is a force of order or an artist.
Before the creator there was only chaos, meaning that the 'universe'
was in a state that nothing could truly arise from it. Plato referred
to this being as the Demiurge, gnostic Christianity also uses this
term for the being that came and ordered the universe after the
unknowable Creator made it. This form of creation best fits an
craftsman or artist type deity.
Emergence:
This
is not necessarily a form of creation, but a means of explanation
that entirely inhabits the point of view of a people or religion. In
this explanation, the people of the religion emerged from a secure
world/area into the current, and more harsh, world they inhabit now.
While the Emergence narrative is common in Native American mythology,
it also is present in the creation myths of the Abrahamic religions
with Adam/Adem and Eve/Hawwah/Hawa being cast out of Eden into the
current world. This type of narrative best fits a religion/culture
that is not overly concerned with subjects that are beyond their
control.
Pantheism:
This
is not necessarily a form of creation, but rather a state of being
for the universe. In Pantheism, the universe is the physical form of
an ultimate deity with everything and everyone within the universe
being a part of that being. In this, the self/individuality is an
illusion, with everyone and everything being unified completely on
the metaphysical level. There can be other gods, but even they are
just parts of the greater whole. This type of universe can be used to
explain phenomena like magic, by stating that the caster has truly
realized they are part of the universe and use that realization to
control it. It is recommended that the prime/universal deity to have
a Causa Sui
or Eternal
Existence origins.
This type of universe works best for narratives that involve an
ultimate form of Enlightenment.
Divine
Birth: In
this form of creation, the universe is the child of a supreme
parent(s) deity(s). Depending on the religion, the universe is the
result of a coupling or the birthed creation (in this case it is
usually a mother type deity). This form of creation works best for
narratives that involve either a highly involved supreme being or a
universe that has two evenly matched opposing forces/deities (e.g.
light/dark, good/evil, life/death, creation/destruction, etc...).
From
Death or Dismemberment: This
form of creation can bear similarities to Pantheism
and Divine Birth,
though the differences lie within the intention of creation or the
consequences of creation. In From
Death
the universe is the dead body of a deity, which bears a similarity to
Pantheism,
however, in Pantheism
the
supreme deity is imminent and constantly involved in the actions of
the universe. By being a dead body, the universe's creation was
either an act of self-sacrifice (hope) or creation is the result of
divine decomposition (pessimism). In Dismemberment,
creation
resulted from the reduction of a deity, either self-inflicted or an
act of violence. Once again we are presented with either an act of
hope (self-sacrifice) or pessimism (violence). This form of creation
works best with narratives that focus perseverance through adversity,
or narratives that focus on deriving meaning from dark/hopeless
situations.
Dependent
Origination: This
is more of an origin, rather than a form of creation. In Dependent
Origination
the universe is result of natural/mundane/non-divine, though still
powerful, events. Here, the universe came about through a mechanistic
set of events, without intention. The 'how' of the creation can be
anything, but in the end it didn't involve the actions of beings.
This form of universal origin works best for games where there are no
deities or deities that are limited in power.
Earth
Diver: In
this form of world creation, the creator deity or their agent dives
into an abyss (be it an endless ocean or a void) and brings back dry
land for beings to live on. This type of creation works best for
narratives that underscore the limits of beings, both deities and
mortals, while maintaining a level of mystery. Earth
Diver creation/origin
still leaves open the possibility of other more powerful beings
without having to reference such beings in the narrative.
 |
| The first humans, Ask and Embla. - Norse Creation Myth. Art By: Lorenz Frolich |
Thus, You
Were Not, But Now Are...
From Darwin to Aquinas, the origin of sentient species
has been a topic of interest for scientists and philosophers alike.
The possible answers to these queries are as varied as the
questioners themselves.
- Devolution From Greater Form
- Divinely Formed
- Natural Origination
- Have Always Existed
Devolution
from a Greater Form: In this
form of origination, sentient beings, and possibly all living
creatures, are the devolved form of other beings who possessed a
level of existence/ability that was superior to their current form.
This type of origin works best for a narrative that involves a
journey toward earlier glories.
Divinely
Formed: In this form of
origination, sentient beings, and possibly all living creatures, are
the direct creations of a divine being. While the creator may imbue
aspects of itself in the created beings, the beings can be completely
different from their creator. If there is a difference, usually but
not always, the created have a more utilitarian purpose rather than
being the beloved 'children' of the creator. This type of origin
works best for a narrative that involves the question of independence
over loyalty.
