Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hartshorne and Indian Panentheism

  • Published:
Sophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. Satya Prakash Singh, Sri Aurobindo and Whitehead on the Nature of God, Aligarh: Vigyan Prakashan, 1972.

  2. These arguments appear in many of Hartshorne’s works, and the concept of ‘creativity’ is elucidated in several places: see in particular, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, London: SCM Press, 1970, pp. 1–18; The Logic of Perfection, Lasalle, Illinois: Open Court, 1962, pp. 164–66; and a paper read originally in India, ‘The Idea of Creativity in American Philosophy,’ Journal of Karnataka University (Social Sciences) 2 (May 1966): 1–13. The argument we shall focus on appears in Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes, State University of New York Press, 1983, pp. 82–83

  3. Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes, p. 82.

  4. ibid. p. 83.

  5. For Aurobindo, the terms ‘God’ and ‘Brahman’ are interchangeable. We take more liberties in using ‘God’ to refer to Abhinava’s Śiva. There may be problems in doing so, but we trust the move is justified as it contributes to the comparative nature of the work.

  6. ‘Mysticism and Metaphor,’ International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 23:1 (1988):17–41.

  7. David Lawrence, The Teachings of the Odd-Eyed One, State University of New York Press, 2008, p. 12.

  8. Paul Eduardo Muller-Ortega, The Triadic Heart of Śiva, Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1989, p. 86.

  9. Abhinavagupta, Īśvara-Pratyabhijñā-Vimarśinī, Ed. R. C. Dwivedi, K. A. Subramania Iyer, and K. C. Pandey, Vol. 2, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1986, p. xiv.

  10. From Abhinava’s commentary to śloka-s 21-24 of his Parātrīśikālaghuvṛtti as translated in Muller-Ortega, p. 221.

  11. Lawrence 2008, p. 13.

  12. David Lawrence, ‘Siva’s self-recognition and the problem of interpretation,’ Philosophy East & West 48.2 (1998): p. 16.

  13. The Life Divine, p. 605, in particular.

  14. Muller-Ortega, p. 103.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Houston-Victoria, Austin, TX, USA

    Ellen Stansell

  2. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Stephen H. Phillips

Authors
  1. Ellen Stansell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen H. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ellen Stansell.

Additional information

This paper is based on an earlier work by Stephen H. Phillips entitled ‘‘‘Mutable God’: Hartshorne and Indian Theism,” which appeared in Hartshorne: Process Theology and Philosophy, eds. Robert Kane and Stephen H. Phillips, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989. While the current paper was not one among the papers read at the 2009 Parliament of the World Religions from which the papers for this issue of Sophia have largely been drawn, we are grateful to Purushottama Bilimoria for encouraging us to jointly rework Phillips’ original paper, bringing it into the 21st century and adding discussion on Abhinavagupta which was carried out largely by Ellen Stansell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stansell, E., Phillips, S.H. Hartshorne and Indian Panentheism. SOPHIA 49, 285–295 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-010-0189-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-010-0189-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation