Meister Eckhart, the German Works: 64 Homilies for the Liturgical Year. 1. de Tempore: Introduction, Translation and Notes (Eckhart: Texts and Studies) 9042936088, 9789042936089

Citation preview

ECKHART: TEXTS AND STUDIES

VOLUME 9

meister eckhart, The german works 64 homelies for the liturgical year 1. «de tempore»

Loris Sturlese and Markus Vinzent

PEETERS

MEISTER ECKHART, THE GERMAN WORKS 64 HOMILIES FOR THE LITURGICAL YEAR 1. DE TEMPORE

Eckhart: Texts and Studies EDITED BY

MARKUS VINZENT (King’s College, London & Max-Weber-Kolleg, Universität Erfurt)

ADVISORY BOARD

CHRISTINE BÜCHNER (Fakultät für Geisteswissenschaften, Universität Hamburg)

MARKUS ENDERS (Theologische Fakultät, Universität Freiburg)

GOTTHARD FUCHS (Kultur-Kirche-Wissenschaft, Bistümer Limburg und Mainz)

FREIMUT LÖSER

(Philosophisch-historische Fakultät, Universität Augsburg)

DIETMAR MIETH (Katholisch-Theologische Fakultät, Universität Tübingen)

REGINA D. SCHIEWER (Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät, Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt)

LORIS STURLESE (Storia della filosofia medievale, Università del Salento)

RUDOLF K. WEIGAND (Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät, Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt)

Eckhart: Texts and Studies VOLUME 9

Meister Eckhart, The German Works 64 Homilies for the Liturgical Year 1. De tempore Introduction, Translation, and Notes

BY

LORIS STURLESE and MARKUS VINZENT

PEETERS LEUVEN — PARIS — BRISTOL, CT

2019

ISBN 978-90-429-3608-9 eISBN 978-90-429-3931-8 D/2019/0602/31 A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. © 2019, Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage or retrieval devices or systems, without prior written permission from the publisher, except the quotation of brief passages for review purposes.

Table of Contents Introduction I. Why Eckhart? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. Eckhart, the preacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. Eckhart’s preaching: the manuscript tradition and the question of authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. Orality and writing according to Eckhart . . . . . . V. Emphatic speech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. The substance of emphasis: the philosophico–theological demonstrative discourse . . . . . . . . . . . VII. Not knowing or the illusion of false self–reliance . . VIII. The ‘transformed knowing’ and ‘God’s necessity’. . IX. The reconstruction of Eckhart’s vernacular Temporale and the editing criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . X. A note on the English translation and the introductions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 4 14 21 28 36 44 50 61 64

Meister Eckhart: 64 Homilies for the Liturgical Year Homily 1* [S 87]: Dominica I in Adventu Domini, ‘Ecce, dies veniunt, dicit dominus, et suscitabo David germen iustum’ . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

69 69 70 71 71 72

Homily 2* [Q 24]: Dominica I in Adventu Domini, Sant Paulus sprichet: ‘întuot iu’, inniget iu ‘Kristum’. . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80 80

VI

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

The content of the homily . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes Previous English translations . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

80 83 83 84

Homily 3* [Q 68]: Dominica II in Adventu Domini, ‘Scitote, quia prope est regnum dei’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

93 93 94 95 95 96

Homily 4* [Q 77]: Dominica III in Adventu Domini, ‘Ecce, mitto angelum meum’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

108 108 108 109 109 110

Homily 5* [Q 22]: Feria IV Quattuor temporum in Adventu Domini, ‘Ave, gratia plena’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

118 118 119 121 121 122

Homily 6* [Q 38]: Feria IV Quattuor temporum in Adventu Domini, ‘In illo tempore missus est angelus Gabriel a deo’ . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

135 135 135 137 137 138

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

VII

Homily 7* [Q 34]: Dominica IV in Adventu Domini, ‘Gaudete in domino, iterum gaudete’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

150 150 150 151 151 152

Homily 8* [Q 76]: , ‘Videte qualem caritatem dedit nobis pater’ . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

159 159 159 161 161 162

Homily 9* [S 101]: Dominica infra octavam nativitatis Domini, ‘Dum medium silentium tenerent omnia’ . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

174 174 175 177 177 178

Homily 10* [S 88]: In circumcisione vocatum est nomen eius Iesus’ . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . Edition, commentary and notes . Previous English translation . . . Text and translation . . . . . . .

Domini, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Homily 11* [S 89]: In vigilia epiphaniae domini apparuit’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . .

‘Post . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

dies octo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

198 198 198 199 199 200

Domini, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

‘Angelus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

202 202 202

VIII

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

203 203 204

Homily 12* [Q 14]: In epiphania Domini, ‘Surge, illuminare Ierusalem’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

209 209 210 211 211 212

Homily 13* [S 102]: In epiphania Domini, est rex Iudaeorum?’ . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . .

natus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

223 223 223 225 225 226

Homily 14* [S 90]: Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae, ‘Sedebat Iesus docens in templo’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

243 243 243 245 245 246

Homily 15* [S 103]: Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae, ‘Cum factus esset Iesus annorum duodecim’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

254 254 254 255 255 256

‘Ubi est, qui . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

Homily 16* [S 104]: Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae, his, quae patris mei sunt, oportet me esse’ . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IX

‘In . . . . . . . . . . . .

273 273 273 277 277 278

Homily 17* [S 91]: Dominica in Septuagesima, ‘Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem suam’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

301 301 301 303 303 304

Homily 18* [Q 1]: Feria III post dominicam I in Quadragesima, ‘Intravit Iesus in templum et ejiciebat vendentes et ementes.’ Matthaei.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

314 314 314 316 317 318

Homily 19* [S 116]: Feria IV post dominicam II in Quadragesima, ‘Domine rex omnipotens in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita’ . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

330 330 330 331 331 332

Homily 20* [Q 50]: Dominica III in Quadragesima, ‘Eratis enim aliquando tenebrae’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

338 338

X

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

The content of the homily . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes Previous English translations . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

338 339 339 340

‘Beatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

347 347 347 349 349 350

III in Quadra. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

369 369 370 371 371 372

Homily 23* [Q 51]: Feria IV post dominicam III in Quadragesima, ‘Haec dicit dominus: honora patrem tuum’ etc. . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

380 380 380 382 383 384

Homily 24* [Q 19]: Feria V post dominicam III in Quadragesima, ‘Sta in porta domus domini et loquere verbum’ . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

397 397 397 398 399 400

Homily 21* [Q 49]: Dominica III in Quadragesima, venter, qui te portavit, et ubera, quae suxisti’ . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Homily 22* [Q 37]: Feria III post dominicam gesima, ‘Vir meus servus tuus mortuus est’ . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

T ABLE

OF CONTENTS

XI

Homily 25* [Q 26]: Feria VI post dominicam III in Quadragesima, ‘Mulier, venit hora et nunc est, quando veri adoratores adorabunt patrem in spiritu et veritate’ . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editions, commentaries and notes . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous English translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

409 409 409 411 411 412

Homily 26* [S 99]: Dominica IV in Quadragesima, sterilis’> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the homily . . . . . . . . . . . Edition, commentary and notes . . . . . . . . . Previous English translation . . . . . . . . . . . Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

This is written in the Gospel1 and says in German: ‘See, I send my angel.’ First, one has to know, what an angel is, as it is said in Scripture that ‘we should be like angels’.2 A master says, ‘the angel is an image of God’.3 Another says that he has been made in the image of God.4 A third says that he is ‘a pure mirror’,5 who is in him and ‘carries in him’ the likeness of6 ‘God’s goodness and God’s purity’, ‘of the quietness and the obscurity of God’, ‘as much as possible’. One, however, says he was ‘an intellectual, pure light’, separate of all material things.7 We should become8 like such angels. Everything that knows has to know in a light that is in time, as what I believe, I believe in a light that is in time and is temporal. The angel, however, knows in a light that is beyond time and is eternal. Therefore, it knows in an eternal now. Man, however, knows in a now of time.9 The most minimal measure10 is the now of time. Take away, however, the now of time, then you are everywhere and you have all ad similitudinem Dei factus, sed signaculum similitudinis dicitur, ut quia in eo subtilior est natura, eo in illum imago Dei similius insinuetur expressa’. 5. ‘der dritte sprichet’: Ps.-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 4, § 22 (PG 3, col. 724B), Dionysiaca pp. 269, 3–270, 3: ‘manifestatio occulti luminis, speculum purum suscipiens totam … pulchritudinem boniformis deiformitatis et munde resplendere faciens in se ipso, quemadmodum possibile est, bonitatem silentii, quod est in adytis’ (perhaps Eckhart uses a text with the reading of ‘abditis’, see Albertus, Super Dionysii De divinis nominibus, c. 4 n. 182, ed. Simon, 268, 13–4: ‘quod est in abditis, idest in occultis divinitatis, vel in aditis, idest quae adiri non possunt’). 6. ‘glîcheit’: the source, as L. Sturlese points out, is not ‘similitudinem’, but ‘pulchritudinem’. 7. ‘einer sprichet’: Iohannes Damascenus, De fide orthodoxa II 3 (17), tr. Burgundionis, ed. Buytaert, 70, 31–2: ‘Lumina secunda intellectualia, ex primo et sine principio lumine’. See Eckhart, In Gen. I n. 72 (LW I/2, 119, 8–9): ‘per lucem productam primo die secundum Augustinum intelligitur productio vel formatio angelicae naturae intellectualis et deo proximae’. Augustinus, De Genesi ad litteram I 17. 19, ed. Zycha, 23, 20–4, 10; 27, 21–4; Confessiones XII 15, n. 20, ed. Verheijen, 225, 34–6; XIII 3, n. 4, 243, 1–3; De civitate Dei XI 32, ed. Dombart/Kalb, 351, 1–352, 15. 8. ‘suln wir glîch werden’: the translation of the Lat. future, which creates a certain ambiguity. 9. ‘in einem nû der zît’: lat. ‘nunc temporis’, see for example Theodericus de Vriberg, De mensuris 2, 24, ed. Rehn, 221: ‘ipsum nunc, quod est mensura mobilis secundum Philosophum IV Physicorum (IV, c. 11, 220a3–4), currit per diversa nunc temporis, quae sunt termini temporis inquantum continuum’. 10. ‘Daz allerminste’ means the smallest measure; on ‘momentum’, see Isidorus, Etymologiae V 29, n. 1: ‘Tempora autem momentis, horis, diebus, mensibus … dividuntur. Momentum est minimum atque angustissimum tempus, a motu siderum dictum’.

112

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

allenthalben und hâst alle zît. Diz wesen oder daz enist niht alliu dinc11, wan, sô lange ich diz und daz bin oder diz und daz hân, sô enbin ich niht alliu dinc noch enhân niht alliu dinc. Scheit abe, daz dû noch diz noch daz sîst noch diz noch daz habest, sô bist dû alliu dinc und hâst alliu dinc; und alsô: bist dû noch hie noch dâ, sô bist dû allenthalben. Und alsô: bist dû noch diz noch daz, sô bist dû alliu dinc. Der engel ist und würket ouch vernünfticlîche in sîner stat und schouwet sunder underlâz, und sîn gegenwurf ist ein vernünftic wesen. Dar umbe ist sîn wesen verre geverret von allen dingen. Swaz alheit12 oder zal ist, von dem ist er verre. (337) | Sprechen wir ein lützel vürbaz von dem worte, daz er saget: ‘ich sende’. Ein geschrift13 geswîget des namen ‘ich’, diu ander14 saget von dem namen ‘ich’. Der prophête15 saget: ‘ich sende mînen engel’; aber der êvangeliste16 geswîget des namen ‘ich’ und saget: ‘sehet, sende mînen engel’. Waz nû daz meine, daz diu ein geschrift geswîget des namen ‘ich’?17 Ez meinet des êrsten die unsprechelicheit gotes, daz got ist unnennelich und über alliu wort in lûterkeit sînes grundes, dâ got kein wort noch rede niht haben enmac, dâ er unsprechelich ist allen crêatûren und unwortlich. Daz ander: ez meinet, daz diu sêle unsprechelich ist und âne wort; dâ si sich nimet in irme eigenen grunde, dâ ist | (338) si unwortlich und unnennelich noch enkan dâ kein wort gehaben, wan dâ ist si über namen und über alliu wort. Dáz meinet, daz des namen ‘ich’ geswigen ist, wan si enhât dâ noch wort noch rede. Daz dritte: daz got und diu sêle sô gar ein18 ist, daz got kein eigenschaft haben enmac, mit der er gescheiden sî von der sêle oder kein anderz ensî, sô daz er niht sprechen enmac: ‘ich sende mînen engel’, alsô daz er ein anderz sî dan diu sêle. Wan, sagete er ‘ich’, sô meinete er ein anderz von der sêle. Dar umbe geswîget man des namen ‘ich’, daz er und diu sêle sô gar ein ist, daz got kein eigenschaft haben enmac, 11. ‘Diz … dinc’: J. Quint translates: ‘Dieses zu sein oder jenes bedeutet nicht alles ’, see also his apparatus at p. 336. 12. ‘alheit’, here (with L. Sturlese) not totality in the metaphysical sense, but in terms of sum of numbers, pace B. Hennig, Kleines Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch [2001], 7 s.v.: ‘Vollkommenheit’. 13. Luc. 7:27: ‘Ecce mitto angelum meum’. 14. Matth. 11:10: ‘Ecce ego mitto angelum meum’.

H OMILY 4* [Q 77]

113

time. This or that being is not all things,11 because, as long as I am this or that, or possess this or that, neither am I all things nor do I possess all things. Cut off being either this or that, or possessing either this or that, and lo, you are all things and possess all things. Therefore, if you are neither here nor there, you are everywhere. And if you are neither this nor that, you are all things. The angel is and also acts intellectually in his place and contemplates without interruption, and its object is an intellectual being. For this reason, its being is far away from all things. It is far away from all sum12 or number. Let us talk a little bit about the verse in which he says: ‘I send.’ One gospel13 does not mention the ‘I’, another14 mentions the ‘I’. The Prophet15 says: ‘I send my angel’, but the evangelist16 does not mention the term ‘I’, but says: ‘See, send my angel.’ What does it mean that the one gospel does not mention the term ‘I’?17 First, it means the unspeakability of God, as God is unnameable and beyond any word in the purity of His ground, where God cannot have any word or language, where He is unspeakable for all creatures and wordless. Second, it means that the soul is unspeakable and without a word, as she takes herself in her own ground, where she is wordless, unnameable, nor can she have any word, as she is there beyond all names and beyond any word. That is what is meant when the term ‘I’ is not mentioned, because she has there neither word nor language. Third, that God and the soul are so fully one,18 that God has no property with which he can distinguish Himself from the soul or that He be something other so that he could say: ‘I send my angel’, as if he were something else than the soul. If he says ‘I’, He would mean being something other than the soul. Therefore, the term ‘I’ is not mentioned, because He and the soul are so much one, because God cannot have any 15. Mal. 3:1: ‘Ecce ego mitto angelum meum’. 16. Luc. 7:27. 17. J. Quint comments: ‘… Eine ähnliche mystisch willkürlich gezwungene Interpretation der Unterdrückung eines grammatisch im Lateinischen überflüssigen Bestandteiles eines Schrifttextes findet sich in DW 1 S. 357,6f…’ 18. ‘sô gar ein…’, emphatic expressions for a total unity.

114

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

daz noch iht noch niht von gote gesprochen enmac sîn, daz underscheit oder anderheit wîsen müge. (339) | Von dem andern: daz diu geschrift19 saget ‘ich’, meinet des êrsten gotes isticheit20, daz got aleine ist; wan alliu dinc sint in gote und von im, wan ûzwendic im und âne in enist niht in der wârheit: wan alle crêatûren sint ein snœde dinc und ein blôz niht gegen gote. Dar umbe: waz sie sint in der wârheit, daz sint sie in gote, und dar umbe ist got aleine in der wârheit. Und alsô meinet daz wort ‘ich’ die isticheit götlîcher wârheit, wan ez ist ein bewîsunge21 eines ‘istes’22. Darumbe bewîset ez, daz er aleine ist. (340) | Daz ander: ez meinet, daz got ungescheiden ist von allen dingen, wan got ist in allen dingen, wan er ist in inniger, dan sie in selben sint. Alsô ist got ungescheiden von allen dingen. Alsô sol ouch der mensche ungescheiden sîn von allen dingen, daz ist: daz der mensche an im selber niht ensî und zemâle sîn selbes abegegangen sî; sô ist er ungescheiden von allen dingen und ist alliu dinc. Wan, als verre dû niht enbist an dir selben, als verre bist dû alliu dinc und ungescheiden von allen dingen. Dar umbe: als verre dû ungescheiden bist von allen dingen, als verre bist dû got und alliu dinc, wan gotes gotheit liget dar ane, daz er ungescheiden ist von allen dingen. Dar umbe: der mensche, der ungescheiden ist von allen dingen, der nimet die gotheit, dâ got selbe sîne gotheit nemende ist. Ze dem dritten sô meinet daz wort ‘ich’ umbe etwaz volkomenheit23 des namen ‘ich’, wan ez enist kein eigen name24: ez ist umbe einen namen und umbe volkomenheit des namen und meinet eine unbewegelicheit und unberüerlicheit, und dar | (341) umbe meinet ez, daz got unbewegelich und unberüerlich ist und êwigiu stæticheit ist. Ze dem vierden mâle25 meinet ez die blôzen lûterkeit götlîches wesens, daz blôz âne allez mitewesen26 ist. Wan güete und wîsheit 19. Matth. 11:10: ‘Ecce ego mitto angelum meum’. 20. ‘isticheit’: J. Quint translates this neologism as ‘Seinsheit’. See, however, A. Beccarisi, ‘Philosophische Neologismen zwischen Latein und Volkssprache: ‘istic’ und ‘isticheit’ bei Meister Eckhart’ (2003), and the comments in LE III 110–3. 21. ‘bewîsunge’: manifestations. 22. ‘eines “istes”’: J. Quint translates ‘eines Seienden’ (see above note 20). 23. ‘volkomenheit’: perfection. 24. J. Quint’s interpunction is ‘ez enist kein eigen name: ez ist…’, but according to L. Sturlese it rather should be taken paratactically: ‘kein eigen name, ez ist’.

H OMILY 4* [Q 77]

115

property such that neither something nor nothing can be said of God which would point to difference or diversity. About the other: that the gospel19 mentions the ‘I’ means first God’s beingness:20 that God alone is; because all things are in God and from Him, as outside Him and without Him nothing in truth is. Because all creatures are a negligible thing and a naked nothing compared with God. Therefore, what they are in truth, they are in God, and, therefore, in truth, God alone is. Hence, the word ‘I’ means the beingness of divine truth, because it manifests21 the state of being.22 So it proves that He alone is. Second: it means that God is indistinct from all things, because God is in all things, as He is more intimately in them, than they are in themselves. Hence, God is indistinct from all things. Likewise, man ought to be indistinct from all things, that is that man for himself should be nothing and should be totally detached from himself; this way he is indistinct from all things and is all things. Because, as far you are not in yourself, you are that far from all things and indistinct from all things. Hence, as far as you are indistinct from all things, to that extent you are far from God and all things, because God’s godhead presumes that He is indistinct from all things. Therefore, the man who is indistinct of all things, takes the godhead, where God Himself is the one who takes His godhead. Third, the word ‘I’ means somehow a perfection23 of the term ‘I’, as it is not a proper name;24 it stands for a name and a perfection of the name and means an immovability and ungraspability, and, therefore, it indicates that God is immovable and ungraspable and of eternal constancy. Fourth,25 it means the naked and pure, divine being which is naked without any kind of accident.26 Because goodness, wisdom and

25. The ‘ego’ signifies pure substance without accidents; see, for example, Eckhart, In Ex. n. 14 (LW II 20): ‘Li “ego” pronomen est primae personae. Discretivum pronomen meram substantiam significat: meram, inquam, sine omni accidente, sine omni alieno, substantiam sine qualitate, sine forma hac aut illa, sine hoc aut illo. Haec autem deo et ipsi soli congruunt’. On this modal topic see Priscianus, Institutiones grammaticae, ed. Keil, II 131, 5: ‘pronomina et finita uolunt esse et loco propriorum accipiuntur et substantiam solam sine qualitate significant’. 26. ‘mitewesen’: the sole place in his work where Eckhart uses this term. The further text shows that he takes it as (substantial, divine) accidents.