Natural
Origination: In this form of
origination, a group of, or all, creatures are the result of natural
processes. Natural can mean anything from evolution to the changing
force of naturally occurring magic, rather than any willful action.
This type of origin works best for a narrative that does not involve
divine beings or one that wishes to reduce the importance of deities.
Have
Always Existed: This is less of
a form of origination than a way of skirting the issue. Sentient
beings have always existed, be it a single race or a succession of
races. Using this explanation allows for a universe that is layered
with the detritus of previous races going back into an infinite
regression. This explanation works best for a type of narrative that
wishes to avoid the question of creation and origin.
 |
| Our purpose on this Earth is not to beat each other with livestock... |
Oh
Master, What Am I?
Though we may understand what we are as far as our
physicality, religions across time and the world have concerned
themselves with our relationship to the divine. While each answer to
the question of relationship is as unique as the religion being
asked, the answers can be broken down into six highly general
categories.
- Beloved Children
- Beloved Subjects/Citizens
- Beloved Servants/Slaves
- Servants/Slaves
- Subjects/Citizens
- Children
- Amusement
- Nothing / Inconsequential
Beloved
Children: In this type of
relationship sentient beings are the children of one or more deities.
These sentient being may be adopted by the divine being, having no
direct lineage to the deity but being treated as such, or they may
contain a spark of the divine due to their direct familial link with
the deity or deities in question. One possibility for a direct
parentage between the deity(s) and sentient beings is the deity(s)
sire/birth/craft the soul of the individual, while their earthly
parents are responsible for their physical form. This type of
relationship works best for narratives that seek to have a very close
relationship between sentient beings and the deities of the world.
Beloved
Subjects/Citizens: In this type
of relationship the sentient beings are to the deity as a
subject/citizen is to their king/queen. There exists a gulf between
the deity(s) and the sentient beings which means their relationship
based more along the lines of loyalty/justice. The deity(s) will form
pacts/covenants/contracts/agreements with their people which the
deity(s) will uphold to the best of their ability. A breech of these
agreements can have dire consequences for the people, these
consequences involving punishments that would not occur if they were
considered part of the deity(s) family. The god(s)/goddess(es) show
their love for the beings by continuing to make agreements with their
chosen people, though this does not mean there are not punishments
beforehand. This type of relationship works best for a narrative that
involves stern or distant gods.
Beloved
Servants/Slaves: In this type
of relationship the gulf between the deity and their sentient beings
is widened even further from the previous two types. In this type of
relationship the deity makes no promises or agreements with the
sentient beings, the beings being completely under the control of the
deity(s). The divine being(s) is under no requirement to do anything
for the beings, but only does so out of their own magnanimous nature.
With this relationship the penalty for angering the deity(s) can be
quite extreme, ending with the possible destruction of an entire race
(though this is unlikely due to their beloved status). This type of
relationship works best for narratives that involve sentient beings
being under the complete power of gods/goddesses (for good or ill),
with little recourse against said beings.
Servants:
In this type of relationship
the value of sentient beings is purely based upon the utility they
serve, be it worship to feed the deity or soldiers in some kind of
holy war. As long as the beings fulfill their purpose, the deity(s)
will provide for the people. Once their purpose is fulfilled, or if
they no longer are fulfilling their duties, the beings are abandoned
(at best) or destroyed (at worst). This type of relationship works
best for narratives involving the oppression of people by higher
powers.
Subjects/Citizens:
This type of relationship is
similar both to its 'beloved' version and to the Subject/Slave
option. In this relationship the deity has a less utilitarian use for
sentient beings, or the use does not have an end. The deity(s) is far
less likely to destroy or irrevocably hurt the beings, but as brutal
and cruel a government/monarch can be to their people so can the
deity(s). This relationship means there is no love for the
individual, or for even the people themselves, rather they are merely
part of a large thing/concept the deity values. This type of
relationship works best for a narrative that focuses on oppression
without the direct possibility of genocide or ultimate destruction.
