Zeynep Münteha Kot
Turtle shells, fish scales, the trunk of a tree, the cool water of the ocean, a bronze sculpture, human hair, and the awe-inspiring soul… When we look at the universe, we encounter an astounding diversity that is difficult to reconcile or reduce to a single principle or element, and we marvel. Western philosophy, it is assumed, began with this sense of wonder. To quellthis astonishment, philosophy, since Ancient Greece, has been striving to transformmultiplicity into unity. Everything that exists could have originated from water, fire, an unspecified substance, or air. Early philosophers thought this way, and they proposedjustifications for each possibility that, from the perspective of modern science, would seemexceedingly primitive. However, it was challenging to find a reason or mechanism for a single element to transform into its opposite and produce all this diversity.
When Empedocles explained the multiplicity in the universe through the composition andinteraction of four elements in varying proportions, the sought-after reasons and mechanismscould be more easily connected. The theory was completed when Aristotle added ether, thought to be the substance of incorporeal beings, to these four elements. However, we laterlearned that the universe contains at least 63 elements—first identified through AntoineLavoisier’s list in 1789, followed by Dmitri Mendeleev’s invention of the periodic table in 1869. A year after Mendeleev’s death, this number rose to 89 and subsequently to 101. Today, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry recognizes 118 elements, 94 of whichare natural and 24 synthetic.
Can we then say that the four-element theory is no longer valid?
In many philosophical, mythological, and theological traditions, the four-element theory holdsa central place. The common belief is as follows: as a primordial energy flows downward, it gains material form; thus, the four elements come into existence. Some traditions refer to thisenergy using terms like “vital force,” “Ki energy,” or “Prana,” while others leave it outside thesystem or omit it entirely. For instance, the stupas of Tibet (gigantic structures that depictcreation) consist of a cube, a sphere, a spiral, a crescent, and a small sphere that supports thecrescent. These forms correspond to earth, water, fire, and air, respectively. The small spheresupporting the crescent symbolizes the ether, the primordial energy from which the fourelements arise.
A similar cosmic teaching can be found in the Bhagavad Gita and Bodhidharma texts. WhileNative Americans pray with the four elements during harvest and war, the Sumerianmythology presents a theological dimension to the elements: Anu governs air, Enlil fire, Ninhursaga earth, and Enki oversees the vital forces of earth. This theological dimension is also present in Kabbalah: the letters of God’s proper name, Yahweh, correspond respectivelyto fire (Yod), water (He), air (Vav), and earth (He). Earth is considered secondary to the otherthree elements because it reuses a letter (He) that already denotes an element. While Chinesemedicine discusses five elements as encompassing natural phenomena, the Western traditionmentions the fifth element—ether—separately. In ancient Greek thought, the four elementscorrespond to the moral (fire), aesthetic (water), intellectual (air), and physical (earth) aspectsof human beings.
Medieval and Renaissance Europe developed the Greek interpretation of the theory of theelements into a theory of temperament, using Galen as a primary reference point. Similarly, in Ayurvedic medicine, the elements were employed to understand human nature. However, bythe modern era, these elements had lost much of their credibility and largely their spiritualsignificance. Current studies on the subject seem to focus either on a few specific disciplines, such as astrology, occult sciences, traditional psychology, and medicine, or on the material—at best symbolic—aspect of the elements. The primary connections linking the theory to thepresent can be identified as traditional medicine, traditional psychology, astrology, and occultsciences.
What did water, fire, air, and earth mean to ancient people that allowed them to permeateevery discipline, from cosmology to psychology, astrology to medicine?
This meaning can be uncovered by analyzing existing records and can also be carried forwardto the present day. However, to avoid falling into anachronism during such a transfer, twosecondary objectives must accompany this primary goal.
The first objective is to explore the possible connections and ruptures between modern sciences and the ancient sciences where the four-element theory held central importance. Such an exploration will help us distinguish the historical aspect of the theory of the elementsfrom its ahistorical or supra-historical dimension. The second objective, which would preventus from making a chronological error, is to focus on the energy equivalents of the fourelements and their interactions, rather than their material aspects. While matter is constrainedby time and space, and what we can say about it depends entirely on scientific developments, a discussion on energy transcends these limitations and leads us to a universal dimension. Forinstance, it is universally acknowledged across times and geographies that nature seeksequilibrium when a vortex arises. Similarly, in disciplines ranging from psychology toeconomics, from the history of philosophy to physics, it is understood that when there is a blockage, there is a need for pressure to resolve it, and this pressure inevitably bringsdestruction. Or, when energy ceases to flow, the simplest solution often involves redirectingits course.
By uncovering the interrelations of the four elements as translated into energy—such as airescaping the constraints of earth, fire provoking air while simultaneously empowering andreassuring it—their partial dominance over one another, and their power to transform oneanother, we can gain a versatile tool applicable across disciplines and an expanded vision of the source of motion.