116

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

und swaz man von gote sprechen mac, daz ist allez mitewesen gotes blôzen wesens; wan alliu mitewesen machent ein vremde von dem wesene. Und alsô meinet daz wort ‘ich’ gotes lûterkeit des wesens, daz dâ ist in im selben blôz âne alliu mitewesen, diu vremde und verre machent. (342) | Nû sagen wir vürbaz von den engeln, als ich nû sagete27, daz sie wæren ein bilde gotes und daz sie sint ein spiegel, der in im hât glîcheit der guotheit und der lûterkeit des stilnisses und der verborgenheit gotes, als verre als ez mügelich ist. Nû suln wir glîch sîn den engeln28, und alsô suln wir ein bilde gotes sîn, wan got hât uns gemachet ein bilde sîn selbes. Der meister, der ein bilde machen wil nâch einem menschen, der enmachet ez niht nâch Kuonrâte oder nâch Heinrîche. Aber, machete er ein bilde nâch Kuonrâte oder nâch Heinrîche, sô enmeinete er niht dén menschen, er meinete Kuonrât oder Heinrich. Aber machete er ein bilde nâch Kuonrâte, sô enmeinete er niht Heinrich; wan, möhte und künde29 er, er machete alzemâle Kuonrât und den selben30 und alzemâle im glîch31. Nû mac got alzemâle und kan, und dar umbe sô hât got dich im alzemâle glîch gemachet und ein bilde sîn selbes. Aber ‘im glîch’ wîset ein vremde und ein verre. Nû | (343) enist zwischen dem menschen und gote noch vremde noch verre; und dar umbe enist er im niht glîch, mêr: er ist mit im alzemâle glîch und daz selbe, daz er alzemâle ist. Ich enweiz noch enkan niht mê; dâ mite sî dirre rede ein ende. Aber ich gedâhte eines ûf dem wege, daz der mensche sô gar abegescheiden32 solte sîn in sîner meinunge, | (344) daz er nieman noch niht meinen ensolte wan die gotheit in ir selben, noch sælicheit noch diz noch daz wan aleine got als got und die gotheit in ir selber; wan, swaz dû anders meinest, daz ist allez ein mitewesen der gotheit. Dar umbe scheit abe33 allez mitewesen der gotheit, und nim sie blôz in ir selber. Daz wir her zuo komen, des helfe uns got. Âmen. 27. Reference to n. 3 above. 28. MHG ‘suln wir glîch sîn’ is a periphrastic future. 29. ‘möhte und künde’: J. Quint translates: ‘vermag und kann’; but see BMZ I 806, s.v. ‘kinne’ which observes that in this combination, ‘mugen’ indicates ‘potere’, ‘kunnen’ ‘sapere’. 30. ‘den selben’: ‘Conrad’. 31. ‘alzemâle … glîch’, lat. ‘similitudo perfecta’. See Hom. 103* [Q 6], n. 11: ‘Sant Johannes sprichet: “daz wort was bî gote”. Ez was alzemâle glîch und was bî neben, noch undenân noch

H OMILY 4* [Q 77]

117

what one can say of God, all of these are accidents of God’s naked being; as all accidents are alien with regards to being. Hence, the word ‘I’ means God’s purity of being which is naked in itself without any accident that would make it alien and distant. Now, finally we speak of angels, as I said just before,27 that they are ‘an image of God’ and that they are ‘a mirror’ which has in it a similitude ‘of goodness and purity’ ‘of the quietude and the obscurity of God’ ‘as much as possible’. Now, we should be28 equal to the angels, and, therefore, should be an image of God, because God has created us an image of Himself. The master who wants to create an image of a man does not make one simply of Conrad or Henry, but when he makes an image of Conrad or Henry, he does not want to portray man, but intends to portray Conrad or Henry. Yet, when he makes an image of Conrad, he does not mean to portray Henry. Because, if he intended and were able,29 he would portray [Henry] entirely [like] Conrad, and [as] the same one30 and entirely like31 him. Now God entirely wishes and is able; therefore, God has made you entirely like Himself and an image of Himself. But ‘like Him’ points to strangeness and distance. Now, between man and God is neither strangeness nor distance; and, therefore, he is not like Him; instead, he is entirely like Him and the very same as He is. I neither do nor can know anything more. So this homily finds its end. Yet, I had a thought on the way that man should be so detached32 in his intention that he should not think about anybody or anything except the godhead in itself, not about happiness, not about this or that, except God alone as God and the godhead in itself; because whatever else you think, all of that is an accident of the godhead. Therefore, cut off 33 all accidents of the godhead, and take it naked in itself. That we may come to this, may God help us! Amen. obenân, sunder glîch’. See Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 5 (LW III 7): ‘Non ait: sub deo, nec ait: descendit a deo, sed ait: verbum erat apud deum. Li enim apud deum sonat in quandam aequalitatem’. 32. ‘abegescheiden’: J. Quint translates: ‘selbstlos’, yet see n. 33 and further below: ‘Dar umbe scheit abe allez mitewesen’ (see note 33). As John Connolly rightly points out, this reminds of Plotinus, Ennead V 3[49].17: ἄφελε πάντα. 33. ‘scheit abe’: see note 32.

Homily 5* [Q 22] Feria IV Quattuor temporum in Adventu Domini ‘Ave, gratia plena’ Introduction

T

he theme of this homily is the simple salutation of the angel meeting Mary (Luke 1:28), ‘Greetings, full of grace’. It is taken from the Gospel reading on Wednesday of the Fourth Week of Advent (although the codices Mai1 and BT give ‘vff vnser lieben Frowen Verkündung’, and in fact the passage is also read for the feast of ‘In annuntiatione Dominica’, that is 25 March). The homily is passed down in its entirety by four manuscripts (Bra2, E1, Mai1, STR3), from BT, and there is one fragment extant (Wo3). Koch placed it in Advent, as it contains a phrase from the Offertory of the Saturday of the ember days (‘Exultet’) and appears at the beginning of the Introit and the Gospel of Christmas (see J. Koch, Kleine Schriften I 302). On two separate occasions in this homily (in particular at n. 12) Eckhart refers to a convent that Quint and Koch identified with the Cistercian monastery of Mariengarten in Cologne (references are Hom. 65* [S 13], n. 6: ‘Als ich nû niuwelîche sprach ze Mergarden’, and Hom. 12* [Q 14], n. 5: ‘as ich sprach zo mergarden’ and n. 9: ‘as ich sprach zo mergarden’; see J. Koch, Kleine Schriften I 299–302). The context of Cologne seems confirmed by the reference in the text to an earlier sermon by Eckhart at the Convent of the Holy Maccabees (n. 8: ‘als ich ê sprach ze sant Magfire’), which refers to Hom. 90* [Q 12], held on 8 September). Against Cologne as the location for the homily, however, Strasbourg has been advanced by K. Ruh, ‘Zu Meister Eckharts Kölner Predigten’ (1999), but the scholarly consensus stays with Cologne. Before Eckhart deals with the main topic, he introduces as protheme three combined quotations from Luke 1:35, Iac. 1:17 and Wisd. 18:15.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

119

The content of the homily The homily has two main parts: part one where Eckhart sets out why God ‘is with you’ (nn. 2–6); and part two, in which he discusses the meaning of ‘in principio’ (nn. 7–18). In the first part Eckhart mentions three elements, ‘the modesty of the angelic nature’, his reluctance in approaching Mary and his addressing ‘every good soul’ (n. 3); these elements, however, are not further developed in the first part of the text, and are pursued only partially in the second part. Instead, Eckhart elaborates the thought that Mary giving birth to God was first of all a spiritual, and only secondarily, a bodily act (n. 4). The spiritual nature is the reason for the greeting not being confined to one person; rather it was meant to be directed towards ‘any good soul’. In a next step, Eckhart focuses on the identification between the one, single, eternally born Son and the listener to this homily (n. 5). Aware of the emphatic character of this statement, he adds as an illustration of God’s loving kenosis the story of the rich woman who has only one eye, and the ‘rich man’ who takes out one of his own eyes to make himself like the woman in order to prove his love to her (n. 6). In the second part of the homily, Eckhart interprets Gen. 1:1 and John 1:1 (‘In principio’) by relating it to the Christmas reading of Is. 9:6 (‘To us a child is born, to us a son is given’). And following on from the identification between the eternal Son of God and ‘any good soul’, Eckhart picks up on the ‘modesty’ not of the angel, but of ‘human nature’ (n. 7). The modesty, however, is not a negative connotation of the soul, but matches God’s own kenosis, the end of which action reveals its beginning – God is all about perfecting what he has created. From the beginning, this aim directs his action, and as even fire cannot ignite as fire, but instead the nature of it (being hot) ignites, so it is with God’s being. It is not God as God that acts, but because of His kenotic acting nature, God creates everything. Hence, what he has created is of that same perfection of a kenotically acting being. The birth of what is absolutely identical with Himself is even prior to the creation of all creatures (n. 8). This uncreated spark is the reason for Eckhart to state that he himself can be called the Father’s eternal son, even though an unborn son (n. 9). In an emphatic further note, Eckhart unfolds what this birth ‘out of the hidden darkness of eternal obscurity’ means,

120

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

explaining it by using the example of the resonating echo (n. 10). To this he adds his thoughts about the fact of similarity amongst created things such as blades of grass (n. 11). Coming back to the echo, he even dares to think that man can ‘force God’, because of His kenotic nature (n. 12). And what is true for God, is true for man: he cannot flee from God, as the extreme hiding place from God is still a place of revelation (n. 13). Why then, one may ask, does one not discover God? Eckhart’s answer is that we lack ‘divine love’ (n. 14), hence his hope for us to re–discover what is the core of human nature. The soul is the ‘birth’ (in the sense of the birthplace or the moment of birth) of the ‘inborn Son’ who had decided to leave the sleeping place in the Father and come to the fore as his Word (n. 15). As with God Himself, it was a going forth not for His own sake, but for His friend, His bride (n. 16), to make ‘a start of all being’ (n. 17). As can be seen from the summary of the content, but even more from the many images that Eckhart uses (darkness, obscurity, light, kenosis, birth etc.), the homily anticipates the theme of Christ’s birth at Christmas. Read against this liturgical background, the text becomes a solemn introduction into the mysteries of this feast, starting from the address of the angel. It may reflect, as L. Sturlese states, the extraordinary presence of Eckhart as preacher in the Cistercian church of Cologne: ‘Eckhart preaches about the theme of eternal generation in the spark of the soul, claiming that the relationship between God and this “spark” is not created (which is true of the soul), but generated by a mutual and dynamic unity.’ Also of interest is the question whether Eckhart taught an uncreated element of the soul (see n. 9), a topic for which he was accused of pantheism. Here he gives his reply to the school debate: ‘If you asked me, at what moment I am a unique son who has been born by the heavenly Father in eternity and whether then I have been from eternity son in God, I answer: yes and no. Yes, a son according to the fact that the Father has given birth to me eternally, and no, by way of being unborn.’ Being unborn (a hapax in Eckhart) would normally exclude the notion of ‘Son’, and yet, Eckhart maintains that the definition of ‘Son’ depends on the perspective one takes. If one looks at the eternal birth by which the Father has made the highest element of the soul to be, we can call it the one and single Son; if however we look at the implied notion of ‘birth’, it is an eternal act which defies the common notion of birth, implying a beginning of what is without start. See also Hom. 18* [Q 1], n. 10.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

121

Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW I 371–89; N. Largier, I 935–9. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart’s Sermons, trans. by C. Field (1900), 25–8; Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 221–4; J.M. Clark, Meister Eckhart (1957), 212–7; Meister Eckhart, The Essential Sermons (1981), 192–6; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 279–84.

122

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (375)‘Ave, gratia plena’. Diz wort, daz ich gesprochen hân in latîne, daz stât geschriben in dem heiligen êwangeliô1 und sprichet als vil ze tiutsche: ‘gegrüezet sîst dû, vol gnâde, der herre ist mit dir!’ ‘Der heilige geist’ sol von oben her nider komen von dem obersten trône und ‘sol in dich komen’ von dem liehte des êwigen vaters2. Hie sint driu dinc ze verstânne. Daz êrste: kleinheit der engelischen natûre; daz ander: daz er sich unwirdic bekante, daz er gotes muoter nennen solte; daz dritte: daz er ez ir niht aleine zuo sprach, mêr, daz er ez einer alsô grôzen schar zuo sprach: einer ieglîchen guoten sêle, diu gotes begert. Ich spriche: und hæte Marîâ niht von êrste got geistlîche geborn, er enwære nie lîplîche von ir geborn worden. Ein vrouwe sprach ze unserm herren3: | (376) ‘sælic ist der lîp, der dich truoc’. Dô sprach unser herre4: niht enist der lîp aleine sælic, der mich getragen hât; ‘sælic sint, die daz wort gotes hœrent und daz behaltent’. Daz ist gote werder, daz er geistlîche geborn werde von einer ieglîchen juncvrouwen oder von einer ieglîchen guoten sêle, dan daz er von Marîâ lîplîche geborn wart. Hier inne ist ze verstânne, daz wir sîn5 ein einiger sun, den der vater êwiclîche geborn hât. Dô der vater gebar alle crêatûren, dô gebar er mich und ich vlôz ûz6 mit allen crêatûren und bleip doch inne in dem vater. Ze glîcher wîs, als daz wort, daz ich nû spriche, daz entspringet in mir, ze dem andern mâle sô ruowe ich ûf dem bilde, ze dem dritten mâle sô spriche ich ez ûz, und ir enpfâhet ez alle; nochdenne blîbet ez 1. Luc. 1:28. The liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 436rb: ‘Feria quarta. Secundum Lucam [1, 26–38]. In illo tempore [In mense autem sexto Vg.] missus est Angelus Gabriel a Deo in civitatem Galylee, cui nomen Nazareth, ad virginem desponsatam viro, cui nomen erat Ioseph, de domo David, et nomen virginis Maria. Et ingressus angelus ad eam dixit: Ave gratia plena: Dominus tecum: Benedicta tu [+ in Vg.] mulieribus. Quae cum audisset, turbata est in sermone eius, et cogitabat qualis esset ista salutatio. Et ait Angelus ei: Ne timeas Maria, invenisti enim gratiam apud Deum. Ecce concipies in utero, et paries filium, et vocabis nomen eius Ihesum. Hic erit magnus, et Filius Altissimi vocabitur, et dabit illi Dominus Deus sedem David patris eius: et regnabit in domo Iacob in eternum, et regni eius non erit finis. Dixit autem Maria ad Angelum: Quomodo fiet istud, quoniam virum non cognosco? Et respondens Angelus dixit ei: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Ideoque et quod nascetur ex te Sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei. Et ecce Elisabeth cognata tua, et ipsa concepit filium in senectute sua: et hic mensis est sextus illi, que vocatur sterilis: quia non erit impossibile apud Deum omne verbum. Dixit autem Maria: Ecce ancilla Domini, fiat michi secundum verbum tuum’.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

123

‘Ave, gratia plena’. That verse which I have spoken in Latin, is written in the holy gospel1 and can be rendered in German: ‘Greetings, full of grace, the Lord is with you!’ ‘The Holy Spirit’ shall come down from above, from the highest throne and ‘shall come into you’ from the light of the eternal Father.2 Here, three things have to be understood. The first: the modesty of the angelic nature. The other: that he called himself not worthy of addressing the mother of God. The third: that he did not speak to her alone, but that he spoke to a great number, to every good soul that longs for God. I say: If Mary had not first given birth to God in a spiritual way, He would not have been born bodily of her. A women spoke to our Lord: ‘Blessed is the body that carried you.’3 And our Lord replied: Not the body alone is blessed that carried me, ‘blessed are those who listen to the word of God and who remember it’.4 It is more worthy of God that He is spiritually born of any young woman or of any good soul than being born bodily of Mary. Here we have to understand that we have to be5 one single Son, whom the Father has born eternally. When the Father gave birth to all creatures, then He gave birth to me and I emanated6 together with all creatures, yet remained inside the Father. Likewise, the word that I am saying now, it derives from me, next I remain with the image, then thirdly I speak it out and you all receive it; nevertheless it properly stays 2. Luc. 1:35: ‘Spiritus Sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi’; Iac. 1:17: ‘… descendens a Patre luminum’; Sap. 18:15: ‘sermo tuus de caelo a regalibus sedibus … prosilivit’ (Introit of the Sunday of the Christmas Octave: see Hom. 9* [S 101]). 3. Luc. 11:27: ‘quaedam mulier de turba dixit illi: Beatus venter, qui te portavit’. Same Middle High German translation in Hom. 21* [Q 49], n. 2: ‘sælic ist der lîp, der dich truoc … Dô sprach unser herre: … Aber noch sæliger ist der mensche, der mîn wort hœret und ez beheltet’. 4. Luc. 11:28: ‘… At ille dixit: Quinimmo beati, qui audiunt verbum Dei, et custodiunt illud’. 5. ‘daz wir sîn ein einiger sun’: J. Quint translates: ‘daß wir ein einziger Sohn sein sollen’. It is true that ‘sîn’ is subjunctive, but it has to be translated in a stronger sense than a potential ‘sollen’. 6. ‘ûzvliezen’ is the technical term for emanation, yet in the context of birth, we also have to hear the delivering process in this technical term.

124

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

eigenlîche in mir. Alsô | (377) bin ich in dem vater bliben. In dem vater sint bilde aller crêatûren. Diz holz hât ein vernünftic bilde in gote. Ez enist niht aleine vernünftic, mêr: ez ist ein lûter vernunft. Daz allermeiste guot, daz got dem menschen ie getete, daz was, daz er mensche wart. Hie sol ich ein mære7 sagen, daz wol hie zuo gehœret. Ez was ein rîcher man und ein rîchiu vrouwe. Dô geschach der vrouwen ein unval, daz si ein ouge verlôs; des wart si sêre betrüebet. Dô kom der herre ze ir und sprach: ‘vrouwe, wie sît ir alsô betrüebet? Ir sult iuch niht betrüeben dar umbe, daz ir iuwer ouge verlorn hât’. Dô sprach si: ‘herre, ich enbetrüebe mich niht dar umbe, daz ich mîn ouge verlorn hân; dar umbe betrüebe ich mich, daz mich des dünket, daz ir mich deste minner liep sült hân’8. Dô sprach er: ‘vrouwe, ich hân iuch liep’. Dar nâch niht lanc dô stach er im selber ein ouge ûz und kom ze der vrouwen und sprach: ‘vrouwe, daz ir nû gloubet, daz ich iuch liep hân, sô hân ich mich iu glîch gemachet; ich enhân ouch | (378) niht dan éin ouge’. Diz ist der mensche, der kunde gar kûme glouben, daz in got sô liep hâte, biz als lanc daz got im selber ein ouge ûz stach und an | (379) sich nam menschlîche natûre. Diz ist9 ‘vleisch worden’. Unser vrouwe sprach10: ‘wie sol diz geschehen?’ Dô sprach der engel11: ‘der heilic geist sol von oben her nider komen in dich’ von dem obersten trône von dem vater des êwigen liehtes. ‘In principio.’12 ‘Ein kint ist uns geborn, ein sun ist uns geben’13, ein kint nâch kleinheit menschlîcher natûre, ein sun nâch der êwigen gotheit. Die meister sprechent14: alle crêatûren würkent dar nâch, daz sie wellent gebern und wellent sich dem vater glîchen. Ein ander meister sprichet15: ein ieglich würkendiu sache würket durch irs endes willen, daz si rast und ruowe in irm ende vinde. Ein meister sprichet16: alle 7. ‘ein mære’: see also In Ioh. n. 683 (LW III 598). 8. ‘liep … hân’ is different from ‘minnen’. See the Latin parallel: ‘non posset concipere quod se taliter deformatam ille posset amare, et dum ipse saepius assereret se ipsam multum diligere…’ 9. Ioh. 1:14: ‘Et Verbum caro factum est’. 10. Luc. 1:34: ‘Dixit autem Maria ad Angelum: Quomodo fiet istud…?’ 11. Luc. 1:35: ‘Et respondens Angelus dixit ei: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te…’; Sap. 18:15: ‘a regalibus sedibus…’; Iac. 1:17: ‘a Patre luminum’. See also note 2. 12. Ioh. 1:1. See also note 23. 13. Is. 9:6: ‘Parvulus enim natus est nobis et filius datus est nobis’. According to the Officium of the third Christmas mass: ‘In principio’ is the opening of the Gospel and ‘Parvulus natus’ of the Introit (see Miss. convent., Arch. f. 396ra), which is a confirmation that this homily was given in Advent.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

125

in me. In the same way I had stayed in the Father. All creatures are as images in the Father. This log of wood has an intellectual image in God. It is not only intellectual, rather it is pure intellect. The highest good that God has ever done to man was Him having become man. At this point I should tell a story7 that might help. There was a rich man and a rich woman. Then, the woman suffered from an accident and lost one eye, and she was very sad. And the man approached her and said: ‘Lady, why are you so sad? You should not be so sad for having lost one of your eyes.’ And she said: ‘Sir, I am not sad that I have lost my eye, but I am sad because I fear that you would now like me less because of that.’8 Yet, he said: ‘Lady, I like you.’ Not long after that he took out one of his eyes, went to the woman and said: ‘Lady so that you believe me that I like you, I have made myself the same as you. I, too, have only one eye left.’ This is the man who could hardly believe that God liked him so much, until God Himself took out one of His eyes and took on Himself human nature. This is the meaning of:9 ‘became flesh’. Our lady said:10 ‘How should this happen?’ Then, the angel said:11 ‘The Holy Spirit shall come from above on you’ ‘from the supreme throne’, from ‘the Father of eternal light’. ‘In principio.’12 ‘To us a child is born, to us a son is given’,13 a child according to the modesty of human nature, a son according to eternal divinity. The master says:14 all creatures act, because they want to give birth and want to become like the Father. Another master says:15 every acting cause acts with regards to its end, so that it finds rest and peace in its end. A master says:16 all creatures act according to their first 14. Aristotle, De anima II 4, 415a26–29: ‘naturalissimum enim operum viventibus … facere alterum quale ipsum’, see also Albertus, Quaestiones de animalibus XV q. 2, ed. Filthaut, 260: ‘Natura autem particularis intendit producere sibi simile’; XVIII, q. 3, p. 298: ‘virtus patris … marem producit, sed non similem patri, sed producit fetum similem patri, quantum potest, quia in semine est virtus avi et proavi, remotius tamen quam patris’. This is an idea to which Eckhart returns below (see note 27) and also Hom. 47* [Q 47], n. 3. 15. ‘Ein ander meister sprichet’: see Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 42 (LW III 35): ‘Adhuc autem efficiens non agit nisi per intentionem finis, et motum a fine et propter finem, et sic per consequens est “movens motum” et secundum in causando’. 16. ‘Ein meister sprichet’: see Auctoritates Aristotelis 7, n. 17, ed. Hamesse 197, 61–2: ‘Ignis non agit neque patitur ratione qua ignis, sed ratione qua calidus’ (= Aristotle, De sensu et sensato c. 4, 441b11–5).