Children:
This
type of relationship can be the most dangerous and unstable out of
all the other types. Instead of a loving parent, the sentient beings
have a parent that can vary wildly in the tone of interactions with
their children. As before, in the 'beloved' version, the people may
be the direct children of the deity(s) or their adopted children. The
deity may be suffocating and overbearing for one moment (or age), and
completely distant or abusive for another moment (age). In this type
of relationship, sentient beings can be in the most danger as their
deity(s) are invested in 'their' children, and that investment can
bring rise to genocidal rage. This type of relationship works best
for a narrative that involves capricious divine beings.
Amusement:
In
this type of relationship there is no loyalty, love, or even use for
sentient beings, they are only there for the amusement of the god(s).
With this type of relationship there is no discernible reason for
punishments and rewards, and often there can be rewards for very
evil acts that the deity(s) find amusing. There is no justice when it
comes to the gods, and no real way of trusting them at all. This type
of relationship works best for narratives that involve a world in
complete social, if not physical, chaos.
Nothing/Inconsequential:
This
type of relationship can offer the most stability for sentient
beings, or sudden and violent endings for them. The deity(s) either
don't exist, or simply don't notice/care at all about them. In this
relationship sentient beings can go lifetimes without ever
seeing/hearing-of divine action in their world. However, when such
action does occur it almost always means a great deal of
turmoil/destruction without any discernible reason. This type of
relationship works best for narratives that involve no deity(s)
what-so-ever, or deity(s) that are distant/alien.
 |
| Ganesha - Deva of Intellect and Wisdom |
Look
Upon Me in Awe...
How a deity presents themselves to people is an integral
part of a religion's metaphysics as well as relationship inherent to
it. How a deity presents themselves will often indicate their
attitude to physical existence as well as their attitude towards
mortals in general.
- Form of the People
- Form of the Winds and Fire
- Form of the Mountains and Forests
- Form of the Alien and Ineffable
- Form of the Animal
- Form of Nothing and Whispers
Form
of the People: In
this type of divine presentation, the deity takes on the form of the
people who worship them. The form may be a complete union with a
mortal, being both divine and mortal at the same time, or be a guise
they use to interact with their chosen race. Whatever the case may
be, this type of presentation suggests a respect/love/kinship with a
particular race. This type of physical presentation works best for a
narrative that wishes to have a close relationship between the divine
and mortals.
Form
of the Winds and Fire: Here,
the deity takes on the form of storms, earthquakes, pillars of fire,
tornadoes, or any other type of (semi) natural phenomena. These
phenomena might not actually be the deity's physical form, rather
they herald the deity's presence in an area; in this case choose (or
roll) another form. This type of physical presentation works best for
narratives that wish to focus on nature or gods/goddesses that
boarder on the unknowable.
Form
of the Mountains and Forests: In
this, the god(s) take the form of natural features of the land/world.
Usually, but not always, these forms are limited in scope, such as
'that mountain' or 'this forest'. However, it is possible for a deity
to taken on the form of an ocean, the entire sky, or even the world
itself. Whatever the form may be, it is not merely an avatar, rather
the form is
the deity in question. This type of physicality works best for
narratives that wishes to focus on nature as being a source of
divinity.
Form
of the Alien and Ineffable: In
this type of divine formation the deity's physical form is truly
bizarre, lacking any natural precedent or similarity. These forms
might possess a beauty beyond description, or be so awful that to
gaze upon them is to be driven insane. Whatever the case may be,
these forms can only be described in the most general of terms. This
type of divine form works best for narratives that wish to focus on
the unknowable mystery that the gods/goddesses present to the world.
Form
of the Animal: Here,
the deity takes the form of an animal, be they magical/mythical or
natural. If the deity takes the form of a natural animal, these forms
tend to be much larger than their mundane cousins and usually possess
fantastical features (luminous fur, 'human' eyes, majestic/infernal
wings, etc...). Deities that take on animal forms tend to be
guardians of a particular natural environment, or have some aspect of
nature as their purview. This type of divine form works best for
narratives that wish to focus on the 'otherness' of gods/goddesses or
ones that wish to focus on the divine aspects of nature.
Form
of Nothing and Whispers: Here,
the deity has no true form, or the deity's form has never been seen
by mortal eyes. These deities usually work through secondary parties,
such as mortal prophets or angelic servants. If the deity does take
direct action in the world, their actions occur as part of natural or
miraculous events with no apparent actor. This type of divine
physicality works best for a narrative that wishes to focus on the
actions of mortals or on truly mysterious deities.
 |
| The murder of Abel by Cain. Art By: Odilon Redon |
How Hath
I Offended Thee?
