"largely because of the second point: the gods are "superessential," that is, above/prior/before Being itself. Indeed, the confluence of the gods, if I recall right, is what generates Being"
Huh, interesting. I'm still balancing the several cosmogenic tales I'm most familiar with in light of this. No, I don't expect them to agree, but I'm still holding them up next to each other (these are the big bang theory (it does posit a First Cause of sorts) , the Cosmic Doctrine's version of things, and the Dao de Jing's Dao as the originator of Heaven and Earth). I don't have much to say about how they stack up or compare to what Taylor's noting...
Thanks for the graphic - it's a nice visual as well as fulfilling its educative purpose. It's reminiscent of umbrellas or lotus leaves, or even inversed turtles, all the way up! :D
no subject
Huh, interesting. I'm still balancing the several cosmogenic tales I'm most familiar with in light of this. No, I don't expect them to agree, but I'm still holding them up next to each other (these are the big bang theory (it does posit a First Cause of sorts) , the Cosmic Doctrine's version of things, and the Dao de Jing's Dao as the originator of Heaven and Earth). I don't have much to say about how they stack up or compare to what Taylor's noting...
Thanks for the graphic - it's a nice visual as well as fulfilling its educative purpose. It's reminiscent of umbrellas or lotus leaves, or even inversed turtles, all the way up! :D