126

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

crêatûren die würkent nâch ir êrsten lûterkeit und nâch ir aller hœhsten volkomenheit. Viur als viur enbrennet niht; ez ist als lûter und als kleinvüege, daz ez niht enbrennet; mêr: diu natûre des viures diu brennet und giuzet in daz dürre holz sîne | (380) natûre und sîne klârheit nâch sîner allerhœhsten volkomenheit. Alsô hât got getân. Er hât die sêle geschaffen nâch der allerhœhsten volkomenheit und hât in sie gegozzen alle sîne klârheit in der êrsten lûterkeit, und ist er doch unvermischet bliben. Ich sprach niuwelîche an einer stat17: dô got geschuof alle crêatûren, und hæte dô got niht vor geborn etwaz, daz ungeschaffen wære, daz in im getragen hæte bilde aller crêatûren: daz ist der vunke18 – als ich ê sprach ze sant Magfire19, daz ir niht vergebens hie ensît gewesen20 – diz vünkelîn ist gote | (381) alsô sippe, daz ez ist ein einic ein ungescheiden und daz bilde in im treget aller crêatûren, bilde sunder bilde und bilde über bilde. Ein vrâge was gester in der schuole under grôzen pfaffen. ‘Mich wundert’, sprach ich, ‘daz diu geschrift alsô vol21 ist, daz nieman daz allerminste wort ergründen enkan’, und vrâget ir22 mich, wan ich ein einiger sun bin, den der himelische vater êwiclîche geborn hât, ob ich dan êwiclîche in gote sun sî | (382) gewesen, sô spriche ich: jâ und nein; jâ, ein sun nâch dem, daz der vater mich êwiclîche geborn hât, und niht sun nâch der ungebornheit. ‘In principio.’23 Hie ist uns ze verstânne geben, daz wir ein einiger sun sîn, den der vater êwiclîche geborn hât ûz dem verborgenen vinsternisse der êwigen verborgenheit, inneblîbende in dem êrsten beginne der êrsten lûterkeit, diu dâ ist ein vülle aller lûterkeit. Hie hân ich êwiclîche geruowet und geslâfen in der verborgenen bekantnisse des êwigen vaters, inneblîbende ungesprochen. Ûz der lûterkeit hât er mich êwiclîche geborn sînen einbornen sun in daz selbe bilde sîner 17. The best reference for this is Hom. 90* [Q 12], n. 8, see note 19. 18. An anacoluthon. Probably the ‘bilde aller crêatûren’, specified as ‘bilde sunder bilde und bilde über bilde’, might be the characteristics associated with the intellectus agens of Theodericus de Vriberg, De visione beatifica 1.1.1.3.6, ed. Mojsisch, 22, 110–6: ‘abditum mentis…, cum sit intellectus per essentiam et semper in actu suae intellectionis, est quaedam similitudo et exemplar totius entis in eo, quod ens, secundum quod totum ens secundum omnem sui ambitum sibi intellectualiter praesens est et omnia actu intelligit’. 19. Reference to Hom. 90* [Q 12], n. 8. 20. ‘daz ir niht vergebens hie ensît gewesen’: it is unclear whether Eckhart spoke to a male or female audience. The ‘hie’ might indicate that Eckhart is still preaching in the convent of

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

127

purity and according to their absolutely highest perfection. Fire as fire does not ignite; it is so pure and so fine that it does not ignite; rather, the nature of fire ignites and pours into the dry wood its nature and its clarity according to its absolutely highest perfection. Likewise, God has acted. He has created the soul according to the absolutely highest perfection and has poured into her all His clarity in the first purity, and yet He remained uncontaminated. Recently, I spoke in a place:17 Then God created all creatures, and had God not prior to that given birth to something uncreated that had carried in itself the images of all creatures: this is the spark18 – as I said at Saint Maccabees,19 if you were not there20 in vain –, this small spark is so akin to God that it is one single indivisible one and the image in it carries all creatures, image without image and image beyond image. Yesterday, a question was debated among great theologians in the school. ‘I am surprised’, I said, ‘that Scripture is so dense,21 that nobody can unpack the smallest verse’, – and if you22 asked me, at what moment I am a unique son who has been born by the heavenly Father in eternity and whether then I have been from eternity the son in God, I answer: yes and no. Yes, a son according to the fact that the Father has given birth to me eternally, and no, by way of being unborn. ‘In principio.’23 Here we are given to understand that we are a unique son to whom the Father has eternally given birth out of the hidden darkness of eternal obscurity, indwelling in the first beginning of the first purity in which there is a fullness of all purity. Here, I have eternally rested and slept in the hidden knowledge of the eternal Father, indwellingly unspoken. Out of purity He has eternally given birth to me, His inborn son, into the same image of His eternal fatherhood, so that

Mariengarten. J. Quint translates more generally (DW I 373): ‘voraugesetzt, daß ihr nicht vergeblich in meiner Predigt gewesen seid’. 21. The same reflection in Hom. 23* [Q 51], n. 3: ‘Mich wundert, daz diu heilige geschrift sô vol ist, und die meister sprechent, daz man sie niht bediuten enmüge alsô blôz, als si ist, und sprechent, ob iht grobes dar inne sî, daz sol man ûftuon; aber man bedarf dar zuo glîchnisse’. 22. ‘ir’: J. Quint thinks of the listeners, but perhaps Eckhart reflects a school debate. 23. Ioh. 1:1. J. Theisen, Predigt und Gottesdienst (1990), 387, suggests the following interpunction: ‘nach der ungebornheit in principio’.

128

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

êwigen vaterschaft, daz ich vater sî und geber den, | (383) von dem ich geborn bin. Ze glîcher wîs, als ob einer stüende vor einem hôhen berge und ruofte: ‘bistû dâ?’ der gal und der hal24 ruofte wider: ‘bistû dâ?’ Spræche er: ‘kum her ûz!’ der gal spræche ouch: ‘kum her ûz!’ Jâ, der in dém liehte ein holz sæhe, daz würde ein engel und würde vernünftic, und niht aleine vernünftic, ez würde ein lûter vernunft in der êrsten lûterkeit, diu dâ ist ein vülle aller lûterkeit. Alsô tuot got: er gebirt sînen einbornen sun in daz hœhste teil der sêle. In dem selben, daz er gebirt sînen eingebornen sun in mich, sô gebir ich in wider in den vater. Daz enwas anders niht, dan daz got den engel gebar wider25 dem, daz er von der juncvrouwen geborn wart. (384) | Ich gedâhte – ez ist etwie manic jâr –, ob ich gevrâget würde, wie ein ieglich grasspier dem andern sô unglîch wære, und ez geschach, daz ich sîn gevrâget wart, wie sie sô unglîch einander wæren. Dô sprach ich: wie alle grasspier sô glîch sîn, daz ist noch wunderlîcher. Ein meister26 sprach: daz alle grasspier sô unglîch sint, daz kumet von der übervlüzzicheit gotes güete, die er stürzet übervlüzziclîche in alle crêatûren, daz sîn hêrschaft deste mê geoffenbâret werde. Dô sprach ich: ez ist wunderlîcher, wie alle grasspier sô | (385) glîch sint, und sprach: wie alle engel ein engel in der êrsten lûterkeit sint al ein, alsô sint alle grasspier in der êrsten lûterkeit ein, und alliu dinc sint dâ ein. Ich gedâhte underwîlen, dô ich her gienc, daz der mensche in der zît dar zuo komen mac, daz er got mac twingen. Wære ich hie oben und spræche ich ze einem: ‘kum her ûf!’ daz wære swære. Mêr: spræche ich: ‘sitz hie nider!’ daz wære lîht. Alsô tuot got. Swenne sich der mensche dêmüetiget, sô enmac sich got niht enthalten von sîner eigenen güete, er enmüeze sich senken und giezen in den dêmüetigen menschen, und dem allerminsten dem gibet er sich in dem allermeisten und gibet sich im alzemâle. Daz got gibet, daz ist sîn wesen, und sîn wesen daz ist sîn güete, und sîn güete daz ist sîn minne. Allez leit und allez liep daz kumet von minne. Ich gedâhte underwegen, dô ich her solte gân, ich enwolte niht her gân, ich würde doch naz von minne. Swenne ir naz sît worden von minne, daz lâzen wir sîn. Liep und leit kumet von 24. Note the paronomasia: ‘gal … hal’. 25. The sense is not entirely clear, but Eckhart seems to say that the birth which was to be given as an announcement to the angel, in fact, was a birth to have been delivered by the virgin; see also Hom. 8* [Q 76], n. 5.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

129

I am father and give to Him that by which I have been given birth. Likewise, as if somebody stood at the foot of a high mountain and shouted: ‘Are you there?’ the cry would echo24 and respond: ‘Are you there?’ Had he said: ‘Come forth!’ the echo would also have spoken: ‘Come forth!’ Indeed, who in this light would see a log of wood, it would be an angel and would be intellectual, and not only intellectual, it would be pure intellect in the first purity which there is a fullness of all purity. And so God does: He gives birth to His inborn Son in the highest part of the soul. In this same place, in which He gives birth to His inborn Son into me, so I give birth to Him into the Father. This is not different from God giving birth to the angel, because he would be born by the virgin.25 I used to wonder – it is many years ago –, whether I would be asked why one blade of grass is so unlike another, and as it happened, I was indeed asked how they could be so different. Then I answered: It is much more astonishing that all blades of grass look so similar. A master26 said: that all blades of grass are so different derives from the abundance of God’s goodness which He pours out abundantly into all creatures to reveal His majesty the more. Then I said: It is all the more astonishing that all blades of grass are so similar, and said: as all angels are all one single angel in the first purity, so all blades of grass are one in the first purity, and there all things are one. In the meantime, as I was walking here, I thought that in time man may come to force God. If I were high up here and spoke to somebody: ‘Come forth!’ that would be difficult. Further, if I said: ‘Sit down here!’ that would be simple. And so does God. When man humbles himself, God cannot withhold His own bounty, but He must sink and pour Himself into the humble man and give Himself most and give Himself entirely to the meanest. What God gives is His being, and His being is His bounty, and His bounty is His love. All sorrow and all joy come from love. I was thinking on the way, when I was setting off to come here, that I did not want to come here, because I would get wet because of love. If you have become tearful with love, let us allow it. Joy and sorrow come from love. Man should not fear God, as the one who 26. ‘Ein meister’: See Th. Aqu., Summa theologiae I, a. 47, c. 1, resp.: ‘Distinctio rerum et multitudo est ex intentione primi agentis … Produxit enim res in esse propter suam bonitatem communicabilem creaturis et per eas repraesentandam’.

130

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

minne. Der mensche ensol got niht vürhten, wan der, der in vürhtet, der vliuhet in. Diu vorhte ist ein schedelîchiu vorhte. Daz ist ein rehtiu vorhte, | (386) der dâ vürhtet, daz er got verliese. Der mensche ensol in niht vürhten, er sol in minnen, wan got der minnet den menschen mit aller sîner hœhsten volkomenheit. Die meister27 sprechent, daz alliu dinc würkent dar nâch, daz sie wellent gebern und wellent sich dem vater glîchen, und sprechent: diu erde vliuhet den himel; vliuhet si niderwert, sô kumet si niderwert ze dem himel; vliuhet si ûfwert, sô kumet si ze dem nidersten des himels. Diu erde enkan sô nider niht gevliehen, der himel envlieze28 in sie und endrücke sîne maht in sie und enmache sie vruhtbære, ez sî ir liep oder leit. Alsô tuot der | (387) mensche, der dâ wænet gote entvliehen, und er enkan doch niht entvliehen; alle winkel sint im ein offenbârunge. Er wænet gote entvliehen und loufet im in die schôz. Got gebirt sînen eingebornen sun in dir, ez sî dir liep oder leit, dû slâfest oder wachest, er tuot daz sîne. Ich sprach niuwelîche29, wes schult daz wære, daz der mensche des niht ensmecket und sprach, ez wære des schult, daz sîn zunge belîmet wære mit anderm unvlâte, daz ist mit den crêatûren; ze glîcher wîs als einem menschen, dem alliu spîse bitter ist und im niht ensmekket. Wes schult ist daz, daz uns diu spîse niht ensmecket? Ez ist des schult, daz wir des salzes niht enhân. Daz salz ist diu götlîche minne. Hæten wir die götlîche minne, sô smakte uns got und alliu diu werk, diu got ie geworhte, und enpfiengen alliu dinc von gote und worhten alliu diu selben werk, diu er würket. In dirre glîcheit sô sîn wir alle ein einic sun. Dô got die sêle geschuof, dô geschuof er sie nâch sîner hœhsten volkomenheit, daz si solte sîn ein geburt30 des eingebornen suns. Wan er diz wol | (388) bekante, sô wolte er ûzgân ûzer sîner heimlîcher triskamer der êwigen veterlicheit, in der er êwiclîche geslâfen hât, ungesprochen inneblîbende. ‘In principio.’31 In dem êrsten beginne der êrsten lûterkeit dâ hât der sun ûfgeslagen daz gezelt sîner êwigen glôrien und ist dar umbe 27. ‘Die meister’: unidentified (see above at n. 7 note 14). 28. Paronomasia of ‘vliehen’ and ‘vliezen’. 29. ‘niuwelîche’: we do not know where or when. According to J. Quint ad loc. it cannot be a reference to either Hom. 76* [Q 11], n. 10 (even if the content corresponds), or Hom. 65* [Q 13],

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

131

fears Him flees from Him. Fear is a damaging fear. The right fear is that one fears to give up on God. Man should not fear Him, he should love Him, because God loves man with His highest perfection.

The masters27 say that all things act in order to give birth and because they want to become like the Father, and they say: the earth flees from the heavens, but if she flees downward, she comes downward to heaven, and if she flees upward, then she comes to the lowest of the heavens. The earth can never flee so low that heaven does not flow28 into her and impresses his power on her and makes her fertile, whether she enjoys it or feels sorrow. And so does the man who ponders whether to flee from God, but he cannot flee from Him; all hiding places are places of revelation. He ponders whether to flee from God, but he runs into His bosom. God gives birth to His inborn Son in you, whether you enjoy it or feel sorrow, whether you are asleep or are awake, He does His work. I was speaking recently29 about whose fault it was if a man could not taste that and said, it was because his tongue was coated with extraneous filth, that is to say, with creatures, just like a man to whom all food seems bitter and not to his taste. Who is to blame that we don’t like this food? The reason is lack of salt. The salt is divine love. If we had divine love, we would savour God, and all the works God ever performed, and we would receive all things from God and would perform all the same work which He performs. So, in this sameness, we are all one unique Son. When God created the soul, He created her according to His highest perfection, so that she should be the birth30 of the inborn Son. As He [the Son] knew this well, He wanted to leave His private chamber of the eternal fatherhood, in which He slept eternally and remained unspoken. ‘In principio.’31 In the first beginning of the first purity, the Son has put up the tent of His eternal glory and, therefore, has come n. 4, which must have been written later, as it refers to our homily (see n. 6: ‘Als ich nû niuwelîche sprach ze Mergarden…’). 30. J. Quint conjectures ‘brût’, as he considered ‘geburt’ to be nonsensical. 31. Ioh. 1:1.

132

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

her ûz komen ûz dem allerhœhsten, daz er wolte hœhen sîne vriundinne, die im der vater êwiclîche gemahelt hâte, daz er sie widerbræhte in daz allerhœhste, ûz dem si komen ist, und stât an einer andern stat geschriben32: ‘nim war! dîn künic kumet dir’. Her umbe gienc er ûz und kom springende als ein rêchböckelîn und leit sîne pîne von minne; und niht engienc er alsô ûz, er enwölte wider îngân in sîne kamer mit sîner brût. Disiu kamer ist diu stille vinsternisse der verborgenen vaterschaft. Dâ er ûzgienc von dem allerhœhsten, dâ wolte er wider îngân mit sîner brût in dem allerlûtersten und wolte ir offenbâren die verborgene heimlicheit33 sîner verborgenen gotheit, dâ er ruowet mit im selber mit allen crêatûren. (389) | ‘In principio’ daz sprichet als vil ze tiutsche als ein anegenge alles wesens34, als ich sprach in der schuole35; ich sprach noch mê: ez ist ein ende alles wesens, wan der êrste begin ist durch des lesten endes willen. Jâ, got der ruowet selbe niht dâ, dâ er ist der êrste begin; er ruowet dâ, dâ er ist ein ende und ein raste alles wesens, niht daz diz wesen ze nihte werde, mêr: ez wirt dâ vor volbrâht in sînem lesten ende nâch sîner hœhsten volkomenheit36. Waz ist daz leste ende? Ez ist diu verborgen vinsternisse der êwigen gotheit und ist unbekant und wart nie bekant und enwirt niemer bekant. Got blîbet dâ in im selber unbekant, und daz lieht des êwigen vaters hât dâ êwiclîche îngeschinen, und diu vinsternisse enbegrîfet des liehtes niht37. Daz wir ze dirre wârheit komen, des helfe uns diu wârheit, von der ich gesprochen hân. Âmen.

32. Zach. 9:9: ‘Ecce Rex tuus veniet tibi iustus, et salvator’. 33. ‘heimlicheit’ can mean both ‘homeliness/privacy’ and also ‘secrecy/mystery’ (Walshe has taken it in the latter sense, so also the suggestion by John Connolly); as the homily had just mentioned the ‘heimlîcher triskamer’ (‘private chamber’), we suggest the translation ‘privacy’ here with the connotations of ‘home’, ‘secret’, but also note the sexual overtone, Lexer has, under heimelich, ‘euphem. für eheliche Beiwohnung’.

H OMILY 5* [Q 22]

133

forth from the Most High, so as to elevate His friend, to whom the Father had eternally wedded Him, and to bring her back into the Highest from where she had come. And in another place it says:32 ‘Realize! Your king is coming to you.’ For this reason, He went forth and came leaping like a stag, and suffered the pangs of love. And yet He did not go out, as He wished to go back in His chamber together with His bride. This chamber is the quiet darkness of the hidden fatherhood. As He went out of the Most High, He wanted to go back in together with His bride into the all pure and wanted to reveal to her the hidden privacy33 of His hidden godhead, where He rests with Himself together with all creatures. ‘In principio’ means when translated into German as much as a start of all being,34 as I said in school.35 I further said: It is an end of all being, because the first beginning is for the sake of the final end. Indeed, God Himself does not rest there, where He is the first beginning; He rests where He is an end and a rest of all beings, so that this being is not annihilated; rather it will be brought there to perfection in its last end according to His highest perfection.36 What is the last end? It is the hidden darkness of the eternal godhead which is not known, never has been known and will never be known. There, God remains unknown in Himself, and into that place the light of the eternal Father has eternally shone, but the darkness does not comprehend the light.37 That we may come to this truth, may the truth of which I have spoken help us. Amen.