In any relationship, there are rules (spoken or
unspoken) which exist. The basis of these rules can be upon mutual
agreement or unspoken societal norms that exist across a culture. In
the case of divine relationships, these rules are often the basis for
entire section(s) of holy texts. The rules can be as simple as
banning certain destructive behavior (like murder or rape) or as
complex as requiring certain rituals at certain times. The
consequences of which can be as varied as the deity(s) in question.
- Acts against the will/law of a deity
- Acts driven by undesirable/evil urges/intentions
- Acts that bring about undesirable consequences
- Acts against natural laws
Divine
Will/Law: With these types of
relational rules, the deity has proscribed a set of laws/rules that
sentient beings must follow. These rules/laws can be along the same
lines as natural laws (no murder, rape, or theft) or they can be much
more involved (requiring certain types of diets or ritualistic
behavior). The deity often does not give reasons for such laws/rules,
but this is not always the case. In the case of rules base upon
natural laws, intentionality is key (it is not murder if you kill
someone in self defense). In the case of much more involved
requirements, intentionality plays less of a role rather than the
consequences of actions/inaction. This type of relational setup works
best for narratives that have strict rules, and consequences, for
behavior and action.
Undesirable/
Evil Urges/Intentions: This
type of relational setup is far more nuanced, with few rules/laws.
The rules/laws are more concerned with types of motivation that are
considered desirable of unwanted. Usually, but not always, this type
of relational setup bans urges/desires based upon self-aggrandizement
or actions/inaction based upon personal-enrichment/empowerment. There
is a degree of nuance when it comes to urges/desires involving only
the self. It is usually acceptable to do something with the sole
intention of staying healthy/safe/full, but it may not be acceptable
to do something with the sole intention of gaining overt/unnecessary
luxury. Whatever the case may be, a seemingly good act (such as
feeding the poor), can be actually evil/wrong if the intention was
unacceptable (such as feeding the poor so that one increases their
own fame). This type of relational setup works best for narratives
that are just as concerned about the intentions behind an action as
the action itself.
Undesirable
Consequences: This form of
relational rule/law is nuanced and usually involves few rules/laws.
Here, it is not the action that has any value, rather it is the
consequence that has any value (the ends always justifies the means).
In this, it would be a good act to murder 2 billion people if it
results in saving 2 billion and 1 people. The consequence of such a
setup means that intentionality has no meaning, and if the
consequences for an action are undesirable then the act was evil no
matter the good that was intended. Care must be taken with this type
of setup, since things like rape/murder/genocide/abuse will end up
being considered good if the consequence for such actions are
desirable. This type of setup works best for narratives that often
involve tough decisions or situations where there is no perfect
answer.
Natural
Law: This form of relational
rule/law involves following an engrained set of laws/rules that exist
within a society or reality itself. The consequences for breaking or
following the law can involve mundane events (such as action by a
society or government), or can involve more metaphysical events (such
as karma or wu-wei). In either case, there is no authoritative action
taken by divine entities, though they may react in their own way
(though without any mandate for doing so). This type of setup works
best for narratives that do not have gods/goddesses or ones that deny
an objective authority of the gods.
 |
| The Penitent. Art By: Albrecht Durer |
Forgive
Us Our Trespasses...
Just as important as rules are to a relationship, are
ways of gaining forgiveness for certain actions. In certain cases, an
action may very well be unforgivable or require a great degree of
action in order to gain forgiveness. Whatever the case may be,
different religions have different answers to the question of
forgiveness.
- Economy
- Atoning to Victim
- Atoning to Authority
- Atonement is Impossible
Economy:
This is more of a mechanism of
morality than it is strictly a means for forgiveness, though
forgiveness is taken into account. With economy, each
action/motivation/consequence has a particular value be it positive,
neutral, or negative. Some economies might assign a null value to
some actions (using an umbrella while it is raining, or choosing to
read 'Perdido Street Station' rather than 'In Viriconium). Other
economies might assign positive or negative values to all actions by
extrapolating on possible effects/consequences (it is good
to use an umbrella since getting wet might result in getting sick
[which is bad], or it is good
to read 'Perdido Street Station' rather than 'In Viriconium' since
one has read the latter quite a few times but read the former only
once and it is good
to experience newer things). Whatever the case may be, nothing is
unforgivable in this setup, though it may require more effort/action
than a person is willing/capable of doing. This setup works best for
narratives that have a more mechanistic form of morality, without the
presence/need of divine moral authority.
