Talk:Emanationism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

Well, I guess anything with an "-ism" on it is an "ism." But this "ism" doesn't stand up all by itself... Wetman 04:29, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)


The only unresolved issue with the assumptions above is that an eternal has neither a beginning nor an end. I established this easily describing the irrational number as being and not being concurrently, the two valid premises of a paradox which becomes a contradiction in applying either one.

Thus, "Creationism" in common lore as an event and moment of origin is a misconception. Things always were and will be - that is the meta concept of "God" - separation of an entity from a "creation" is extrinsic nonsense.

The will is also distracting as it implies a sentient being but does not imply consciousness or motivation beyond the primal expression of life and survival as is the non-alternative character of an eternal being. GeMiJa 02:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

This could do with explaining what an emanation is, as it redirects to here. I'm finding this article pretty hard going, it seems to require a philosophy degree. Secretlondon 22:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe emanation in Tibetan Buddhism needs its own article as it seems to be a key concept which this article isn't helping with. Secretlondon 22:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • deleted [1], should be reinserted. What kind of source do you want, Mitsube?
Austerlitz -- 88.75.193.130 (talk) 20:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
A reliable one! As per WP:RS. For the record "emanationism" is quite foreign to earliest Buddhism. Mitsube (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

To account for the origin of the world there arose the Neoplatonic Notion of 'emanation'. The basic image behind the concept is light streaming from a source. As light streams from the sun - by the sun's very nature, not because of any intent or decision it makes - so the universe streams forth (emanates) from the One. The One neither wills nor knows of it, but simply emits its existence, as the sun emits light. From Education for Ministry, Third Year, by The University of the South,Revised 2006, Ch 6 pg 85. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.177.113.243 (talk) 13:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Ainur?[edit]

In what way are Tolkien's Ainur emanations? They seem to me to be clearly created beings, distinct from Iluvatar (God). The fact that they are the main agents of organizing creation doesn't make them emanations. Vultur (talk) 05:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)