34. ‘anegenge’ is a technical term for generation. ‘anegenge alles wesens’ perhaps renders Lat. ‘principium omnis esse’. For God as the principle and end of all substance see Hom. 12* [Q 14], n. 4. 35. In school (= the university) Eckhart usually interprets ‘in principle’ as ‘in God’, rather than ‘in the beginning’, see C.J. Wojtulewicz, On Principle (2017). 36. ‘nâch sîner hœhsten volkomenheit’: picks up the topic from above n. 15. 37. Ioh. 1:5: ‘et lux in tenebris lucet, et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt’.

Homily 6* [Q 38] Feria IV Quattuor temporum in Adventu Domini ‘In illo tempore missus est angelus Gabriel a deo’ Introduction

T

he liturgical place of this homily is supported by arguments similar to those for the previous one (Hom. 5*), and relates to Wednesday in the Fourth Week of Advent. It is in Advent that the homily can be found in the collection of the Paradisus animae intelligentis, which therefore excludes the possibility of it being related to the feast of the Annunciation on 25 March, as proposed by J. Theisen, Predigt und Gottesdienst (1990), 222, based on N2. Eckhart deals with the topic of the opening of the scriptural passage: ‘In time the angel Gabriel was sent by God’ (Luke 1:26.28). This passage leads him to question what ‘time’ is and what it means that God has been born. The homily has come down to us in full in three manuscripts (H2, N2, O) and there are four fragments preserved (E1, Me2, Me3, H). The content of the homily The homily quickly moves to fundamental questions, the hinge being how to understand ‘time’: (A) Eckhart opens the address by placing a potential question: ‘If anyone asked me: why do we pray, why do we fast, why do we do all our works, why are we baptised, why has God become man, which was the most important thing, I would say: in order for God to be born in the soul and the soul to be born in God.’ Although Eckhart takes as ‘the most important thing’ what Christians celebrate at Christmas, he goes beyond this timely understanding of a memorial feast to endorse a

136

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

spiritual celebration at which not only is God born in the soul, but the soul is born in God. The latter he supports with the example of natural things that all tend towards the highest of that which they can aim for (nn. 2–3). Having moved away from a historical understanding of the event that is remembered at Christmas, he needs to ask ‘at what time’ Christmas happens (n. 4), with his response that it is ‘when the Word was first conceived in my intellect’. This, he sees as ‘the fullness of time’, which takes up a topic we have come across earlier, in Hom. 2*. This is different from the earlier explanation, for here Eckhart develops the topic more broadly, presenting the view of Augustine that fullness of time means ‘when there is no more time’ (n. 5) and when all things have been ‘gathered into one present now’ (nn. 6–7). (B) In a next step he focuses on ‘the angel has been sent’, to explain that although we are celebrating the announcement of the one Son, as with the multitude of the angels, which cannot be understood in terms of numbers, so it is with the Trinity. The three persons should not be understood in terms of numbers, even though many ‘unlearned Christians ... and many clerics’ do so and show that they have no clue what is meant by the Trinity. Instead of speaking numerically of three, Christians could also speak of and believe in a hundred persons in the Trinity – hence, the Trinity does not mean ‘three’ in numerical terms, but is an expression of God’s oneness (n. 8). In a rhetorical tour de force Eckhart moves from the difference between man and the perfect nature of the angels to the lofty state of the soul – proven by the fact that, according to the liturgical reading, even the angels served God at His birth in the soul (n. 9). (C) What happens in the birth of God in the soul? God wants to replicate Himself, as any father wishes (n. 9). As with the angel, so also the soul is unnameable (n. 10), but Eckhart only dares to ask the rhetorical question through Augustine and the Scripture: ‘What the soul loves, she grows to be like. If she loves earthly things, so she becomes earthly. If she loves God, one might ask whether she then becomes God?’ (n. 11). (D) Explaining ‘Ave’, Eckhart reads it ‘without woe’ and elaborates on what it means to be without creaturehood and of pure joy of the divine birth (n. 12).

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

137

(E) ‘Full of grace’ is the next topic, which places grace in the soul, yet not as grace per se, but ‘so pure, so like God and so akin to Him’, that it is grace ‘without work’ (n. 13). In order to underpin the divine nature of such grace, Eckhart comes to speak about two wells from which grace comes forth (n. 14). (F) ‘God be with you’. Placing grace in this way in God makes it sound too far away for man to ever attain to that grace; yet, Eckhart ends on the Advent topic of God coming and being close to man: ‘Nobody should think it impossible to come to this’ (n. 15). Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW II 224–45; N. Largier, I 997–1006. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 80–1; The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 151–6; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 177–82; Meister Eckhart, Selected Writings, ed. and trans. O. Davies (1994), 112–8.

138

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (227)‘In illo tempore missus est angelus Gabriel a deo’: ‘ave gratia plena, dominus tecum’. Disiu wort beschrîbet sant Lukas1: ‘in der zît wart gesant der engel Gabriêl von gote’. In welher zît? ‘In dem sehsten mânôte’2, dô Johannes Baptistâ was in sîner muoter lîbe. Der mich vrâgete: war umbe beten wir, war umbe vasten wir, war umbe tuon wir alliu unseriu werk, war umbe sîn wir getoufet, war umbe ist got mensche worden, daz daz hœhste was – ich spræche: dar umbe, daz got geborn werde in der sêle und diu | (228) sêle in gote geborn werde. Dar umbe ist alliu diu schrift geschriben, dar umbe hât got die werlt geschaffen und alle engelische natûre, daz got geborn werde in der sêle und diu sêle in gote geborn werde. Alles kornes natûre meinet weizen3, und alles schatzes natûre meinet golt4, und alliu geberunge meinet menschen5. Dar umbe sprichet ein meister6: man envindet kein tier, ez enhabe etwaz glîches dem menschen. (229) | ‘In der zît’. In dem, dâ daz wort ze dem êrsten enpfangen7 wirt in mîner vernunft, dâ ist ez sô lûter und sô kleinlich, daz ez ein wâr wort ist, ê ez gebildet wirt in mînem gedanke. Ze dem dritten mâle wirt ez gesprochen ûzwendic mit dem munde, und alsô enist ez niht dan ein offenbârunge des innern wortes. Alsô wirt daz êwige wort gesprochen inwendic in dem herzen der sêle, in dem innersten, in dem lûtersten, in dem | (230) houbete der sêle, dâ ich nû von sprach8, in vernünfticheit: dâ geschihet diu geburt inne. Der niht dan einen ganzen wân und ein hoffenunge hie zuo hæte, der möhte gerne wizzen, wie disiu geburt geschihet und waz hie zuo hilfet. 1. Luc. 1:26.28: ‘In mense autem sexto [non: ‘in illo tempore’] missus est angelus Gabriel a Deo … Ave gratia plena: Dominus tecum’. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 436rb: ‘Feria quarta. Secundum Lucam [1, 26–38]. In illo tempore [In mense autem sexto Vg.] missus est Angelus Gabriel a Deo in civitatem Galylee, cui nomen Nazareth, ad virginem desponsatam viro, cui nomen erat Ioseph, de domo David, et nomen virginis Maria. Et ingressus Angelus ad eam dixit: Ave gratia plena: Dominus tecum: benedicta tu [+ in Vg.] mulieribus. Quae cum audisset, turbata est in sermone eius, et cogitabat qualis esset ista salutatio. Et ait Angelus ei: Ne timeas Maria, invenisti enim gratiam apud Deum. Ecce concipies in utero, et paries filium, et vocabis nomen eius Ihesum. Hic erit magnus, et Filius Altissimi vocabitur, et dabit illi Dominus Deus sedem David patris eius: et regnabit in domo Iacob in eternum, et regni eius non erit finis. Dixit autem Maria ad Angelum: Quomodo fiet istud, quoniam virum non cognosco? Et respondens Angelus dixit ei: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Ideoque et quod nascetur ex te Sanctum, vocabitur Filius Dei. Et ecce Elisabeth cognata tua, et ipsa concepit filium in senectute sua: et hic mensis est sextus illi, que vocatur sterilis: quia non erit

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

139

‘In illo tempore missus est angelus Gabriel a deo’: … ‘ave gratia plena, dominus tecum’. This verse Luke has written down: ‘In time the angel Gabriel was sent by God’.1 At what time? ‘In the sixth month’2 that John the Baptist was in his mother’s womb. If anyone asked me: why do we pray, why do we fast, why do we do all our works, why are we baptised, why has God become man, which was the most important thing, I would say: in order for God to be born in the soul and the soul to be born in God. That is the reason why the entire Scripture has been written, that is why God has created the world and all angelic nature, in order for God to be born in the soul and the soul to be born in God. Every grain intends to be wheat,3 and all the precious nature intends to be gold,4 and all generation intends to be man.5 That is why a master says:6 you will not find an animal which has not something similar to man. ‘At what time?’ At that time when the Word was first conceived7 in my intellect, there it is so pure and subtle that it is a true word, before it is imaged in my mind. Thirdly, it is spoken openly through my mouth, and yet it is nothing but a revelation of the inner word. In this way the eternal Word is spoken within the heart of the soul, in the innermost, in the purest, in the head of the soul, of which I have just spoken,8 in intellectuality: there the inner birth takes place. He who has nothing but a firm conviction and hope of this would be glad to know how this birth occurs and what is conducive to it.

impossibile apud Deum omne verbum. Dixit autem Maria: Ecce ancilla Domini, fiat michi secundum verbum tuum’. 2. Luc. 1:26. 3. See Albertus, De vegetabilibus V, tr. 1, c. 7, n. 55, ed. Meyer/Jessen, 312–3. 4. See Albertus, Mineralia III, tr. 1, c. 7 e 9, ed. Borgnet, 68a, 70–1. 5. See Maimonides, Dux neutrorum III 14, ed. Parisiis, 1520, f. 77v13–7. 6. ‘ein meister’: not identifiable. It may be the inverse of Eriugena’s: ‘Homo … in tanta naturae conditae dignitate creatus est, ut nulla creatura siue uisibilis siue inuisibilis sit quae in eo reperiri non possit’ (Periphyseon II, ed. Jeauneau, 11, 193–6), or ‘in homine solo…, in quo omnis creatura adunatur’ (Homilia Vox spiritualis, c. 19, ed. Jeauneau, 294); Honorius Augustodunensis, Clavis physicae, n. 74, ed. Lucentini, 52, 5. 7. ‘enpfangen’: usually means ‘to receive’, but can also mean ‘to conceive’. 8. According to J. Quint, 230, the reference is Hom. 22* [Q 37], n. 3, but perhaps it refers to what has been said before (‘enpfangen … in mîner vernunft’).

140

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Sant Paulus sprichet9: ‘in der vüllede der zît sante got sînen sun’. Sant Augustînus10 sprichet, waz dâ sî vüllede der zît: dâ niemer zît enist, dâ ist vüllede der zît. Danne ist der tac vol, als des tages niemer enist. Daz ist ein nôtwârheit: alliu zît muoz dâ abe sîn, dâ sich disiu geburt hebet, wan niht enist, daz dise geburt alsô sêre hinder als zît | (231) und crêatûre. Daz ist ein gewissiu wârheit, daz zît got noch die sêle von natûre niht berüeren enmac. Möhte diu sêle von zît berüeret werden, si enwære niht sêle, und möhte got von zît berüeret werden, er enwære niht got. Wære aber, daz zît die sêle berüeren möhte, sô enmöhte got niemer in ir geborn werden, und si enmöhte niemer in gote geborn werden. Dâ got geborn sol werden in der sêle, dâ muoz alliu zît abegevallen sîn, oder si muoz der zît entvallen sîn mit willen oder mit begerunge. Ein ander sin von ‘vüllede der zît’: der die kunst hæte und die maht, daz er die zît und allez, daz in der zît in sehs tûsent jâren11 ie geschach und daz noch geschehen sol biz an daz ende, her wider geziehen künde in ein gegenwertic nû, daz wære ‘vüllede der zît’. Daz ist daz nû der êwicheit, dâ diu sêle in gote alliu dinc niuwe und vrisch und | (232) gegenwertic bekennet und in der lust, als diu ich iezuo gegenwertic hân. Ich las niuwelîche in einem buoche12 – der ez gegründen künde! –, daz got die werlt iezuo machet als an dem êrsten tage, dô er die werlt geschuof. Hie ist got rîche13, und daz ist gotes rîche. Diu sêle, in der got sol geborn werden, der muoz diu zît entvallen, und si muoz der zît entvallen und sol sich ûftragen und sol stân in einem înkaffenne in disen rîchtuom gotes: dâ ist wîte âne wîte und breite âne breite; dâ bekennet diu sêle alliu dinc und bekennet sie dâ volkomen. Die meister, die dâ beschrîbent, wie wît14 der himel sî, daz wære unglouplich ze sprechenne: diu minste kraft, diu in mîner sêle ist, diu ist wîter dan der wîte himel; ich | (233) geswîge der vernünfticheit: diu ist wît âne wîte. In dem houbete der sêle, in vernünfticheit, 9. Gal. 4:4: ‘At ubi venit plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filium suum…’ In Hom. 2* [Q 24], n. 11 the same text has been translated as: ‘in volheit der zît sô wart der sun gesant’. On the ‘fullness of time’ see ibid. 10. Augustinus, Enarrationes in Psalmos 72, n. 16, ed. Dekkers/Fraipont, 995, 6–7: ‘Ipsa est plenitudo temporis, quando uenit ille temporalia docere contemni’. This is no literal translation, see another in In Ioh. n. 293 (LW III 245, 7): ‘Plenitudo temporis est, ubi nullum tempus est’. 11. ‘in sehs tûsent jâren’: as shown by L. Sturlese ad lod., this is a reference to the total duration of time, because according to ancient history the incarnation came about 5500 years after the creation of Adam (see, for example, Otto Frisingensis, Chronica II, c. 6, ed. Hofmeister, 141).

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

141

Saint Paul says: ‘In the fullness of time God sent His Son’.9 Saint Augustine10 explains what the fullness of time could mean: when there is no more time, then there is fullness of time. Then, the day is full, when there is no more day. This is a compelling truth: all time must be gone when this birth begins, for there is nothing that hinders this birth so much as time and creatures. This is an assured truth that by nature time can affect neither God nor the soul. If the soul wished to be affected by time, she would not be soul, and if God wished to be affected by time, He would not be God. Should, however, time wish to affect the soul, God would never wish to be born in her, and she would never be born in God. As God is to be born in the soul, there all time must have gone, or she has to have forgone time, willingly or desiringly. A second meaning of the ‘fullness of time’: if anyone had the skill and the power to gather into one present now time and everything that ever happened during the time of six thousand years11 and what still is supposed to happen up to the end, that would be ‘fullness of time’. This is the now of eternity, when the soul in God knows all things as new and fresh and present and as joyous as I have them here now in the present. I recently read in a book12 – could anyone fully fathom it! – that God is making the world here now just as on the first day, when He created the world. Here God is rich,13 and this is God’s richness. From the soul in which God is supposed to be born, time has to fall away and she has to fall away from time, and should lift up and stand gazing into this richness of God: there is breadth without breadth, expanse without expanse; there the soul knows all things and knows them there perfectly. The masters who there describe how open heaven might 14 be, take it to be unbelievable to say: the slightest power which is in my soul is broader than the expanded heaven; I do not speak of intellectuality, it is expanded without expanse. In the head of the soul, in

12. ‘in einem buoche’: perhaps an allusion to Augustinus, Confessiones XI c. 13, n. 15. 13. Note the paronomasia rîche and rîchtuom gotes and gotes rîche which can hardly be imitated; gotes rîche means both, God’s richness and also God’s kingdom. 14. ‘wît’ is more than ‘expanded’; here it means ‘open’ or ‘without limits’, see also Eckhart, Hom. 31* [Q 59], n. 3: ‘Ez ist ein kraft in der sêle, diu ist wîter dan alliu disiu werlt. Ez muoz gar wît sîn, dâ got inne wonet’ and Hom. 59* [Q 42], n. 4: ‘ez ist ein kraft in der sêle, diu ist wîter dan der himel, der dâ unglouplîche wît ist, und alsô wît, daz man ez niht wol gesprechen enmac – und disiu selbe kraft diu ist noch vil wîter’.

142

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

in der bin ich als nâhe der stat über tûsent mîle jensît des mers als der stat, dâ ich iezuo inne stân. In dirre wîte und in disem rîchtuome gotes dâ bekennet diu sêle, aldâ entvellet ir niht, und dâ enist si nihtes wartende. (234) | ‘Der engel wart gesant’. Die meister sprechent15, daz der engel menige ist zal boben zal. Ir menige ist sô grôz, daz sie kein zal begrîfen enmac; ir zal enmac joch niht bedâht werden. Der underscheit künde genemen âne zal und âne menige, dem wæren hundert als ein. Wæren joch hundert persônen in der gotheit, der underscheit künde genemen âne zal und âne menige, der enbekente doch niht dan einen got. Es wundernt sich unglöubige liute und etlîche ungelêrte kristene liute, und joch etlîche pfaffen wizzen dâ von als wênic als ein stein: die nement drîe als drîe küeje oder drîe steine. Aber, der underscheit kan genemen in gote âne zal und âne menige, der bekennet, daz drîe persônen sîn ein got. (234) | Der engel ist ouch sô hôch: die besten meister sprechent, daz ieglich engel habe eine ganze natûre16. Glîcher wîs, als ob ein mensche wære, der allez daz hæte, daz alle menschen ie gehâten und nû hânt und iemermê gehaben suln an gewalt und an wîsheit und an allen dingen, daz wære ein wunder, und sô enwære er doch niht dan ein mensche; wan der mensche hæte allez daz, daz alle menschen hânt, und wære dannoch verre den engeln. Alsô hât ein ieglich engel eine ganze natûre und ist gesundert von dem andern als ein tier von dem andern, daz einer andern natûre17 ist. An dirre menige der engel ist got rîche, und der daz bekennet, der bekennet gotes rîche. Si bewîset gotes rîche, als ein | (235) herre bewîset wirt von der menige sîner ritter. Dar umbe heizet er ‘ein herre got der here’18. Alliu disiu menige der engel, swie hôch sie sint, die hânt ein mitewürken und helfen dar zuo, dâ got geborn wirt in der sêle, daz ist: sie hânt lust und vröude und wunne in der geburt; sie enwürkent niht. Dâ enist kein werk der crêatûren, wan got der würket die geburt aleine, mêr: die engel hânt ein diensthaft werk hie zuo. Allez, daz dar zuo würket, daz ist ein diensthaft werk. 15. Ps.–Dionysius, De caelesti hierarchia, c. 14, § 1 (PG 3, 321), Dionysiaca 981. See also Eckhart, In Sap. n. 113 (LW II 450): ‘dicit Dionysius quod “multitudo angelorum excedit numerum omnium corporalium”. Excedit quidem numerum, utpote sine numero et super numerum’. 16. ‘ganze natûre’: species as such, see Th. Aqu., Summa theologiae I, a. 50, c. 4 ad 4, and also Albertus, De causis et processu universitatis II, tr. 2, c. 4, ed. Fauser, 97; Sigerius de Brabantia,

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

143

intellectuality, in it I am as close to the place which is a thousand miles away across the sea as to where I am standing here now. In this expanse and in this richness of God, there the soul knows, there she misses nothing and expects nothing. ‘The angel has been sent.’ The masters say15 that the multitude of angels is beyond all numbering. Their multitude is so great that no number can describe it; their number cannot even be conceived. But for anyone who could grasp distinctions without number and quantity, a hundred would be as one. Even if there were a hundred persons in the godhead, a man who could distinguish without number and quantity would perceive them only as one God. Unbelievers and numerous unlearned Christians wonder at this, and many clerics know of it as little as a stone: They think of the three as of three cows or three stones. The one, however, who can think of difference in God without number and without multitude, he knows that three persons are one God. Also, an angel is so exalted: the best masters say that every angel has a complete nature.16 Likewise, if there were a man who had everything that all men ever had, have now, or ever will have of power and wisdom and everything, that would be a miracle, but he would be nothing else but a man. If that man had everything that all men have, he still would be far from the angels. Hence, every angel has a complete nature and is distinct from the other as an animal from another which is of a different nature.17 God is rich with this multitude of angels and the one who knows this knows God’s richness. They prove God’s richness as a lord has been proven by the multitude of his knights. That is why he is called ‘a Lord, God, of Hosts’.18 All this multitude of angels, however lofty they are, co–operate and help when God is born in the soul, which means: they have pleasure, joy and delight in the birth, but they do not act. There no creature acts, because God alone performs the birth; rather the angels minister to this. Everything that acts over and above is a work of ministry.

Quaestiones super librum de causis, q. 24, ed. Marlasca, 98. See also Eckhart, In Sap. n. 111 (LW II 447): ‘Propter quod in qualibet natura et specie est unicus angelus’. 17. A specific nature, i.e. a species. 18. II Sam. 5:10: ‘Dominus Deus exercituum’, et passim.