Atoning
to the Victim: In
this form of forgiveness gaining/granting, the party in the wrong
must seek the forgiveness of the wronged party. Difficulty arises in
when the wronged party is unwilling to give forgiveness (either by
still being too hurt to meaningfully give it, or out of spite) or if
the wronged party is unable to give forgiveness (either by being
dead, or in such a state that they cannot meaningfully/responsibly
grant such forgiveness). There are two possible consequences in being
unable to gain forgiveness: either the offending party remains
unforgiven or they can gain forgiveness from a secondary party (be it
a higher authority, or a representative of the wronged party).
Usually, in gaining forgiveness from a higher authority, such
forgiveness is only granted if the wronged party is withholding
forgiveness out of spite or if the offending party is very contrite
for their wrongdoing and is unable to gain forgiveness due to the
wronged party being unable to give it. In gaining forgiveness from a
representative of the wronged party, usually the representative must
be explicitly given authority by the wronged or the representative is
a family member of the wronged. In either case, the requirements for
gaining forgiveness usually require a greater degree of reparation on
the part of the wrongdoing party. This form of forgiveness works best
for narratives that focus on making amends to the victim rather than
authority.
Atoning
to Authority: In
this form of forgiveness the focus is on making amends to an
authority of some kind (whether natural or divine) rather than the
victim of a particular action/inaction. If the authority is a
benevolent one, they will usually require the wrongdoer to genuinely
seek the forgiveness of the wronged, but the victim's forgiveness is
not required to be officially forgiven. Other forms/beings of
authority may simply require that the wrongdoer make amends to them,
rather than the victim, in essence paying some sort of fine or toll.
Whatever the case may be, any wrongful act is first and foremost an
act against the authority with the victim coming second. This type of
setup works best for a narrative that focuses on characters
relationship with authority rather than each other.
Atonement
is Impossible: In
this form of morality, one can never atone for any wrong act no
matter how minor it may be. A narrative may treat this setup as being
focused on present actions rather than the past, or that the wrong
done to an authority (the victim having little or no meaning) can not
be atoned for due to the position the authority/deity holds in the
world. An authority may set such actions against them aside, once
again placing the wrongdoers in the authority's good graces, but the
wrongful act can once again be held against the wrongdoers at any
time for any reason (in giving/gaining forgiveness, the forgiven
act(s) are erased/buried/inconsequential and cannot be held against
the offending party again). This type of setup works best with
narratives that focus on indelible results of actions.
 |
| Lead us not into temptation. Art By: Alphonse Mucha |
I've Got
Soul, But I'm Not a Soldier...
What the soul is has been of great concern to both
philosophers and priests alike. Concepts can range from the
consciousness that resides in the body (Cartesian Dualism) to the
very essence of a person's mind and body (Aquinian Theology). The
possible qualities and aspects of the soul are as varied as the
religions and philosophies that posit them. It should be added that
most, but not all, religions do not see physical disability as a sign
of a deficient soul. Rather, most religions see disability as
dysfunction of physical processes that cause difficulties for the
soul to enact its will or fulfill its purpose. Even with religions
that posit the soul being the very essence of the mind and body hold
that broken biological processes keep the body and mind from being
expressed in their ideal forms. Whatever the view on the soul, many
religions see people with disabilities as being worthy of assistance
or even living martyrs to be respected.
- Soul as Consciousness
- Soul as Essence
- Soul as Energy
- Soul as Metaphysical Change
- Soul as God
- Soul as Nothing
Soul
as Consciousness: In this
concept of the soul, the soul is the consciousness that resides in
the body and reacts to the stimulus presented to it. It is the soul
that makes decisions based upon the stimulus presented to it,
commanding the body as best it can in order to enact its will.
Whether or not the soul continues to reside in a body that is
brain-dead various by religion and philosophy. This soul concept
works best with most narratives and tends to be the automatic choice
when it comes to questions of the soul.
Soul
as Essence: This concept of the
soul bears similarities to the previous concept, but goes much
further. In this concept, the soul is both the blueprint for the
ideal form of the individual as well as their consciousness. Here,
the soul is an active participant in not only consciousness but the
body itself, informing every aspect of creature as it can. Due to the
limitations of biology, the body rarely meets the ideal form which
the soul attempts to drive it to. This type of soul works best for
narratives that wish to underscore a sense of inherent rightness in
physical existence, with the spiritual aspect of a person being only
part of existence as a whole.
