Origins of dualistic thought in western hemispheres

[S:C]

Does anyone have an idea, where the first traces of dualistic thought originated in western thinking? 
 

I remember Manichäism (Augustinus of Hippo) but it must have been way earlier. Kind of ‘fall of men’ like… serpent, Adam and Eve, own moral judgements etc?

[Dainin]

One of the older sources may be Zoroastrianism. To quote Wikipedia:

 

" Zoroastrianism, also known as Mazdayasna and Behdin, is an Iranian religion and one of the world's oldest organized faiths, based on the teachings of the Iranian-speaking prophet Zoroaster. It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic ontology and an eschatology which predicts the ultimate triumph of good over evil. Zoroastrianism exalts an uncreated and benevolent deity of wisdom known as Ahura Mazda (lit. 'Lord of Wisdom') as its supreme being and Angra Mainyu as the opposing, destructive spirit and adversary to Ahura Mazda. Historically, the unique features of Zoroastrianism, such as its monotheism, messianism, belief in free will and judgement after death, conception of heaven, hell, angels, and demons, among other concepts, may have influenced other religious and philosophical systems, including the Abrahamic religions and Gnosticism, Northern Buddhism, and Greek philosophy.

 

With possible roots dating back to the 2nd millennium BCE, Zoroastrianism enters recorded history around the middle of the 6th century BCE. It served as the state religion of the ancient Iranian empires for more than a millennium (approximately from 600 BCE to 650 CE), but declined from the 7th century CE onwards as a direct result of the Arab-Muslim conquest of Persia (633–654 CE), which led to the large-scale persecution of the Zoroastrian people. Recent estimates place the current number of Zoroastrians in the world at around 110,000–120,000 at most, with the majority of this figure living in India, Iran, and North America; their number has been thought to be declining. "

[SirPalomides]

2 hours ago, S:C said:

Does anyone have an idea, where the first traces of dualistic thought originated in western thinking? 
 

I remember Manichäism (Augustinus of Hippo) but it must have been way earlier. Kind of ‘fall of men’ like… serpent, Adam and Eve, own moral judgements etc?

 

Well, on a geographic note, I don't think "western hemisphere" is what you mean to say. 

 

As for dualism in the West (the inheritors of Greco-Roman culture and related currents, which would include the Islamicate world) the origins are very murky. Yes, people have tried to pinpoint Zoroastrianism as a source but that's always been more conjecture than something really established. I think two probable key sources (not the only ones) would be Platonic distinctions between mind and matter, monad and dyad, etc. and Jewish apocalyptic thinking. These get mixed up and refracted through other currents like gnosticism and hermeticism. There might be something also to the social-historical context of the Roman empire where a lot of different people seemed to be saying the world was some kind of prison. However, very rarely are any of these people true dualists- oftentimes what appears to be dualist resolves into some sort of monism.

 

The Manichaeans seem to be real dualists to me though. In their system, light and dark are co-eternal and irreconcilable principles. The present world is a mixture of the two resulting from their war which will eventually lead to the triumph of the light, separating itself completely from the darkness and rendering it inert. 

 

By the way, if anyone wants to see some enjoyable Shaw Brothers mayhem with Chinese Manichaean (mingjiao) heroes check out the two part film Heaven Sword and Dragon Sabre. 

 

[Nungali]

I think it goes back further ... to whenever it was humans started to realise they had a material body and a non material  mind . Siberian shamanism ( the 'real' shamanism ....  other cultural  systems have appropriated  the term or been designated  'shaman'   from    'outside' ) might be an early manifestation of that , pre-Zoroastrianism . Even with Zoroastrianism  it relates to a quality within the mind - a 'tendency'  for our minds to 'go' , develop or be 'stuck in' a negative mode , as opposed to a good  bright and 'healthy' mode  - evidenced by their use of the term 'mainyu' - we told it could mean this or that (in later Zoroastrianism ) , even devolving to a personalised concept of the 'bad tendencies ' of mind in 'Ahriman' , who was a 'bad spirit' but also apparently some geo politician enemy of the 'Zoroastrian tribes' ,  but along with that explanation the 'literal' meaning is given ; 'mind' .

 

 

[NaturaNaturans]

On 29.1.2024 at 12:16 PM, S:C said:

Does anyone have an idea, where the first traces of dualistic thought originated in western thinking? 
 

I remember Manichäism (Augustinus of Hippo) but it must have been way earlier. Kind of ‘fall of men’ like… serpent, Adam and Eve, own moral judgements etc?

I think we can go way, way back. At least 6000 years:

Quote

Trito is a significant figure in Proto-Indo-European mythology, representing the first warrior and acting as a culture hero.^[1] He is connected to other prominent characters, such as Manu and Yemo,^[1] and is recognized as the protagonist of the myth of the warrior function,^[1]establishing the model for all later men of arms.^[1] In the legend, Trito is offered cattle as a divine gift by celestial gods,^[2] which is later stolen by a three-headed serpent named *H₂n̥gʷʰis('serpent').^[2][3][4] Despite initial defeat, Trito, fortified by an intoxicating drink and aided by the Sky-Father,^[2][4][5] or alternatively the Storm-God or *H₂nḗr, 'Man',^[4][6] together they go to a cave or a mountain, and the hero overcomes the monster and returns the recovered cattle to a priest for it to be properly sacrificed.^[2][4][5] He is now the first warrior, maintaining through his heroic deeds the cycle of mutual giving between gods and mortals.^[1][4] Scholars have interpreted the story of Trito either as a cosmic conflict between the heavenly hero and the earthly serpent or as an Indo-European victory over non-Indo-European people, with the monster symbolizing the aboriginal thief or usurper.^[7]Trito's character served as a model for later cattle raiding epic myths and was seen as providing moral justification for cattle raiding.^[1]The legend of Trito is generally accepted among scholars and is recognized as an essential part of Proto-Indo-European mythology, although not to the level of Manu and Yemo.^[8]

 

[Zhongyongdaoist]

You shouldn't leave ancient Egypt out of the running here, and as usual references to Plato are distortions that arise in part because of explanations given in scholarly work about how Plato contributed to Cartesian dualism, an ontological dualism that historically has more to do with the reintroduction of Epicureanism to European thinking than anything Plato said.  Epicureanism by the way is proof that, as the ancestor to modern materialistic monism,  monistic thinking is not good in itself.  There is naturally a lot more that I could say about this, including that it is a good idea to define ones terms a little better than has been done here, though the type of Dualism that seems to be intended here is the type of moral dualism implied by distinctions between "Good" and "Evil", and not Descartes distinction between Mind and Matter.  If I have time I will contribute further to the discussion.

 

ZYD

[NaturaNaturans]

@Zhongyongdaoist you made a statement about the exact topic I was thinking about: can we say that dualism is wrong or less valid? I do not think so

[S:C]

10 hours ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

though the type of Dualism that seems to be intended here is the type of moral dualism implied by distinctions between "Good" and "Evil", and not Descartes distinction between Mind and Matter.  If I have time I will contribute further

That’s the one I’m interested in … well, please do contribute further, if you like 

Edited February 3 by S:C

[NaturaNaturans]

Quote

So now that you have clarified that you mean mind-matter this is less relevant, but this passage about one of the absolute earliest western thinkers on record might be worth a read:

Quote

Another of Heraclitus' famous sayings highlights the idea that the unity of opposites is also a conflict of opposites: "War is father of all and king of all; and some he manifested as gods, some as men; some he made slaves, some free"; war is a creative tension that brings things into existence.

When it comes to mind matter, I would conclude that one has to come from the other in order to interract.

 

We even have a fancy latin term for that, primera materia. But best I stop there before i butcher yet another tradition, but alchemy has to touch on this mind-matter issue, no?

Edited February 2 by NaturaNaturans

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

You shouldn't leave ancient Egypt out of the running here, and as usual references to Plato are distortions that arise in part because of explanations given in scholarly work about how Plato contributed to Cartesian dualism, an ontological dualism that historically has more to do with the reintroduction of Epicureanism to European thinking than anything Plato said.  Epicureanism by the way is proof that, as the ancestor to modern materialistic monism,  monistic thinking is not good in itself.  There is naturally a lot more that I could say about this, including that it is a good idea to define ones terms a little better than has been done here, though the type of Dualism that seems to be intended here is the type of moral dualism implied by distinctions between "Good" and "Evil", and not Descartes distinction between Mind and Matter.  If I have time I will contribute further to the discussion.