144

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Der engel was genant ‘Gabriêl’. Er tete ouch, waz er hiez. Er hiez als wênic Gabriêl als Kuonrât. Nieman enkan wizzen des engels namen. Dâ der engel genant ist, dâ enkam | (237) nie meister noch sin19 zuo; vil lîhte ist er namelôs. Diu sêle enhât ouch keinen namen; als wênic als man gote eigenen namen vinden mac, als wênic mac man der sêle eigenen namen vinden, aleine dâ grôziu buoch20 von geschriben sîn. Aber dâ si ein ûzluogen hât ze den werken, dâ von gibet man ir namen. Ein zimberman daz enist sîn name niht, mêr: den namen nimet er von dem werke, des er ein meister ist. Den namen ‘Gabriêl’ den nam er von dem werke, des er ein bote was, wan ‘Gabriêl’ sprichet ‘kraft’21. In dirre | (238) geburt würket got krefticlîche oder würket kraft. Waz meinet alliu diu kraft der natûre? daz si sich selben würken wil. Waz meinet alliu diu natûre, diu dâ würket gebern? – daz si sich selben würken wil. Diu natûre mînes vaters wolte würken in sîner natûre einen vater. Dô des niht gesîn enmohte, dô wolte si ein würken, daz im alles dinges glîch wære. Dô der kraft gebrach, dô worhte si ein, sô si glîchest mohte: daz was ein sun. Dâ aber der kraft noch mê gebrichet oder ein ander ungevelle geschihet, dâ würket si noch einen unglîchern menschen. Aber in gote ist volliu kraft; dar umbe würket er sîn glîch in sîner geburt. Allez, daz got ist an gewalt und an wârheit und an wîsheit, daz gebirt er alzemâle in die sêle. Sant Augustînus sprichet22: ‘swaz diu sêle minnet, dem wirt si glîch. Minnet si irdischiu dinc, sô wirt si irdisch. Minnet si got, sô möhte man vrâgen, wirt si danne | (239) got?’ Spræche ich daz, daz lûtte unglouplich den, die ze kranken sin hânt und ez niht vernement. Mêr: sant Augustînus sprichet: ‘ich enspriche ez niht, mêr: ich wîse iuch an die schrift, diu dâ sprichet23: ‘ich hân gesprochen, daz ir gote sît’’. Der etwaz hæte des rîchtuomes, dâ ich vor von gesprochen hân24, einen blik oder 19. ‘sin’: lat. ‘sensus’. 20. That the soul designates the function, not the essence, can be found in Avicenna, De anima I, c. 1, ed. Van Riet, 15, 78–9, several times quoted by Eckhart, see A. Palazzo, Studi sulle fonti di Meister Eckhart I 99. 21. See Luc. 1:35: ‘… virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi’, see also Hugo a Sancto Caro, Postilla, ad loc., VI, fol. 123va, who interprets ‘virtus’ as Holy Spirit. See also Isidorus, Etymologiae VII, c. 5, n. 10: ‘Gabriel Hebraice in linguam nostram vertitur fortitudo dei’, and Hieronymus, Liber interpretationis Hebraicorum nominum, ed. Lagarde, 140, 24: ‘Gabrihel: confortavit me deus aut fortitudo dei vel virtus mea deus’. And Rabanus, De rerum naturis II (PL 111, col. 28): ‘Quidam autem archangelorum priuatis nominibus appellantur ut per uocabula ipsa in opere quid ualeant designetur. Gabriel Ebraice in lingua nostra uertitur fortitudo Dei ubi enim potentia diuina uel fortitudo

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

145

The angel was called ‘Gabriel’. He also did what he was called. He was called no more Gabriel than Conrad. Nobody knows the angel’s name. No master or mastering ever knows from where an angel received his name;19 perhaps he is nameless. Nor does the soul have a name; as little as one can find God’s own name, as little can one find the soul’s own name, even though big books have been written about it.20 But because she has a concern for her works, one has given her the name. A carpenter is not a name, rather the name describes the work of which he is a master. The name ‘Gabriel’ he took from the work of which he was a messenger, for ‘Gabriel’ means ‘power’.21 In this birth God works powerfully or exerts power. What does all the power of nature intend? It wants to reproduce itself. What does all nature intend that acts to give birth? – She wants to reproduce herself. The nature of my father wanted in his nature to produce a father. When this was not possible, it wanted to produce something that was like him in all respects. When the strength for this was lacking, it produced someone alike as possible, that was a son. As, however, the power faded even more or some other accident happened, it produced a man that was even less alike. Yet, in God there is full power, therefore He produces somebody like Him in His birth. All that God is in power, truth and wisdom, that He births entirely into the soul. Saint Augustine says:22 ‘What the soul loves, she grows to be like. If she loves earthly things, so she becomes earthly. If she loves God, one might ask whether she then becomes God?’ If I had come up with this, it would sound unbelievable to those who have a feeble mind and do not grasp the meaning. Moreover, Saint Augustine says: ‘I do not affirm this, rather, I refer you to the Scripture which says there: “I have said that you are Gods.”’23 The one who possesses some of the riches I have spoken of before,24 a glimpse, a hope or an inkling, should quite manifestatur Gabrihel mittitur. Vnde et eo tempore quo erat Dominus nasciturus et triumphaturus de mundo Gabrihel uenit ad Mariam ut illum annuntiaret qui ad debellandas aereas potestates humilis uenire dignatus est’. 22. Augustinus, In epistulam Iohannis ad Parthos 2, n. 14 (PL 35, col. 1997): ‘quia talis est quisque, qualis eius dilectio est. Terram diligis? terra erit. Deum diligis? quid dicam? deus erit? Non audeo dicere ex me, scripturas audiamus: ego dixi, dii estis, et filii altissimi omnes’ (Ps. 81:6). Repeatedly quoted by Eckhart, see J. Quint, DW II 238–9. 23. Ps. 81:6: ‘ego dixi: Dii estis’. 24. See above n. 6.

146

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

joch eine hoffenunge oder eine zuoversiht, der vernæme diz wol! Ez enwart nie geburt sô sippe noch sô glîch noch sô ein, als diu sêle gote wirt in dirre geburt. Ist ez, daz ez an ihte gehindert wirt, daz si niht alles dinges glîch25 enwirt, daz enist gotes schult niht; als verre als ir gebrechen entvallent, als verre würket er sie im glîch. Daz der zimberman niht ein schœne hûs | (240) gewürken enkan ûz wurmihtem holze, daz enist sîn schult niht; ez gebrichet an dem holze. Alsô ist ez an götlîchem würkenne in der sêle. Möhte sich der minste engel erbilden oder geborn werden in der sêle, dâ engegen wære alliu disiu werlt niht; wan in einem einigen vünkelîne des engels grüenet, loubet und liuhtet allez, daz in der werlt ist. Mêr: dise geburt würket got selber; der engel enmac dâ kein werk gewürken wan ein diensthaft werk. ‘Âvê’, daz ist ‘âne wê’26. Swer dâ ist âne crêatûre, der ist ‘âne wê’ und âne helle, und der allerminnest crêatûre ist und hât, der hât allerminnest wê. Ich sprach etwenne27 ein | (241) wort: der der werlt allerminnest hât, der hât ir allermeist. Niemannes enist diu werlt alsô eigen, als der alle die werlt gelâzen hât. Wizzet ir, wâ von got got ist? Dâ von ist got got, daz er âne crêatûre ist. Er ennante sich niht in der zît28. In der zît ist crêatûre und sünde und tôt. Disiu hânt ein sippesîn in einem sinne, und wan diu sêle dâ der zît entvallen ist, dar umbe enist dâ noch wê noch pîne; joch ungemach wirt ir dâ ein vröude. Allez, daz ie bedâht möhte werden von luste und von vröude, von wunne und von minnelicheit, hebet man diu gegen der wunne, diu dâ ist in dirre geburt, daz enist niht vröude. ‘Gnâden vol’. Daz minste werk der gnâde ist hœher dan alle engel in der natûre. Sant Augustînus sprichet29, daz ein gnâdenwerk, daz got würket, als daz er einen | (242) sünder bekêret und ze einem guoten menschen machet, daz ist grœzer, dan daz got eine niuwe werlt geschüefe. Als lîht ist gote, himel und erde umbe ze kêrenne, als mir ist, einen apfel umbe ze kêrenne in mîner hant. Dâ gnâde inne ist in der sêle, daz ist sô lûter und ist gote sô glîch und sô sippe, und gnâde ist âne werk, als in der geburt, dâ ich vor von gesprochen hân30, kein werk enist. 25. ‘alles dinges glîch’ in the sense of identical, see Hom. 4* [Q 77], n. 11 (‘alzemale glîch’). 26. Luc. 1:26: ‘ave gratia plena’; Hugo a Sancto Caro, Postilla, ad loc., VI, f. 121va: ‘Ave sine ve, id est sine dolore’; Petrus Cellensis, Sermo 24 (PL 202, col. 713D); Eckhart, In Eccli. n. 40 (LW II 267, 4). 27. Reference unidentified. 28. See Exod. 3:14–5: ‘Ego sum qui sum … Hoc nomen mihi est in aeternum’.

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

147

understand this! Never was there born anything so akin, so like, so one as the soul who becomes God in this birth. If it so happens that there is any hindrance, so that she does not become like in all respects,25 it is not the fault of God; as far as her frailty falls away, to that extent God makes her like Himself. That the carpenter cannot build a beautiful house out of worm–rotten wood is not his fault, it is due to the wood. And so it is with divine action in the soul. If the least of the angels were able to take shape or be born in the soul, the whole world would be as nothing to that, for in a single spark of the angel everything blossoms, flourishes and shines forth that is in the world. Moreover, this birth God Himself performs: the angel can do no work here, except a work of service. ‘Ave’, which means ‘without woe’.26 Whoever is without creaturehood is ‘without woe’ and without hell, and who is and has the slightest creaturehood, has a slight woe. I once27 made a statement: anyone who has the slightest thing of the world, he has it all. Nobody has the world as his own more than the one who has given up the world. Do you know whence God is God? The reason for God being God is because He is without creaturehood. He did not give a name to Himself in time.28 In time are creature, sin and death. These are in a certain sense akin, but when the soul has fallen out of time, so there are neither woe nor suffering; there even distress is turned into joy. Everything that one might ever imagine of pleasure and joy, delight and loveliness, once held against the delight that one finds in this birth, is of no joy at all. ‘Full of grace’. The least work of grace is loftier than all angels in their nature. Saint Augustine says29 that an action of grace that God performs, when He converts a sinner and turns him into a good man, is greater than for God to create a new world. For God it is as easy to convert heaven and earth as it is for me to turn an apple in my hand. Where grace is in the soul, it is so pure, so like God and so akin to Him, and grace is without work, just as in the birth, of which I have spoken before,30 there is no work. Grace does not perform any

29. Augustinus, In Iohannis Evangelium tractatus, tr. 72, n. 3, ed. Willems, 509, 13–6, quoted according to a formulation used by Eckhart, Serm. II 2, n. 15 (LW IV 16, 10–1) and In Ioh. n. 592 (LW III 517), see also Th. Aqu., Summa theologiae I–II, q. 113, a. 9 s. c.: ‘Augustinus dicit … maius opus est ut ex impio iustus fiat, quam creare caelum et terram’. 30. See above n. 11.

148

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Gnâde enwürket kein werk. Sant Johannes ‘engetete nie kein zeichen’31. Daz werk, daz der engel in gote hât, daz ist sô hôch, daz | (240) nie kein meister noch sin dar zuo enmöhte komen, daz sie daz werk begrîfen möhten. Aber von dem werke vellet ein spân – als dâ ein spân abevellet von einem balken, den man houwet –, ein blîchen, daz ist, dâ der engel 32 mit sînem nidersten den himel berüeret: dâ von grüenet und blüejet und lebet allez, daz in dirre werlt ist. Ich spriche etwenne33 von zwein brunnen. Aleine ez wunderlîche lûte, wir müezen sprechen nâch unserm sinne. Ein brunne, dâ diu gnâde ûz entspringet, ist, dâ der vater ûzgebirt sînen eingebornen sun; in dem selben entspringet diu gnâde, und aldâ gât diu gnâde ûz dem selben brunnen. Ein ander brunne ist, dâ die crêatûren ûz | (244) gote vliezent: der ist sô verre von dem brunnen, dâ diu gnâde ûz entspringet, als der himel ist von der erden. Gnâde enwürket niht. Dâ daz viur ist in sîner natûre, dâ enschadet ez noch enbrennet niht 34. Diu hitze des viures diu brennet hie nidene. Joch dâ diu hitze ist in der natûre des viures, dâ enbrennet si niht und ist unschedelich. Joch dâ diu hitze ist in dem viure, dâ ist si der rehten natûre des viures als verre, als der himel ist von der erden. Gnâde enwürket kein werk, si ist ze zart dar zuo; werk ist ir als verre, als der himel ist von der erden. Ein innesîn und ein anehaften und ein einen mit gote, daz ist gnâde, und dâ ist ‘got mite’, wan daz volget zehant dar nâch: (245)| ‘Got mit dir’ – dâ geschihet diu geburt. Ez endarf nieman unmügelich dünken, hie zuo ze komenne. Waz schadet mir daz, swie swære ez ist, sît er ez würket? Alliu sîniu gebot sint mir lîhte ze haltenne. Er heize mich joch allez, daz er welle, des enahte ich nihtes niht, daz ist mir allez kleine, ob er mir sîne gnâde dar zuo gibet. Ez sprechent etlîche, sie enhaben ez niht; sô spriche ich: ‘daz ist mir leit. Begerst dû es aber?’ ‘Nein!’ – ‘Daz ist mir noch leider’. Enmac man ez niht gehaben, sô habe man doch eine begerunge dar zuo. Enmac man der begerunge niht gehaben, sô beger man doch einer begerunge. Dâvît sprichet 35: ‘ich hân begert einer begerunge, herre, ze dîner gerehticheit’. Daz wir gotes alsô begern, daz er in uns geborn werden welle, des helfe uns got. Âmen.

31. Ioh. 10:41: ‘Ioannes quidem signum fecit nullum’. 32. ‘der engel’: perhaps meaning intellect. See also Eckhart, Hom. 51* [Q 63], n. 8; Hom. 53* [Q 65], n. 5; Hom. 54* [Q 67], n. 3.

H OMILY 6* [Q 38]

149

work. Saint John ‘performed no sign’.31 The action which the angel performs in God, is so lofty that never did any master and his mastery come to an understanding of it. But from that work there falls a chip – just as a chip might fall from a plank that is being cut –, a lightning flash, which is where the angel32 at his lowest touches heaven: from this everything that is in this world blossoms, flourishes and lives. I sometimes33 mention two wells. Though this may sound strange, we have to speak our mind. A well from which grace springs up, is where the Father bears forth His only begotten Son. From that same well springs forth grace, and there grace flows forth from that same well. Another well is where creatures flow out of God. This one is as far from the well, whence grace flows, as heaven is from earth. Grace does not act. Where fire is in its own nature, there it does neither harm nor ignite.34 The heat of the fire burns here below. Yet, when the heat is in the nature of fire, then it does not ignite and does not harm. Yet, when the heat is in the fire, then it is as far from the true nature of the fire as heaven is from the earth. Grace does not perform a work, it is too delicate for this; action is as far from her as heaven is from the earth. Grace is an inbeing, an attachment and a being one with God, and there is ‘God with’, for there immediately follows: ‘God be with you’ – there the birth takes place. Nobody needs to think it impossible to come to this. What is it to me, be it as hard as it is, since He is doing the work? All His commandments are easy for me to keep. Let Him ask me to do whatever He wishes, I care not at all, it is all a trifle to me, if He gives me His grace with it. Many people say, they have not got it; and I say: ‘I am sorry! Do you wish for it?’ ‘No!’ – ‘I feel sorrier still’. If you cannot have it, you should at least have a desire for it. David says:35 ‘I have desired a desire, Lord, for your justice.’

That we may so desire God that He may be willing to be born in us, so help us God! Amen. 33. Reference unidentified, but see Eckhart, In Ioh., n. 564 (LW III 492, 9–11): ‘unum fons est primo primae emanationis, filii scilicet et spiritus sancti a patre aeterna processione; bonum autem fons est secundae, ut sic dicamus, temporalis productionis creaturae’. 34. See above Hom. 5* [Q 22], note 16. 35. See Ps. 118:20: ‘Concupivit anima mea desiderare iustificationes tuas’.

Homily 7* [Q 34] Dominica IV in Adventu Domini ‘Gaudete in domino, iterum gaudete’ Introduction

A

dvent is a time of contrasts – darkness and light, suffering and, as in this homily, joy. Joy is the topic of the Epistle of the Fourth Sunday of Advent (see the note ‘Dominica IIII in adventu domini’ in N2) with its liturgical context (Lectionar., Arch. f. 422vb). It complements the theme of Ps. 144:18: ‘Prope est Dominus omnibus invocantibus eum: omnibus invocantibus eum in veritate’ (‘The Lord is close to all who call on Him, to all who call on Him in truth’), which appears in the Gradual of the Fourth Sunday of Advent (Miss. Conv., Arch. f. 395va). The Pauline text of Phil. 4:4–6: ‘Gaudete…’ can also be found in the Office of the Third Sunday of Advent (Miss. Conv., Arch. f. 395rb). Eckhart makes a reference to this homily (to n. 5 with reference to the quotation of Augustine) in Hom. 76* [Q 11], n. 3). The text is preserved in its entirety in four manuscripts (B7, Bre1, N3, Str1) and is also attested in a number of fragments, including quotes in Nicolaus of Landau and Hartwig of Erfurt. The content of the homily As with the two quotes from Phil. 4:4–6, so the homily is structured accordingly. After giving the reading, abbreviated in Latin (n. 1) and extended in MHG (n. 2), he develops the first part (‘Rejoice in the Lord’). With Jerome, Eckhart takes the one who can rejoice as the ‘good man’ (n. 3). That it says of ‘the’, not of ‘our’, Lord, Eckhart reads as an indication of God’s lordship, which does not depend on creatures, but on God’s

H OMILY 7* [Q 34]

151

will to create and transcend them. In a next step, he contemplates ‘in the Lord’ to place the listener ‘entirely “within the Lord”’, ‘in his innermost being and in his first’ (n. 4). In a further note, he explains ‘all the time’ with unnamed masters and Augustine to mean ‘without time’ (n. 5). This leads to his next topic, that ‘the Lord is close by and He is near!’ (nn. 5–6). To be close and near means that the soul has to stay in its innermost being, not go out ‘for a walk together with the five senses’ (n. 6). As with the soul, so is the Lord ‘close by’; moreover, the soul ‘must lift herself beyond herself ... above time and above space’ (n. 7). On the proximity of the Lord, he elaborates by pointing to Ps. 144:18 (‘God is close by to all of those who praise Him, speak of Him and in truth name Him’) and by explaining what ‘in truth’ means. ‘Truth is when I reveal what I carry in my heart and speak out with my mouth as I carry it in my heart, without likeness and covering up’; hence he concludes: ‘revelation is truth’ (n. 8). Truth he equates with intellectuality (vernünfticheit), the abstract form of intellect (vernunft) (n. 9). That thoughts ‘are known by the Lord as thanks or supplications’ is summed up, omitting ‘supplications’, by the statement that will make its way into Eckhart’s sayings: ‘Had a human being nothing more to do with God than to be thankful, it would be enough’ (n. 10). Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW II 156–69; N. Largier, I 981–3. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 77–9; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 172–4.