Soul
as Energy: Here the soul is the
energizing force behind life, with what might be termed the 'self'
being a product of the soul's energizing presence. The soul does not
contain anything that contains a sense of identity, though some
religions that use this concept state that the soul may bear memories
(not a personality) to the next life or into some form of afterlife.
This concept of a soul works best for narratives that wish to focus
on the transitory nature of existence or life.
Soul
as Metaphysical Change: Here
the soul is not a set identity or state of being, rather it is that
which reacts to the physical world and is constantly changed by it.
This concept bears similarities to Soul
as Consciousness
but it is more of a participant in the world in which it resides in.
While the Consciousness
soul may merely react to a particular stimulus, this soul is changed
by everything it comes in contact with and through that change reacts
to the stimulus presented to it. The 'self' aspect of the soul
changes as the rest of the soul does, but these changes are often
subtle and do not present anything notable until after numerous minor
changes or after a major (and often traumatic) event. This concept of
the soul works best for narratives that wish to focus on the constant
change that is inherent to life as a whole.
Soul
as God: In
this concept of the soul, the soul is a piece of a deity that has
been separated from her/him/it. This concept of the soul need to be
paired with other concepts in order to give a full explanation of its
existence. For example, this piece of divine might be the source of
all consciousness in a body or merely the energy that consciousness
results from. The goal of life, using this concept, is to rejoin the
rest of the deity that the soul is a part of. Enlightenment, or
magical empowerment, in physical life is the result of realizing that
the individual in question is in part a god with all the privileges
and abilities inherent to such a being. This type of concept works
best for a narrative that focuses on finding one's place or purpose
in reality/life.
Soul
as Nothing: Here,
there is no soul. What is considered the 'self' is just the end
result of biological, or magical, properties and processes. This
concept also comes with the consequence of having no free will, since
all choices are the result of mechanistic processes, no choice can be
made because there is no true self to make it, just modalities of
input and output. This concept of the soul, or lack there of, works
best for narratives that wish to completely avoid the questions
inherent to metaphysics.
 |
| Garden of Earthly Delights. Art By: Hieronymus Bosch |
A Good
Life Lived...
In
creating rules/laws regulating behaviors, one must always consider
the consequences for desirable behaviors/actions. Every religion
addresses the consequences of desirable behaviors in this life and
after death with each religion having its own take on what these
consequences are.
- Perpetual Paradise
- Temporary Paradise
- Advantageous Rebirth
- Rewards in this life
- Rejoining Deity
- Oblivion
Perpetual
Paradise: In this form of
reward, the individual's soul is transported to paradise after the
end of their life. The form this paradise can be as varied as the
religion in question and the culture of the rewarded soul. Whatever
the form may take, the soul of the individual is usually reunited
with family members who have passed before them and are placed in
close proximity to their deity. From the point of their entry until
the end of time, and perhaps further, the soul resides in this
paradise. This form of metaphysical reward works best with most
narratives, and tends to be the automatic choice for most narratives.
Temporary
Paradise: This form of reward
resembles the previous form in many ways, but it differs in its
duration. Here, the soul resides for a period of time which can
differ widely depending on the religion in question. With this form
of reward, the soul will not encounter previously passed loved ones
unless they had died recently. Once the allotted time has expired,
the soul passes from paradise into a new state. This state can range
from rebirth to a form of oblivion, whatever the case may be, the
transition to this new state will be an easy one. This form of reward
works best for a narrative that wants to focus on an afterlife as
well as rebirth.
Advantageous
Rebirth: In this form of
reward, the soul of the individual is reborn into a better life than
their previous one, or is reborn (or metamorphosed into) a higher
form of life. This higher form of life can be a more advanced form of
mundane life, or some kind of spiritual/supernatural being. This form
of reward can either be attended by a deity(s) or can be simply a
mechanistic process of the metaphysical universe. This form of reward
works best for narratives that focus on cycles or natural processes.