 

ZYD

 

I was thinking of Egypt eg , the Horus Set 'duality . But this came 'later' in their 'ancient times I think , perhaps after the original Avestan concept , and I think that came via north-east Indo-European groups and before that , perhaps,  further north west influence from Siberian Shamanism .

 

But perhaps the Egyptian concept originates much earlier , in the 'two lands' concept  ( Upper and Lower Egypt )  ?

 

In any case, as I stated , it seems a pre 'civilised' concept ... possibly part of an original programme  even ?

[NaturaNaturans]

Dispute between man and his soul 

[steve]

While it is nothing more than an opinion that I am unable to verify, I suspect dualistic thought is an inherent characteristic of language. I also imagine this coincides, more or less, with a distancing between humans and their environment. Current thinking in biological sciences acknowledges the inherent non-duality of biological systems, eg. organism-environment systems. As our species became less concordant with, and more controlling of, its environment; it seems a sense of separation and individuation would naturally arise. 

 

 

[Nungali]

So, what went wrong , where and with whom ? 

 

Some people  became more controlling of their environment at an exponential rate after a  certain stage of technology was developed. Yet some never really approached that level of technology nor 'dualistic separation ' from their environment  ( eg. Australian Aboriginals pre Euro  invasion  )

[SirPalomides]

I have to step in and defend the Epicureans here. Yes, I am aware that modern scientism/positivism etc has put Epicurus in its lineage, particularly via the rediscovery of Lucretius, but in spirit the Epicurean school was quite different. It is maybe the most unjustly maligned and misrepresented school of Greek philosophy, in its time by detractors and nowadays chiefly by putative heirs. 

 

The Epicurean materialism was a lively materialism, a universe animated by desire. Lucretius' opening hymn to Venus in his De Rerum Natura is often read as an aberration by those who misunderstand the spirit of the Epicurean system. 

 

Epicurus' first concern is the enjoyment of life with equanimity. The Epicurean natural philosophy has the overriding purpose of curing the fear of the gods and of death, by providing plausible explanations for observed phenomena that do not rely on the agency of powerful deities whose wrath must be appeased. For many phenomena multiple explanations were offered- what would nowadays be called strict scientific accuracy was not a top concern. However the desire of the Epicureans to remove the fear of the gods would be wrongly interpreted as atheism.

 

It is not a mistake that the beginning of his Letter to Menoeceus, and the first of the Principal Doctrines, are concerned with the gods, particular the understanding of god as a perfectly happy being who does not threaten or interfere with our lives, but provides instead an inducement to good living by example. 

 

The Epicurean gods are often dismissed as a fig leaf to their atheism, a ploy to avoid persecution. Reading the actual writings of the Epicureans, including the fragments being translated from Herculaneum papyri, it is clear that the Epicurean theology is not only sincere but central to their system. Meditation on the gods is foundational to the Epicurean ethical system. Epicurus and his followers gladly and sincerely participated in the feasts and sacrifices of popular religion and exhorted others to do likewise. The worship of the gods was a way to contemplate and absorb their blessedness, particularly their fearless and undisturbed bliss. The entire Epicurean ideal is only knowable because of the images of the gods that visit us, most vividly in dreams but throughout our lives (since the images are constantly streaming from the gods' bodies). When Epicurus closes his letter to Menoeceus with Meditate therefore on these things and things akin to them night and day by yourself, and with a companion like to yourself, and never shall you be disturbed waking or asleep, but you shall live like a god among men he is being quite literal. 

 

Stoics and Platonists would distort the Epicurean teaching in polemics, but more often they simply met the Epicureans with scornful silence, but I think the Epicureans did have enduring influence in these schools later on. The theurgists' conception of the gods as not actually inclined to favor or vengeance toward mortals (interpreting these rather as figurative descriptions of the happiness or suffering deriving from our assimilation or disharmony with the gods), likewise their understanding of sacrifice as benefiting worshipers, not the gods, by drawing worshipers into participation in the divine- in my opinion these are clearly echoes of the Epicurean theology. Other influences would include the streaming eidola theory of dreams, which appears for instance in Synesius' On Dreams.