152

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (160)‘Gaudete in domino, iterum gaudete’ etc. Sant Paulus sprichet1: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem herren alle zît’ und ‘ensorget niht mê; der herre ist hie bî; iuwer gedanke die sîn bekant bî gote dankbærlîche oder vlêhelîche’. Nû sprichet er: ‘vröuwet iuch!’ Jeronimus sprichet2: nieman enmac von | (161) gote genemen kunst, wîsheit und vröude, er ensî denne ein guot mensche. Der enist niht ein guot mensche, der niht enhât gewandelt sînen alten site; der enmac niht von gote genemen kunst, wîsheit und vröude. Nû sprichet er: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem herren!’ Er ensprach niht: ‘in únserm herren’, mêr: ‘in dém herren’. Ich hân ez mê gesprochen3, daz gotes hêrschaft niht aleine dar ane liget, daz er ist herre aller crêatûren, mêr: sîn hêrschaft liget dar ane, daz er möhte schepfen tûsent werlte und er dâ enboben allez überswebete in sînem lûtern wesene: dar inne ist sîn hêrschaft. Nû sprichet er: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem herren!’ Dâ merken wir zwei wörtelîn. | (162) Daz êrste ist, daz man allez inneblîbende sî ‘ín dem herren’ und niht ûzer im ensuoche in bekantnisse und in luste dan aleine ist sich vröuwende ‘ín dem herren’. Daz ander wörtelîn: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem hérren!’, in sînem innigesten und in sînem êrsten4, dâ alliu dinc von enpfâhent und er von niemanne. – Nû sprichet er: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem herren álle zît!’ Die meister sprechent5, daz niht enmügen zwô stunden mit einander | (163) gesîn noch zwêne tage. Sant Augustînus sprichet6: der vröuwet sich alle zît, der sich vröuwet sunder zît, und er7 sprichet: ‘vröuwet iuch alle zît!’, daz ist über zît, ‘und ensorget niht mê; der herre ist hie bî | (164) und ist nâhe!’ Von nôt muoz diu 1. Phil. 4:4–6. Lectionar., Arch. f. 422vb: ‘Dominica quarta. Ad Philippenses [4, 4–7]. Fratres [> Vg.]. Gaudete in domino semper: iterum dico gaudete. Modestia vestra nota sit omnibus hominibus: Dominus prope est. Nichil solliciti sitis: sed in omni oratione, et obsecratione, cum gratiarum actione petitiones vestre innotescant apud Deum. Et pax Dei, que exsuperat omnem sensum, custodiat corda vestra, et intelligentias vestras in Christo Ihesu domino nostro [domino nostro > Vg.]’. 2. Hieronymus, Commentarius in Ecclesiasten, c. 2, ed. Adriaen, 271, 352: ‘… homini bono coram se dedit sapientiam et scientiam et laetitiam’; see also c. 2, p. 273, 378–80. 3. See Hom. 6* [Q 38], n. 9 4. ‘in sînem êrsten’: the first is the divine principle in which the three Persons and all creatures are one (Hom. 23* [Q 51], n. 7: ‘dar ane enbenüeget den vater niht, er enziuhe wider in die

H OMILY 7* [Q 34]

153

‘Gaudete in domino, iterum gaudete’ etc. Saint Paul says: ‘Rejoice in the Lord’ and ‘have no more care; the Lord is close by; your thoughts are known by God as thanks and supplications’.1 Now, I say: ‘Rejoice!’ Jerome says:2 None other than a good man can take from God skill, wisdom and joy. This is not a good man who has not changed his old habits; he is not able to take from God skill, wisdom and joy. Now, he says: ‘Rejoice in the Lord!’ He did not say: ‘in our Lord’, but: ‘in the Lord’. I have already3 said that God’s lordship does not only depend on the fact of being Lord of all creatures; rather, His lordship depends on Him wishing to create a thousand worlds and then to transcend them all in His pure being: therein lies His lordship. Now, he says: ‘Rejoice in the Lord!’ We note two expressions. The first is that one should remain entirely ‘within the Lord’ and not look outside Him in knowledge and pleasure, because joy is solely ‘in the Lord’. The other expression is: ‘Rejoice in the Lord’, in His innermost being and in His first,4 from where all things receive [from Him] and He does not receive from anybody. Now, he says: ‘Rejoice in the Lord all the time’. The masters 5 say that not two hours or two days could coincide. Saint Augustine says:6 He rejoices all the time who rejoices without time, and he7 says: ‘Rejoice all the time’, that is beyond time, and ‘do not worry any more; the Lord is close by and He is near!’ By necessity, the êrsticheit, in daz innerste, in den grunt und in den kernen der veterlicheit … Hie sint alliu grasbletelîn und hölzer und steine und alliu dinc ein’). 5. ‘Die meister sprechent’: perhaps a reference to Augustinus, Confessiones XI 13, n. 16, ed. Verheijen, 202, 19–25. 6. ‘Sant Augustînus sprichet’: Augustinus, Sermones CLXXI, 1 (PL 38, 933): ‘Quando gaudetur in saeculo, non gaudetur in Domino; quando gaudetur in Domino, non gaudetur in saeculo … gaudium in Domino semper augeatur; gaudium in saeculo semper minuatur, donec finiatur’. To this Eckhart probably refers, according to J. Quint, in Hom. 76* [Q 11], n. 3: ‘Ich sprach einest: der envröuwet sich niht alle zît, der sich vröuwet in der zît. Sant Paulus sprichet: “vröuwet iuch in gote alle zît”’. 7. ‘er’: Paul (see above, n. 2).

154

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

sêle lâzen alle sorge, diu sich vröuwen sol in dem herren, doch ze dem minsten in der stunde, sô si sich ze gote vüeget8. Dar umbe sprichet er: ‘ensorget niht; der herre ist hie bî iu nâhe!’, daz ist: in unserm innigesten, ob er uns dâ heime vindet und niht diu sêle ûzgegangen enist spazieren mit den vünf sinnen. Diu sêle muoz dâ heime sîn in irm innigesten und in dem hœhsten und in irm lûtersten und allez inneblîbende und niht ûzluogende; dâ ‘ist got bî und got ist nâhe’. Der ander sin ist: ‘der herre ist bî’. Er ist bî im selben und engât niht verre ûz. Nû sprichet Dâvît9: ‘herre, ervröuwe mîne sêle, wan ich hân sie ûfgehaben ze | (165) dir!’ Diu sêle muoz sich erheben mit aller ir kraft über sich selben und muoz gezogen werden über zît und über stat in die wîte und in die breite, dâ got ist im selben bî und nâhe und engât niht verre ûz und enrüeret niht vremdes. Jeronimus sprichet 10: als mügelich daz ist, daz ein stein habe engelische wîsheit, als mügelich ist, daz sich | (166) got iemer gegebe11 in zît oder in zîtlîchiu dinc. Dar umbe sprichet er: ‘der herre ist hie bî’. Dâvît sprichet 12: ‘got ist bî allen den, die in lobent und in sprechent und in nennent und daz in der wârheit’. Wie man in lobe und in spreche und in nenne, daz lâze ich ligen; mêr: daz er sprichet: ‘in der wârheit’. Waz ist wârheit? Der sun ist aleine diu wârheit und niht der vater noch der heilige geist, wan als sie éin wârheit sint in irm wesene. Daz ist wârheit, swenne ich daz offenbâre, daz ich in mînem herzen hân, und spriche daz in dem munde, alsô als ich ez in mînem herzen hân, | (167) sunder glîchsenisse und sunder bedahtheit. Diu offenbârunge daz ist wârheit. Alsô ist der sun aleine diu wârheit. Allez, daz der vater hât und geleisten mac, daz sprichet er alzemâle in sînen sun. Diu offenbârunge und diu würkunge, daz ist wârheit. Her umbe sprichet er 13: ‘in der wârheit’. Nû sprichet sant Paulus: ‘vröuwet iuch in dem herren!’, und dar nâch sprichet er: ‘iuwer gedanke sîn bekant bî dem herren!’, daz ist: in dirre wârheit bî dem vater. | (168) Gloube klebet in dem liehte der 8. Eckhart picks up the topic of Hom. 2* [Q 24], n. 7. 9. Ps. 85:4: ‘laetifica animam servi tui, quoniam ad te Domine animam meam levavi’. 10. Place unidentified. 11. ‘gegebe’: J. Quint amends this to gebe. L. Sturlese has suggested accepting the reading given by the manuscripts.

H OMILY 7* [Q 34]

155

soul that should enjoy herself in the Lord must cast off all care, at least in the hour when she attaches herself8 to God. For that reason he says: ‘Do not worry; the Lord is close by you and near!’ which means, in our innermost being, in case He finds us at home and the soul has not gone out for a walk together with the five senses. The soul must stay at home in her innermost being, in the highest and in the purest and she has to remain inside and not look outside; there ‘God is close by and God is near’. The other meaning is: ‘The Lord is close by.’ He is close by Himself and does not go far out. Now, David says: ‘Lord, make my soul rejoice, for I have raised her up to you.’9 The soul must lift herself beyond herself with all her power and must be drawn above time and above space into the expanse and the breadth where God is close by to Himself, does not go far out and does not touch anything alien. Jerome says:10 it is as possible for a stone to have angelic wisdom as for God ever to give11 in time or temporal things. For this reason he says: ‘The Lord is close by.’ David says: ‘God is close by to all of those who praise Him, speak of Him and name Him in truth.’12 I leave aside how to praise Him, how to speak of Him and how to name Him, and rather [point out] that he says: ‘in truth’. What is truth? The Son alone is the truth, neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit, although they are one truth in their being. Truth is when I reveal what I carry in my heart and speak out with my mouth as I carry it in my heart, without hypocrisy and covering up. Revelation is the truth. Hence, the Son alone is the truth. Everything that the Father has and is able to do, He speaks it always through His Son. Revelation and action, that is truth. Therefore,13 he says ‘in the truth’. Now, Saint Paul says: ‘Rejoice in the Lord!’ and after that he says: ‘Your thoughts are known by the Lord’, that is: in this truth by the Father. Faith inheres in the light of intellectuality, hope sticks in the

12. Ps. 144:18: ‘Prope est Dominus omnibus invocantibus eum: omnibus invocantibus eum in veritate’. 13. ‘er’: David (see previous note).

156

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

vernünfticheit, hoffenunge klebet in der kriegenden kraft14, diu alle zît ûfkriegende ist in daz hœhste und in daz lûterste: in die wârheit. Ich hân etwenne gesprochen15 – nemet mir des wortes war! –: diu kraft ist sô vrî und ist sô ûfkriegende, daz si keinen getwanc lîden enwil. Der brant der minne klebet in dem willen16. Nû sprichet er 17: ‘iuwer gedanke’ und alle die krefte ‘die sîn bekant bî dem herren | (169) dankbærlîche oder vlêhelîche!’ Hæte der mensche niht mê ze tuonne mit gote, dan daz er dankbære18 ist, ez wære genuoc. Daz wir uns vröuwen êwiclîche in dem herren und bî dem herren in der wârheit und unser gedanke im bekant sîn und wir im dankbære sîn alles guotes und wir in im sælic sîn, des helfe uns got. Âmen.

14. ‘kriegende kraft’ is known by the dictionaries (for example, B. Hennig, Kleines Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch [2001], 354) in the sense of ‘aufstrebende Kraft’ = lat. ‘irascibilis’. See also Albertus, De anima III, tr. 4, c. 1, ed. Stroick, 229, 26–7: ‘Si autem irrationalis in animositatem sive irascibilem et in appetitivam sive concupiscibilem dividatur…’ 15. For the topic see also Hom. 93* [Q 32], n. 8 and Hom. 104* [Q 33], n. 4. The reference, however, is unclear. 16. The three theological virtues of faith, hope and love are organized according to the division of the soul, ratiocinativa, animativa and appetitiva, the last two of which are divisions of the

H OMILY 7* [Q 34]

157

ascending power,14 which all the time strives up into the highest and purest, into the truth. I have sometimes said15 – take note of what I say! –: this power is so free and is so upward–striving that it does not wish to suffer restraint. The fire of love inheres in the will.16 Now, he says:17 ‘Your thoughts’ and all the powers ‘are known by the Lord as thanks or supplications’. Had man nothing more to do with God than to be thankful,18 it would be enough. That we rejoice eternally in the Lord and close by the Lord in the truth, that our thoughts are known to Him, that we might be thankful for all goods and that we might be happy in Him, so help us God! Amen.

irrational part of the soul. On this see Aristotle, De anima III, c. 8, 432a24–5, ed. Stroick, 228, 61–2, which Albert attributes to some Platonists, see Albertus, De anima III, tr. 4, c. 1 (229, 47–50): ‘Concupiscibilis enim appetit delectabile secundum sensum, et irascibilis appetit arduum, in quo est gloria, sicut vindictam vel victoriam aut aliquid huiusmodi’. Albert’s quote can be found again in Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 573 (LW III 501, 3–4): ‘… irascibilis petit supremum sive arduum…’ (without giving Albert as source). 17. See above note 1. 18. Paronomasia of ‘dankbærlîche’ and ‘dankbære’.

Homily 8* [Q 76]

‘Videte qualem caritatem dedit nobis pater’ Introduction

T

his is not only the homily for the main mass of Christmas; the content will show that Eckhart also seizes the opportunity to introduce listener and reader to core elements of his teachings. The text for the homily is taken from 1John (2:9–3:2) ‘See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are’, although it is not part of the Missal of the Dominicans for that day. That the sermon refers to Christmas is based on the indication of BT (‘Vff den heiligen tag Zuo Weyhnachten’), which means that the quoted text is related to the Christmas Gospel (‘ad maiorem Missam’), John 1:12  : ‘ ... quotquot autem eum receperunt dedit potestatem filios dei fieri’ (‘to all who received Him, He gave the power to become children of God’). J. Theisen, Predigt und Gottesdienst (1990), 138–44, however, sees the homily, as indicated by ms. G5, given on the Third Sunday after the Octave of Easter. The text had a notable diffusion: we know of eight manuscripts that give the entire text (B2, B3, Bra2, G1, G5, M2, Mai1, Str3), to which can be added four fragments and the BT. The content of the homily After giving the main text in Latin, Eckhart opens with a dense thought about the sameness of knowing God and of being known by God, of seeing Him and being seen by Him, and gives as a reason for this that it was He who made man know and see God (n. 2). Only now, in the opening of n. 3 does Eckhart translate the Latin verse into MHG,

160

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

underlining that not only do we carry the name of ‘children of God’, but that indeed, we are such (et simus n. 3). This leads him to state that without being Son, we could not be called God’s son. And he enforces this emphatic statement, that it must be the same being of God’s Son and of us as God’s Sons that makes us Sons of God. While many things seem to conceal this fact, there remains something in the soul, which Eckhart calls her ‘spark of rationality’ (n. 4), that allows for this inner knowledge, as this inner knowledge ‘is based on the intellectual substance in our soul’s being’. This intellectual life is the place where ‘man is born the Son of God’. In a next step, Eckhart gives an ironic example of eye and foot, which he also gives in other forms in his Latin works1 (n. 5). Of course, if the foot could speak, it would call the eye in the head more his own than the one that is in the foot – ‘chicken eye’ in MHG can also mean ‘corn’ –, although it is closer to the foot. Likewise, Eckhart concludes, grace that is in Mary is more properly that of man than of her, as all humanity is united and one. Moving from bodily examples to a spiritual explanation (n. 6), Eckhart develops this unity into the statement that ‘in the kingdom of heaven all in all is all one and all ours’, even if, according to our text, ‘it is not yet revealed’. With the following note, Eckhart comes back to his opening on God making man knowing (n. 7) and man being the Son of God through having the same being as He (n. 8). The argument that because God’s nature is unlike anything, we need to reduce ourselves to nothing, so that we become the same as God, sounds almost sophistic. Yet, this reasoning is far from being sheer sophistry, as it is simply a conclusion from a radically kenotic theology2 that turns nothingness into detachment and revelation. In contrast, nothingness can also be the source of imperfection, as Eckhart continues, and this form of nothingness has to be driven out (n. 9). Similarly, there are two forms of human birth (n. 10): one into the world, the other out of the world. As with nothingness, the benchmark is whether man is still bound and burdened by things. As a remedy, Eckhart points to Christ’s exhortation to follow Him: ‘Whoever wishes to follow me, let him deny himself, take up the cross, and follow me’ (Matth. 16:24). For Eckhart it is Christ’s wish that He as child be born 1. See Eckhart, Sermo XXX/1, n. 312 (LW IV 275,6–7); In Joh. n. 398 (LW III 339,9–10). 2. See M. Vinzent, The Art of Detachment (2011).

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

161

in man, a joy that ‘no one will take’ from us (n. 12). That God’s anger cannot be taken as a counter–argument Eckhart explains by making his punishment derive from divine love. In a final plea, he asks his audience and readership to strive not only that the child be born, but that it be ‘brought to birth’; hence Christmas takes place in this now. Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW III 304–29; N. Largier, II 705–9. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 31–4; R. Schürmann, Meister Eckhart (1978), 131–6; M. Fox, Breakthrough (1980), 325–30; Meister Eckhart, Teacher and Preacher (1987), 327–30; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 72–6.

162

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (310)‘Videte qualem caritatem dedit nobis pater, ut filii dei nominemur et simus.’ 3 Ez ist ze wizzenne, daz daz ein ist nâch dingen: got bekennen und von gote bekant ze sînne und got sehen und von gote gesehen ze sînne. In dem bekennen wir got | (311) und sehen, daz er uns machet gesehende und bekennende. Und als der luft, der erliuhtet ist, niht anders enist, wan daz er erliuhtet, wan von dem erliuhtet er, daz er erliuhtet | (312) ist, und alsô bekennen wir, daz wir bekant sîn und daz er uns sich machet bekennende. Dar umbe sprach Kristus4: ‘anderwarbe sehet ir mich’, daz ist: in dem, daz ich iuch mache gesehende, in dem bekennet ir mich, und dar nâch volget: ‘und iuwer herze sol ervröuwet werden’, daz ist: in der gesiht und in der bekantnisse mîn, ‘und iuwer vröude ennimet nieman von iu’. Ez saget sant Johannes5: ‘sehet, welche minne uns got gegeben hât, daz wir gotes kinder geheizen werden und sîn’. Er ensaget niht aleine ‘geheizen werden’, mêr: ouch | (313) ‘sîn’. Alsô sage ich: sô wênic der mensche mac gesîn wîse âne wizzen, alsô wênic mac er sun sîn âne sunlich wesen gotes sunes, niuwan er enhabe daz selbe wesen des sunes gotes, daz er selbe hât, rehte, als wîse–wesen niht sîn enmac âne wizzen. Dar umbe: solt dû sîn der sun gotes, des enmaht dû niht gesîn, niuwan dû enhabest denne daz selbe wesen gotes, daz dâ hât der sun gotes. Aber diz ‘ist uns nû verborgen’6, und dar nâch | (314) ist geschriben7: ‘vil lieben, wir sîn gotes süne’. Und waz wizzen wir? Daz ist, daz er zuoleget8: ‘und wir werden im glîch’, daz ist: daz selbe, daz er ist, daz selbe wesen und smecken und verstân und allez daz selbe, daz er danne ist, wanne9 ‘wir in sehen, als er got ist’. Dar umbe sage ich, daz got niht machen enmöhte, daz ich wære der sun gotes und | (315) niht enhæte daz wesen 3.  Joh. 3:1: ‘[2:29–3:2] Si scitis quoniam iustus est, scitote quoniam et omnis, qui facit iustitiam, ex ipso natus est. [3, 1] Videte qualem charitatem dedit nobis Pater, ut filii Dei nominemur et simus. Propter hoc mundus non novit nos: quia non novit eum. Carissimi, nunc filii Dei sumus: et nondum apparuit quid erimus. Scimus quoniam cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus: quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est’ (‘If you know that He is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of Him. See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us is that it did not know Him. Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when He appears we shall be the same as Him, because we shall see Him as He is’).

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

163

‘Videte qualem caritatem dedit nobis pater, ut filii dei nominemur et simus.’3 One has to know that in reality it is one thing, to know God and to be known by God, to see God and to be seen by God. We know and ‘see’ God through having been made by Him to be seen and to know. Just as the air which is illuminated is nothing other than air which lights up and it lights up by being illuminated, so too we know that we are known and that he makes Himself known to us. For this reason Christ spoke: ‘Again, you will see me’,4 that is to say, by making you see, you know me; and then follows: ‘your heart will rejoice’, that is to say, in the vision and in the knowledge of me, ‘no one will take your joy from you’. Saint John says: ‘See what love God has given us, that we are called and are children of God.’5 He does not just say ‘we are called’, but rather also: we ‘are’. I, therefore, say: as little as man may be wise without knowing, just as little can he be Son without the Sonlike being of God’s Son, unless he has the same being of the Son of God that He himself has, just as the wise being cannot be without knowing. It follows: should you be the Son of God, you cannot be it unless you have the same being of God that the Son of God has. Although, this ‘is now hidden from us’,6 and, after this, is written: ‘Dearly beloved, we are sons of God.’7 And what do we learn? That he adds: ‘And we shall become like Him’,8 that is to say, the same that He is, the same being, taste, understanding and everything the same as He is when ‘we see Him as He is God’.9 Therefore I say that God could not wish for me either to be the Son of God or to have the being of God’s Son any more than God could wish to make me

4. Ioh. 16:22: ‘iterum autem videbo vos, et gaudebit cor vestrum: et gaudium vestrum nemo tollit a vobis’ (the text has not ‘you will see me’, as Eckhart renders it, but ‘I will see you’, see Hugo, Postilla VI, fol. 347va: ‘id est apparebo vobis resuscitatus’). 5. Ioh. 3:1: ‘videte qualem charitatem dedit nobis Pater, ut filii Dei nominemur et sumus’. 6. Ioh. 3:2: ‘nondum apparuit’. 7. Ioh. 3:2: ‘carissimi, nunc filii Dei sumus’. 8. Ioh. 3:2: ‘similes ei erimus: quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est’. 9. Sturlese notes that ‘wanne wir in sehen’ translates as if the text read ‘quando’ not ‘quoniam’.