Rewards
in this Life: In this form of
reward, the good/just individual is rewarded by fate and circumstance
for their righteous behavior. This can be used in a subtle manner, as
with Wu Wei (Taoism) where the individual receives less resistance to
their actions as they learn to harmonize with the flow/cycle of the
universe. With rewards that resemble Wu Wei, evil men and women can
still amass incredible amounts of wealth and power, but such amassing
is always fraught with resistance difficulty. The more overt form of
this type of reward is similar to cliché fairytales, where the good
are always handsome and strong while the evil are always wretched and
ugly. In any case, this form of reward works best for a narrative
that focuses on harmony with the intentions/flow of reality.
Rejoining
Deity: This form of reward
bears similarities to the Paradise
rewards,
but involves a more spiritual focus. In this form of reward the soul
comes into some kind of ineffable union with their deity, be it where
the soul recognizes that they are actually a part of their
god/goddess, or a form of harmony/sharing where each maintains their
identity but shares themselves with the other in a way that is
impossible in the physical world. This form of harmony/union might
occur in a paradise-like setting, but the setting is at best
secondary or at worst inconsequential to the purpose of this reward.
This form of reward works best for a narrative that wishes to focus
spiritual enlightenment/unity rather than measurable rewards.
Oblivion:
In
this form of reward, the world and existence is seen as eventually
being tiresome or perhaps even torturous. Whatever the case may be, a
limited being will eventually come to despise existence out of
boredom after experiencing all that can possibly experience. In being
given oblivion, the soul is destroyed and the individual can finally
'rest', never having to do anything
ever again. This form of reward works best for a narrative that seeks
to underline the inherent pain or toil that any form of existence
might entail.
 |
| Angel leading a soul into Hell. Art By: Hieronymus Bosch |
After a
Wicked Life...
Just as religions and philosophies are concerned with
rewards for a good life, they are also concerned about punishments
for a life lived in evil. As with rewards, these punishments can be
as varied as the religions in question.
- Perpetual Punishment
- Temporary Punishment
- Disadvantaged Rebirth
- Punishment in this Life
- Oblivion
- Continued Existence
Perpetual
Punishment: Many religions use
this form of punishment as a way of dissuading would-be evil-doers,
and bringing justice for those who commit evil. Here, the souls of
the wicked are subjected to an unwanted form of existence for all of
time. The form that this unwanted existence can vary from religion to
religion: be it submersion in a lake of fire, or being forced to
relive the pain they have caused. This form of punishment can work
well with any type of narrative, and is usually the automatic choice
for most narratives.
Temporary
Punishment: This form of
punishment resembles the previous form in all ways save that there is
a set duration. Once that duration has expired, the soul may be
reborn to try to live a better life, or is destroyed once the
allotted punishments for their crimes have been enacted. This form of
punishment works best for any type of narrative that wishes to
include rebirth as well as an afterlife.
Disadvantaged
Rebirth: In this form of
punishment, the wicked soul is reborn into a lesser station than
their previous life, or into a lesser form of life. Whatever the case
may be, the wicked soul is given another chance to live a more
righteous life, otherwise they will sink even further in the
social/evolutionary scale. Those who continue to live wicked lives
may have an infinite number of chances in order to live a good life,
or there may be a bottom to how low they may sink before a more
permanent punishment is enacted. This permanent punishment can be a
Perpetual Punishment
(like
Hell) or complete destruction. This form of punishment would work
best for a narrative that wishes to focus on cycles of rebirth while
also focusing on the concept of justice.
Oblivion:
In
this form of punishment, existence is seen as inherently good, with
non-existence being evil or unwanted. The offending soul may be
destroyed to avoid the harm that it would cause if allowed to be
reborn, or it may be destroyed because it is unwanted for the next
stage of some divine plan. Whatever the case may be, this punishment
tends to be final, without any chance of it being undone. This form
of punishment works best for narratives that wish to focus on final
consequences for actions taken.
Continued
Existence: This
type of punishment is rare, but not unheard of in the realm of world
religions. In the Hindu, Buddhist, and Jainism faiths continued
existence/rebirth (Samara) is something to be freed from
(Moksha/Nirvana/Mukti), though most forms of the aforementioned
faiths do not see life as an evil, just a stage that must be
surmounted in order to reach one's true purpose. How one goes about
being freed from continued existence has as many answers as there are
religions to give them. What happens after being freed from existence
can vary widely from religion to religion: restful oblivion to a
perfect state of spiritual existence. This type of punishment works
best for narratives whose 'good' is something that extends far beyond
concepts that involve physical existence.
No comments:
Post a Comment