164

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

gotes sunes, als wênic, als got möhte machen, daz ich wîse wære und niht enhæte wîse–wesen. Wie sîn wir gotes kinder? ‘Noch enwizzen wir sîn niht, ez enist uns noch niht offen’10; niuwan sô vil wizzen wir von disem, als er saget: ‘wir werden im glîch’. Etlîchiu dinc sint, diu uns diz verbergent in unsern sêlen und bedeckent uns diz bekantnisse. Diu sêle hât etwaz in ir, ein vünkelîn der redelicheit, daz niemer erlischet, und in diz vünkelîn setzet man daz bilde der sêle als in daz oberste teil des gemüetes; und ist | (316) ouch ein bekennen in unsern sêlen ze ûzern dingen, als daz sinnelîche und verstentlîche bekennen, daz dâ ist nâch glîchnisse und nâch rede11, daz uns diz verbirget. Wie sîn wir ‘süne gotes’? Daz ist: daz wir éin wesen hân mit im. Doch daz wir etwaz verstân von disem, daz wir sîn der sun gotes, daz ist ze verstânne von dem ûzern verstânne und von dem innern verstânne. Daz inner bekennen ist daz, daz sich vernünfticlîche ist fundierende in unserer sêle wesene; doch enist ez niht der sêle wesen, mêr: ez ist dar în gewurzelt und ist etwaz lebens der sêle, wan wir sagen, daz daz verstân sî etwaz lebens der sêle, daz ist vernünftigez leben, und in dem lebene wirt der mensche geborn gotes sun | (317) und ze dem êwigen lebene; und diz bekennen ist âne zît und âne stat, âne hie und âne nû. In disem lebene sint alliu dinc ein, alliu dinc gemeine al und al in al und al geeiniget. Ich gibe ein glîchnisse. In dem lîbe sint alliu diu teil des lîbes geeiniget und ein alsô, daz daz ouge ist des vuozes und der vuoz des ougen. Möhte der vuoz sprechen, er spræche, daz daz ouge mê sîn wære, daz in dem houbete stât, als, ob ez in dem vuoze stüende, und daz selbe spræche daz ouge hin wider. Und alsô meine ich, daz alliu diu | (318) gnâde, diu in Marîen ist, diu ist mê und eigenlîcher des engels und mê in im – diu dâ ist in Marîen –, dan ob si wære in im oder in den heiligen. Wan, swaz Marîâ hât, daz hât allez der heilige und ist mê sîn, und smacket im mê diu gnâde, diu dâ ist in Marîen, dan ob si in im wære. (319) | Noch ist dirre sin ze grop und ze lîplich, wan er hanget an lîplîcher glîchnisse. Dar umbe sage ich iu einen andern sin, der noch lûterer ist und noch geistlîcher. Ich sage, daz in dem rîche der himel al 10.  Ioh. 3:2: ‘et nondum apparuit quid erimus. Scimus quoniam cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus: quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est’.

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

165

wise without having a wise being. How are we God’s children? ‘We do not know yet: It does not yet appear to us’;10 We only know of this as much as he tells us: ‘We shall be the same as Him.’ There are many things which hide this from us and conceal this knowledge from us. The soul has something in her, a spark of rationality, which never goes out, and one places the image of the soul in this spark as in the highest part of the mind; yet, there is also a form of knowledge of external things, such as the knowledge through senses and reason11 in our soul that works according to images and language, which conceals this from us. How are we ‘Sons of God’? It is to say, that we have one being with Him. That we have some understanding of this, to be the Son of God, we can know according to external and internal knowledge. The inner knowledge is based on the intellectual substance in our soul’s being; yet it is not the soul’s being, rather it is rooted in it and is a kind of life of the soul, for we say that understanding is a kind of life of the soul, i.e. intellectual life, and in this life man is born the Son of God and to have eternal life; and to know this is without time and place, without here and now. In this life all things are one, all things are common, all and all are unified to all in all. I will give an example. In the body, all members of the body are united and one, so that the eye is part of the foot and the foot of the eye. If the foot could speak, it would say that the eye which is in the head was more its own than if it were in the foot, and the eye would say the same in reverse. And in the same way, I think that all grace that is in Mary, is more and more properly that of the angels and even more in Him – the one that is in Mary –, than if it were in Him or in the saints. Accordingly, what Mary has, all that the saint has and is more in him, and he tastes the grace that is in Mary more than if it were in him. And yet, this sense is too gross and bodily, for it depends on bodily imagery. For that reason I give you another sense which is even purer and more spiritual. I say that in the kingdom of heaven all in all 11. ere, ‘sinnelîche bekennen’ refers to image, ‘verstentlîche’ to reason (see, for example, Hom. 2* [Q 24], n. 4).

166

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

in al ist und al ein und al unser. Waz unser vrouwe hât der gnâden, daz ist allez in mir – ob ich dâ bin –, und doch niht als ûzquellende noch ûzvliezende von Marîen, mêr: als in mir und als mîn eigen und niht als vremde abkomende. Und alsô sage ich: swaz dâ einer hât, daz hât der ander und niht als von dem andern noch in dem andern, mêr: als in im selben alsô, daz diu gnâde, diu in einem ist, diu ist zemâle in dem andern, als sîn eigen gnâde in im ist. Und alsô ist, daz der geist | (320) ist in dem geiste. Dar umbe sage ich, daz ich niht sîn enmac der sun gotes, niuwan ich enhabe daz selbe wesen, daz dâ hât der sun gotes, und von habunge des selben wesens werden wir im glîch, und wir sehen in, als er got ist12. Aber ‘daz enist noch niht offen, waz wir werden’. Dar umbe sage ich, daz in disem sinne kein glîch enist noch kein underscheit, mêr: âne allen underscheit werden wir daz selbe wesen und substancie und natûre13, diu er selber ist. Aber ‘daz enist nû niht offen’; danne ist ez offen, ‘wanne wir in sehen, als er got ist’. Got machet uns selber sich erkennen und bekennend machet er uns sich selben, und sîn bekennen ist sîn wesen14, und ez ist daz selbe, daz er mich machet bekennende und daz ich bekenne. Und dar umbe ist sîn bekennen mîn, als in dem | (321) meister ein ist, daz er lêret, und in dem jünger, daz er gelêret wirt. Und wan denne sîn bekennen mîn ist und wan sîn substancie sîn bekennen ist und sîn natûre und sîn wesen, dar nâch volget, daz sîn wesen und sîn substancie und sîn natûre mîn ist. Und wan denne sîn substancie, sîn wesen und sîn natûre mîn ist, sô bin ich der sun gotes. ‘Sehet’, brüeder, ‘welche minne uns got gegeben hât, daz wir geheizen sîn der sun gotes und sîn’15. Merket, wâ von wir sîn der sun gotes: wan wir daz selbe wesen hân, daz der sun hât. Wie ist man der sun gotes, oder wie weiz man ez, daz man ez sî, wan got niemanne | (322) glîch enist? Daz ist wâr. Isaias sprichet16: ‘wem hât ir in gelîchet, oder waz bildes gebet ir im?’ Wan denne gotes natûre ist, daz er niemanne glîch enist, sô ist daz von nôt,

12. Ioh. 3:2: ‘et nondum apparuit quid erimus. Scimus quoniam cum apparuerit, similes ei erimus: quoniam videbimus eum sicuti est’. 13. ‘wesen und substancie und natûre’: J. Quint translates ‘seine Substanz, sein Sein und seine Natur’. 14. Quint’s text does not seem to be right (‘Got machet uns sich selber bekennende, und bekennende machet er uns sich selber bekennende, und sîn wesen ist sîn bekennen’), which is shown

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

167

is all one and all ours. What our Lady has of grace, all that is in me, if I am there, yet in another way than welling up and flowing out of Mary; moreover, as in me as my own and not of foreign origin. And, therefore, I say, what somebody has, the other has, yet neither as from the other nor in the other, rather as in himself, so, too, that grace which is in one, is entirely in the other as his own grace is in him. And so is the spirit in the spirit. Therefore, I say that I cannot be the Son of God, unless I have the very same being that the Son of God has, and from having the same being we become the same as Him, and we see Him as He is God.12 But ‘it is not yet revealed’ what we shall become. Therefore, I say that in this sense there is no like or distinction, rather without any distinction we will be the same being, substance13 and nature which He Himself is. And although ‘it is not now revealed’, it will then be revealed ‘when we will see Him as He is God’. God makes Him known to ourselves, and he makes Himself known to us, and His knowing is His being,14 and it is the same thing that He makes me knowing and that I know. Therefore, His knowing is mine, as it is one thing in the master who teaches and the disciple who is being taught. And since then His knowing is mine and since His substance is His knowing, His nature and His being, it follows that His being, His substance and His nature are mine. And since then His substance, His being and His nature are mine, I am the Son of God. ‘See’, brothers, ‘what love God has given us, that we are called and are the Son of God’.15 Note through what we are the Son of God, from having the same being that the Son has. How is one the Son of God, or how does one know that one is, since God is not the same as anybody? Which is true. Isaiah says: ‘To whom do you compare Him, or what kind of image do you give Him?’16 If then it is God’s nature not to be the same

by the fact that also his translation is incomprehensible (‘Gott macht uns sich selbst erkennen, und erkennend macht er uns sich selbst erkennen und sein Sein ist sein Erkennen’). Instead of the apparent diplography of ‘bekennende’, we follow the text of M2. 15. Ioh. 3, 1: ‘Videte qualem charitatem dedit nobis Pater, ut filii Dei nominemur et simus’. 16. Is. 40:18: ‘Cui ergo similem fecistis Deum? aut quam imaginem ponetis ei?’.

168

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

daz wir her zuo komen, daz wir niht sîn, daz wir gesast17 mügen werden in daz selbe wesen, daz er selbe ist. Dar umbe, swanne ich dar zuo kume, daz ich mich gebilde in niht und niht engebilde in mich und ûztrage und ûzwirfe, waz in mir ist, sô mac ich gesast werden in daz blôze wesen gotes, und daz ist daz blôze wesen des geistes. Dâ muoz allez daz ûzgetriben werden, daz glîcheit ist, daz ich übergesast werde in got und werde ein mit im und éin substancie und éin wesen und éin natûre und der sun gotes. Und nâch dem daz diz geschehen ist, sô enist niht verborgen in gote, daz niht offen enwerde oder daz niht mîn enwerde. Danne wirde ich wîse, mehtic und alliu dinc als er und ein und daz selbe mit im. Danne wirt Syon ein wâr–sehender, ein ‘wârer Isrâêl’, daz ist, ‘ein sehender | (323) man got’18, wan im enist niht verborgen in der gotheit. Dâ wirt der mensche in got geleitet. Aber, daz mir niht enwerde in gote verborgen, ez enwerde mir offen, sô muoz in mir kein glîch sîn offen noch kein bilde, wan kein bilde enist uns offenende die gotheit | (324) noch sîn wesen. Wan, blibe dehein bilde in dir oder dehein glîch, dû enwürdest niemer ein mit gote. Dar umbe, daz dû mit gote ein sîst, sô enmuoz niht in dir sîn noch îngebildet noch ûzgebildet19, daz ist, daz niht in dir ensî bedekket, daz niht offen enwerde und ûzgeworfen enwerde. Merke, waz gebreste ist! Der ist von nihte. Dar umbe: waz des nihtes ist in dem menschen, daz muoz getilget werden; wan, als lange der gebreste in dir ist, sô enbist dû niht der sun gotes. Daz der mensche klaget und leidic ist, daz ist allez von gebresten. Dar umbe muoz ez allez getilget sîn und ûzgetriben sîn, daz der mensche werde gotes sun, daz noch klage noch leit dâ ensî. Der mensche enist noch stein noch holz, wan daz | (325) ist allez gebreste und niht. Wir enwerden im niht glîch, niuwan diz niht enwerde ûzgetriben, daz wir werden al in al, als got ‘al in al’ ist20. Ez ist zweierleie geburt der menschen: ein ín die werlt und ein ûz der werlt, daz ist: geistlîche in got. Wilt dû wizzen, ob dîn kint geborn werde und ob ez geblœzet sî, daz ist, ob dû gotes sun sîst gemachet? 17. ‘gesast’: J. Quint translates ‘(in das bloße Sein Gottes) versetzt’, while Eckhart seems to indicate, as L. Sturlese has already noted, a movement of transposition (‘gesast’ in the sense of ‘gefestigt’: B. Hennig, Kleines Mittelhochdeutsches Wörterbuch [2001], 116). 18. Isidorus, Etymologiae XV, c. 1, n. 5: ‘Sion … Hebraice interpretatur speculatio…’; Hieronymus, Liber interpretationis Hebraicorum nominum, ed. Lagarde, 75, 21: ‘Israhel est videre deum siue uir aut mens uidens deum’.

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

169

as anybody, it is necessary that we come to the point that we are nothing, so that we can be placed17 into the same being which He Himself is. Therefore, when I come to the point of making myself into nothing and am not conceited, show off and throw out what is in me, then I can be placed into the naked being of God, and this is the naked being of the Spirit. There all that is likeness has to be driven out, so that I am passed over into God, become one with Him, one substance, one being, one nature and the Son of God. And after that has happened, there is nothing in God which will not be revealed or which will not be mine. Then I will be wise, powerful and everything that He is, and one and the same with Him. Then, Zion will become a true–seer, a ‘true Israel’, that is ‘a seeing man, God’,18 for nothing is hidden from it in the Godhead. There, man is being led into God. However, so that nothing is hidden in God from me, but open to me, nothing in me can be alike or an image, as no image reveals to us the Godhead or His being. Hence, as long as image or likeness remains in you, you can never be one with God. Therefore, that you would be one with God, you should be neither informed, nor outformed,19 that is, that nothing in you should be concealed that will not be revealed and thrown out. Note what imperfection is! It derives from nothing. Therefore, what comes of nothing in man has to be expunged; because, as long as imperfection is in you, you are not the Son of God. That man complains and is sad, all that derives from imperfection. Hence, all of that must be expunged and driven out, so that man becomes God’s Son, so that there is neither complaint nor sadness. Man is neither stone nor wood, these are all imperfect and nothing. We will not become the same with Him, unless this is driven out, so that we become all in all, as God is ‘all in all’.20 There are two forms of human birth: the first into the world, the second out of the world, that is, a spiritual into God. Do you want to know whether your child is being born and is laid bare, that is,

19. ‘în-’ and ‘ûzgebildet’, rhetorical and emphatic speech that can hardly be imitated in an English translation. 20. I Cor. 15:28: ‘… ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus’.

170

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Als lange dû leit in dînem herzen hâst umbe dehein dinc, ez sî joch umbe sünde, als lange enist dîn kint niht geborn. Hâst dû herzeleit, dû enbist niht muoter, mêr: dû bist in der geberunge und nâhe der geburt. Dar umbe enzwîvel niht, ob dû leidic sîst vür dich oder vür dînen vriunt: enist ez21 niht geborn, ez ist doch nâhe der geburt. Aber danne ist ez volkomenlîche geborn, als der mensche niht leit von herzen enpfindet umbe kein dinc; danne hât der mensche daz wesen und natûre und substancie und wîsheit und vröude und allez, daz got hât. Danne wirt daz selbe wesen des sunes gotes unser und in uns, und wir komen in daz selbe wesen gotes. (326) | Kristus saget22: ‘swer mir volgen wil, der verlougen sîn selbes und hebe ûf sîn kriuze und volge mir’. Daz ist: allez herzeleit wirf ûz, alsô daz in dînem herzen niht wan stætiu vröude ensî. Alsô ist daz kint geborn. Dâ von: ist, daz daz kint geborn ist in mir, und sæhe ich danne mînen vater und alle mîne vriunde vor mir tœten, mîn herze enwære dar umbe niht beweget. Aber, würde mîn herze von disem beweget, sô enwære daz kint in mir niht geborn; aber vil lîhte ez wære nâhe der geburt. Ich sage, daz got und die engel sô grôze vröude hânt von einem ieglîchen werke eines guoten menschen, daz im kein vröude enmöhte glîchen. Dar umbe sage ich: ist, daz daz kint geborn wirt in dir, | (327) sô hâst dû sô grôze vröude von einem ieglîchen guoten werke, diu dâ geschehent in dirre werlt, daz dîn vröude wirt diu allergrœste stæticheit, daz si sich niht enendert. Dar umbe saget er23: ‘iuwer vröude ennimet nieman von iu’. Und bin ich wol übergesast24 in daz götlich wesen, sô wirt got mîn und swaz er hât. Dar umbe saget er25: ‘ich bin got, | (328) dîn herre’. Danne hân ich rehte vröude, sô sie noch leit noch pîn von mir genemen enmac, wan danne bin ich gesast in daz götlich wesen, dâ keine stat leit niht enhât. Wan wir sehen, daz in gote noch zorn noch trüepnisse niht enist, sunder minne und vröude. Swie ez schîne, daz er etwanne zürne über den sünder, ez enist niht zorn, ez ist minne, wan ez kumet von grôzer götlîcher minne; wan, die er minnet, die strafet er, wan ‘er ist diu minne’26, diu dâ 21. ‘ez’: the ‘child’. 22. Matth. 16:24: ‘Si quis vult post me venire, abneget se ipsum, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me’. 23.  Ioh. 16:22: ‘gaudium vestrum nemo tollit a vobis’. This text is part of the Gospel reading for the Third Sunday of the Easter Octave.

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

171

whether you have been made the Son of God? As long as you carry sorrow in your heart for anything, even if it is for sin, your child has not been born. If your heart is sore, you are not a mother; rather, you are in labour and close to giving birth. Therefore, do not despair, whether you feel sorrow for yourself or your friend: it is not born yet,21 but it is close to birth. Then, however, it is perfectly born, when man does not feel pain in his heart for anything; then man has being, nature, substance, wisdom, joy and everything that God has. Then the same being of the Son of God will be ours and in us, and we will come into the same being of God. Christ says: ‘Whoever wishes to follow me, let him deny himself, take up the cross, and follow me.’22 That is to say, get rid of all soreness of the heart, as long as in your heart there is not constant joy. In this way the child is born. Therefore, if it happened that the child is born in me, and I saw my father and all my friends killed in front of me, my heart would not be moved by it. But if my heart were moved by it, the child had not been born in me; but perhaps it would be close to birth. I say that God and the angels take such great joy from any work of a good man that no joy may be like it. Hence, I say that if it happened that the child is born in you, you will have such great joy from any good works that are done in this world that your joy will be of the greatest constancy and will not change. Therefore, he says: ‘No one will take your joy from you.’23 And if I have been well passed over24 into the divine being, then God and all that he has will be mine. Therefore, he says: ‘I am God, your Lord.’25 Then I have the true joy, when neither sadness nor pain can take it from me, when I am placed into the divine being, where sadness or pain have no place, because we see that in God there is neither anger nor sorrow, but love and joy. When it seems that He may be angry about a sinner, it is not anger, but love, because it derives from great divine love; because the ones whom He loves He punishes, as ‘He is love’,26 which is the Holy Spirit. Hence the anger of God derives from love, as He

24. ‘übergesast’: J. Quint translates ‘hinüberversetzt’. 25. Exod. 20:2: ‘Ego sum Dominus Deus tuus’. 26. Ioh. 4:16: ‘Deus charitas est’.

172

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

ist der heilige geist. Dar umbe ist der zorn gotes ûz der minne, wan er âne lîden zürnet. Dar umbe, sô dû dar zuo kumest, daz dû noch leit noch swârheit | (329) hân enmaht umbe iht und daz dir leit niht leit enist und daz dir alliu dinc ein lûter vröude sint, sô ist daz kint in der wârheit geborn. Alsô vlîzet iuch, daz niht aleine daz kint geborn werde, mêr: geborn sî, als in gote alle zît der sun geborn ist und alle zît geborn wirt. Daz uns diz widervar, des helfe uns got. Âmen.

H OMILY 8* [Q 76]

173

is angry without passion. Therefore, when you come to the point that nothing is painful or hard to you, and where pain is not pain to you, but all things are pure joy to you, then, in truth, the child is born. Strive, therefore, that not only is the child being born, rather that it is brought to birth, just as in God the Son is always being born and is always brought to birth. That this happens to us, may God help us! Amen.

Homily 9* [S 101] Dominica infra octavam nativitatis Domini ‘Dum medium silentium tenerent omnia’ Introduction

‘T

his sermon epitomizes some of the most important aspects of the whole of Eckhart’s teaching’,1 and it is truly a Christmas homily in the strict sense, as Eckhart refers to Christmas Day in the opening sentence (‘We celebrate here, in time’). The theme is not only the advent of the Divine Word in the midst of the night, but, as Eckhart has stated in his earlier Advent homilies and now reinforces here, it is the birth of the Son in the ground of man’s soul, in order for man to become the Son of God. The main verse is taken from Wisd. 18:14–5, derived from the Introitus of the Sunday in the Octave of Christmas, and conforms to the Vulgate version of the Officium (see note 2). The centrality of the homily can also be seen from the spread of manuscripts. We know of 20 manuscripts that give us the text in its complete or fragmented version, and it can also be found in the Lehrsystem, edited by Greith. Four of these manuscripts (B4, Ko, Tr, St2) present the homily as part of a collection of thematically related homilies in the following order: Hom. 18* [Q 1], Hom. 9* [S 101], Hom. 13* [S 102], Hom. 16* [S 104], Hom. 15* [S 103], Hom. 119* [S 105] and Hom. 83* [Q 2]. Eight additional codices provide the four sermons S 101–104 together as a set; others are less complete and give us two or three sermons of the series. Already, based on manuscript evidence, it is difficult to doubt that at least the sermons S 101–104 are somehow related, although, as scholarship has shown, it is more difficult to define their precise connection. Are they are a real ‘cycle’ (so G. Steer, DW IV 320), even though the sermons are 1. Note 1 of M. O’C. Walshe, The Complete Mystical Works of Meister Eckhart (2009), 37.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

175

connected to different liturgical places, the first to the Octave of Christmas (Hom. 9* [S 101]), the next to Epiphany (Hom. 13* [S 102]) and the next two to the Octave of Epiphany (Hom. 15* and Hom. 16* [S 103 and 104])? With L. Sturlese one can maintain that the present homily, together with Hom. 13*, Hom. 15* and Hom. 16*, formed a small collection, thematically dedicated to the generation of the Word in the soul (see also J. Quint, Überlieferung, 79; G. Steer, DW IV 318ff.). It remains a hypothesis that this collection was circulated by Eckhart himself, perhaps going back to his Erfurt days, as conjectured by G. Steer, ‘Meister Eckharts Predigtzyklus von der ewigen geburt. Mutmaßungen über die Zeit seiner Entstehung’ (2000). The content of the homily The present homily is an elaborate work that has therefore been regarded as having been published by Eckhart himself. Indeed, more than with the previous texts, we find subtle ideas fully developed, and as the related opening and end of the homily show, the text is also structurally perfected; hence, we get a much better insight into how a full (or fuller) homily by Eckhart may have looked or sounded. As much as possible, the translation tries to pick up the elevated celebratory style of the rhetoric, which allows the liturgical setting of the delivery or reading of the homily to shine through. Right from the opening, Eckhart is securing his daring personalizing and continuous processing of the eternal birth of the Word into man through the authority of Augustine, even though the idea is taken not from him, but from Origen (n. 2). According to Eckhart’s self– presentation, he is painted as a ‘good, perfected’, not ‘a naturely untrained man’ (n. 3). Yet, he not only sees himself as the opposite of somebody who is ‘entirely removed and knows absolutely nothing of this birth’, but takes all his listeners and readers as people who are the target of the loving God who, ‘in the midst of silence’, comes down ‘into me’ through His ‘secret word’ (n. 4). First, Eckhart points out three things to note: a) where God speaks His Word in the soul (n. 5), b) how man should react to God speaking His Word into the purest part of the soul (n. 6), and c) what the result of God’s action is (n. 8).

176

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Having systematically laid out the core of the teaching, Eckhart reflects on its proof, pointing to ‘common language’ (natiurlîchen reden), by which he means the Scripture, which not only, as he states, ‘enriches you more intensely’ and is the ‘better’ proof, but which he assumes one trusts more than oneself – and he includes himself in this (‘I believe Scripture more than myself ’) (n. 9). Hence, in what follows, he studies the main verse and gives his interpretation of it. He starts by coming back to his first part (nn. 1–6), the ‘where’, ‘in the midst of silence’ ‘there descended down into me a secret word’, to return to the ‘where’ God speaks His Word (n. 10). The answer is: ‘in the most noble’ part of the soul, in the ground and in the soul’s being. To highlight what he means by this, he explains the threefold make–up of the soul, which contains three powers: the understanding mind, the remembering memory and the loving will (n. 11). They are like tools for the soul’s activity. In contrast, the ground or being of the soul is without tools or powers, as there is no activity in it, but pure receptivity, hence the identification with ‘silence’. This is the place, therefore, into which God comes (n. 12). It is a place which, because no mediation or activity take place there, is not known to the soul herself (nn. 13–4). In contrast, God has perfect knowledge of Himself, and thus, He is active and gives birth in this ground (n. 15) where there are no images, but perfect happiness (n. 16). Eckhart then adds an explanation of the second part, man’s answer to God’s activity (nn. 17–30). Is man a co–operator of God? (n. 17, see also Hom. 13* [S 102]) His answer is no, man should remain silent and let God alone work (n. 18) and let go of all three powers of the soul (n. 19). He supports this by various authorities: Moses (n. 20), a master (Anselm) (n. 21), and (Pseudo–)Dionysius (n. 22–4). When Scripture, as in the Hexaemeron, speaks of timely activities of God, these works are all done within God Himself and are not external activities (n. 23). If so, the question might arise, how can one know of God’s activity, if every knowledge is known only through the soul’s powers and through images? And Eckhart’s answer is that ignorance is the non–power that makes the soul known (n. 25), because it corresponds to God being the one who speaks and makes known (n. 26). Again, this idea is supported by authorities, two pagan masters and Augustine (n. 27). God’s hiding and showing Himself is a loving luring of the soul to Him which does not

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

177

change the nature of the soul, but conforms to how noble He has made her (nn. 28–30). The third part to which Eckhart returns is the result of God’s activity in the soul (nn. 31–2). This is the most daring statement – he knows this, as he states in n. 32 – where he makes the listener and reader the one who is ‘born as the heavenly Father’s child’ (n. 31). Man’s ignorance is his self–denial and detachment and through these man cannot be separated from God (nn. 32–3). Editions, commentaries and notes G. Steer, DW IV 279–367 and id., LE I 247–88. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 3–9; Meister Eckhart: A modern Translation, by R.B. Blakney (1941), 95–102; M. Fox, Breakthrough (1980), 293–301; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 29–38.

178

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (334)‘Dum medium silentium tenerent omnia.’2 (335) | Wir begân hie in der zît von der êwigen geburt, die got der vater hât geborn und gebirt âne underlâz in êwicheit, daz diu selbe geburt nû ist geborn in der zît in menschlîcher natûre. | (336) Sant Augustînus sprichet3: ‘Daz disiu geburt iemer geschehe und aber in mir niht engeschihet, waz hilfet mich daz? Aber daz si in mir geschehe, dâ liget ez allez ane’. Nû gebürt uns ze redenne von dirre geburt, wie daz si in uns geschehe und volbrâht werde in der guoten sêle, wâ got der vater sîn êwic wort sprechende sî in der volkomenen sêle. Wan daz ich hie spriche, daz sol man verstân von einem guoten, volkomenen menschen, der | (337) ‘in dem wege gotes gewandelt hât und noch wandelt’4, niht von einem natiurlîchen ungeüebeten menschen, wan der ist zemâle verre und unwizzende ihtes iht von dirre geburt. (338) | Ein wort sprichet der wîse man5: ‘dô alliu dinc wâren enmitten in einem swîgenne, dô kam von oben her nider von dem küniclîchen stuole’ ‘in mich ein verborgen wort’6. Hie ûz sol disiu predige gân. Driu dinc sol man hie merken. Daz êrste ist, wâ got der vater spreche sîn wort in der sêle und wâ dirre geburt stat sî und | (339) wâ si dises enpfenclich sî7. Wan daz muoz sîn in dem allerlûtersten, edelsten und subtîlsten, daz diu sêle geleisten mac. In der wârheit: möhte got der vater mit aller sîner almehticheit iht edelers gegeben der sêle in ir natûre und möhte diu sêle iht edelers von im genemen, des selben adels müeste got der vater beiten mit

2. Sap. 18:14–5: ‘Cum enim quietum silentium contineret omnia, et nox in suo cursu medium iter haberet, omnipotens sermo tuus de caelo a regalibus sedibus, durus debellator in mediam exterminii terram prosilivit’. Eckhart uses the reading of the Officium, Introitus dom. infra oct. Nativ. Domini, Arch. f. 395ra: ‘Dum medium silentium tenerent omnia, et nox in suo cursu medium iter haberet, omnipotens sermo tuus, Domine, de celis a regalibus sedibus venit’. Eckhart knows the difference between the two versions, and he prefers the second one, see Eckhart, In Sap. n. 285 (LW II 618, 5–9): ‘Et hoc est quod cantat ecclesia: ‘dum medium silentium tenerent omnia’, id est: dum omnia tenerent ipsum medium, et omne medium silentium, id est silens’. See Hugo, Postilla III, f. 151vb: ‘Cum enim quietum silentium id est conticinius noctis…’, to interpret ‘silence’ in a threefold way: ‘Cum enim medium silentium contineret omnia etc. Et notatur ibi triplex silentium. Primum, medium et ultimum. Primum fuit ante legem, scilicet ignorantia languoris propter quam solebant a quaerendo medico … Medium fuit sub lege scilicet desperatio sanitatis, propter quam silebant a quaerendo medico… Ultimum est sub evangelio, scilicet adeptio

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

179

‘Dum medium silentium tenerent omnia.’2 We celebrate here, in time, the eternal birth which God the Father has born and births unceasingly in eternity, because this same birth is now born in time, in human nature. Saint Augustine says: ‘What does it avail me that this birth is always happening, if it does not happen in me? That it should happen in me is what matters.’3 Now it is our duty to talk about this birth, how it can happen in us and be perfected in the good soul, where God the Father shall be His eternal Word that speaks in the perfect soul. For what I say here is to be understood of the good, perfected man who ‘walked on the way of God and still is walking’,4 not of a natural, untrained man, for he is entirely removed and knows absolutely nothing of this birth. The wise man5 says a word: ‘When all things lay in the midst of silence, then from on high, from the royal throne’, ‘descended down into me a secret word’.6 From here the homily should take its start. Three things are to be remembered here. The first thing is, where God the Father speaks His Word in the soul, where this birth takes place and where she receives it.7 Because this must be in the very purest, noblest, subtlest part that the soul is capable of. In truth, if God the Father in His omnipotence could endow the soul with anything more noble, and if the soul could have taken from Him anything nobler, then the Father would have had to delay the

sanitatis, propter quam silebant a quaerimonia et planctu… Vel aliter: Primum silentium fuit in casu Luciferi … Medium silentium fuit in casu Adae … Tertium silentium erit in fine saeculi … Et hoc est: Cum medium silentium contineret omnia, id est cum nihil fieret secundum legem’. As we will see in the next sentence, ‘geburt’ is difficult to translate, as it usually means ‘birth’, but in the opening section, Eckhart clearly thinks of the one who was born in this birth, both possible meanings of ‘geburt’. 3. ‘Sant Augustînus’: see, instead, Origenes, Homiliae in Lucam, c. 22, ed. Rauer, 144, 12–5: ‘Quid enim tibi prodest, si Christus quondam venit in carne, nisi ad tuam quoque animam venerit? Oremus, ut illius cotidie nobis adventus fiat…’ 4. See Deut. 8:6: ‘et ambules in viis eius’. 5. Sap. 18:14–5, see above n. 1. 6. Iob 4:12: ‘Porro ad me dictum est verbum absconditum’. 7. ‘wâ si dises enpfenclich sî’: ‘si’ = the soul, ‘dises’ = the Word.

180

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

dirre geburt. Dar umbe muoz sich | (340) diu sêle, in der disiu geburt geschehen sol, gar lûter halten und gar adellîche leben und gar eine und gar inne, niht ûzloufen durch die vünf sinne in manicvalticheit der crêatûren, mêr: alles inne sîn und ein sîn; und in dem lûtersten dâ ist sîn stat, im versmâhet8 iht minners. Daz ander teil dirre predige ist, wie sich der mensche ze disem werke sülle halten oder ze disem însprechenne oder geberne: ob im nützer sî, daz er ein mitewürken mit disen habe, und dâ mite er werbe und verdiene, daz disiu geburt in im geschehe und geborn werde, alsô daz der mensche in im schepfe ein bilde in sîner vernunft und in sînem gedanken und sich dar ane üebe, alsô gedenkende: got ist guot, wîse, almehtic, êwic, und swaz er alsô erdenken mac von gote, ob daz mê diene und vürdere dise veterlîche geburt, oder daz man sich entziehe und ledic | (341) mache von allen gedenken und von allen worten und werken und von allen bilden und verstânnes, und daz man sich zemâle halte in einem lûtern gotlîdenne, und halte sich müezic und lâze got in im würken: in welchem der mensche allermeist diene ze dirre geburt. Daz dritte ist, wie grôz der nutz sî, der an dirre geburt liget. (342) | Nû merket ze dem êrsten! Ich wil iu dise rede bewæren mit natiurlîchen reden, daz ir ez selber möhtet grîfen, daz ez alsô ist, wie ich doch der schrift mê gloube dan mir selber. Aber ez gât iu mê în und baz von bewærter rede. (343) | Nû nemen wir daz êrste wort, daz er sprichet9: ‘enmitten in dem swîgenne’ ‘wart mir îngesprochen ein verborgen wort’. Ach, herre, wâ ist daz swîgen und wâ ist diu stat, dâ diz wort îngesprochen wirt? Sehet aber, als ich vor sprach10: ez ist in dem lûtersten, daz diu sêle geleisten mac, in dem edelsten, in dem grunde, jâ in dem wesene der sêle11, daz ist in dem verborgensten der sêle. Dâ ist ‘daz mittel swîgen’12, wan dar enkam nie crêatûre în noch nie kein bilde, | (344) noch diu sêle enhât dâ weder würken noch verstân, noch enweiz dâ umbe kein bilde, weder von ir selber noch von keiner crêatûre. 8. ‘und … versmâhet’: the interpunction, different from DW, indicates the subject change. 9. See above Sap. 18:14 and Iob 4:12. For the translation of ‘enmitten’ see the opening of the homily. 10. See above n. 6.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

181

birth for the coming of this same nobility. Therefore, the soul in which this birth is to take place must hold herself very pure and live a very noble life, entirely united and fully interior, must not run out through her five senses into the manifoldness of creatures; rather, she has to be totally interior and to be one; and her place is in this purest part, He disdains8 anything less. The second element of this homily deals with the question how man should react to this work or to this speaking into and giving, whether it might be more useful to be a co–operator with these and procure and deserve them so that this birth might happen in him and He would be born, that is, that one creates an image in oneself, in the intellect and in the mind and practices with it, thus thinking: God is good, wise, omnipotent, eternal, and what he might think of God, whether this would be more useful and promote this fatherly birth, or whether one should detach oneself and become free of all thoughts, all words, all works and of all images and wishful thinking, that one should keep oneself entirely in a pure state of enduring God, and keep oneself idle and let God do the work in oneself, in which man can serve most for this birth. The third is, how great the profit is which results from this birth. Now, note first: I would like to prove to you this statement using common language, so that you might yourself grasp that it is as stated, because, indeed, I believe Scripture more than myself. Yet, it reaches you more intensely and better by a proof. Let us now take the first phrase, where it says: ‘in the midst of silence’ ‘there descended down into me a secret word’.9 O Lord, where is silence and where is the place to which this word descends down? Yet look, as I said before:10 It is in the purest part which the soul is capable of,11 in the most noble, in the ground, indeed, in the being of the soul. There is ‘the midst of silence’,12 as neither creature nor image could reach into there, nor can the soul there act or know, nor does she know an image, neither of herself nor of any creature.

11. ‘in dem wesene der sêle’: see Eckhart, Serm. XXV/2, n. 267 (LW IV 243, 10–1): ‘[gratia non est in potentia animae, sed] in substantia, in intimo scilicet vel potius in ipso esse animae’. 12. Eckhart moves here to the second interpretation of ‘medium silentium’; the medium is silence.

182

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Alliu diu werk, diu diu sêle würket, diu würket si mit den kreften: swaz si verstât, daz verstât si mit verstantnisse13; sô si gedenket, daz tuot si mit gehugnisse; sô si minnet, daz tuot si mit dem willen. Und alsô würket si mit den kreften und niht mit dem wesene. Allez ir ûzwürken haftet iemer an etwaz mittels. Diu kraft des sehennes enwürket niht dan durch diu ougen, anders enmac si enkeine wîs gesehen würken noch geben. Und alsô ist ez mit allen andern sinnen: allez ir ûzwürken würket si durch etwaz mittels14. Mêr: in dem wesene enist kein werk. Dar umbe hât diu sêle in dem wesene kein werk. Mêr: die krefte, dâ si mite würket, | (345) die vliezent ûz dem grunde des wesens15. Mêr: in dem grunde dâ ist ‘daz mittel swîgen’, hie ist aleine ruowe und ein vîren ze dirre geburt und ze disem werke, daz got der vater aldâ sprichet sîn wort. Wan daz enist von natûre nihtes enpfenclich dan aleine des götlîchen wesens âne allez mittel. Got gât hie in die sêle mit sînem allem, niht mit sînem teile. Got gât hie in | (346) den grunt der sêle. Nieman enkumet in den grunt der sêle dan aleine got. Die crêatûren enmügen niht in den grunt der sêle. Sie müezen hie ûze blîben in den kreften. Dâ sihet si wol ir bilde ane, dâ mite si16 îngezogen ist und herberge hât enpfangen17. Wan swenne die krefte der sêle rüerent die crêatûren, sô nement sie und schepfent bilde und glîchnisse von den crêatûren und ziehent die in sich. Und von dem sô bekennent sie die crêatûren. Niht næher | (347) enmac diu crêatûre komen in die sêle, noch niemer engenæhete diu sêle keiner crêatûre, si enhæte des êrsten williclîche ir bilde in sich enpfangen. Von den gegenwertigen bilden sô nâhet si sich den crêatûren — wan bilde ist ein dinc, daz diu sêle schepfet mit den kreften von den dingen, ez sî ein stein, ein rôse, ein mensche oder swaz ez sî, daz si bekennen wil —, sô nimet si daz bilde her vür, daz si vor îngezogen hât, und alsô mac si sich mit in vereinen. (348) | Swenne aber der mensche alsô ein bilde enpfæhet, daz muoz von nôt komen von ûzwendic în durch die sinne. Und dar umbe sô enist 13. ‘verstantnisse … gehugnisse … willen’: ‘intelligentia, memoria, voluntas’; this threefold structure of the soul can also be found in Augustinus, De Trinitate X, c. 11, n. 18, ed. Mountain and Glorie, 330, 29–331, 63. See also Hom. 12* [Q 14], n. 3. 14. The two phrases ‘Diu kraft des sehennes’ and ‘durch etwaz mittels’ are far more readily understood in the critical text published in LE I. The translation follows the latter text, but assumes a different punctuation.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

183

Every work that the soul does, she does using powers: what she understands she understands through the mind.13 When she remembers, she does so through memory. When she loves, she does it through will. Hence, she acts through the powers and not through her being. Every outside activity always depends on a medium. The power of sight does not work unless through the eyes, otherwise one will not be able to see or give sight in any way. And likewise it is with all other senses. All her outside activities happen through a kind of medium.14 In contrast, there is no work in the being. That is the reason why the soul has no work in the being. Moreover, the powers that she uses, they flow from the ground of being.15 Moreover, there, in the ground, is ‘the midst of silence’, here is solely rest and a celebration for this birth and for this work, that God the Father may speak His word there. For this part is by nature receptive to nothing save only the divine essence, without mediation. Here, God goes into the soul with His all, not with parts of Him. Here, God goes into the ground of the soul. Nobody comes into the ground of the soul, except God. The creatures cannot enter the ground of the soul. They have to remain outside in the powers. There, she looks clearly into her image through which it16 has been pulled in and has received lodging.17 For whenever the powers of the soul make contact with creatures, they take from creatures and create images and likenesses and absorb these. That is how they know creatures. A creature cannot get closer towards the inside of the soul, and the soul never approaches a creature, unless she has first willingly received its image in herself. Based on the images, present in her, she approaches the creatures, because an image is something that the soul creates of things through the powers, be it a stone, a rose, a man or whatever she may know. And she picks up the image which she had pulled in before, and this way she can unite herself with it. When, however, a human being receives an image in this way, it must necessarily come in from outside through the senses. Hence, 15. ‘Dar umbe hât diu sêle in dem wesene kein werk. Mêr: die krefte, dâ si mite würket, die vliezent ûz dem grunde des wesens’: Serm. XLV, n. 448 (LW IV 374, 9–10): ‘Caput vocat intellectivum sive mentem vel etiam ipsam substantiam animae, de qua omnes fluunt potentiae’. 16. ‘si’ (‘ella’): the creature, see the following note. 17. According to the powers the creature finds the mediating image which is introjected into the soul and fixed to her memory.

184

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

der sêle kein dinc als unbekant als si ir selber. Alsô sprichet ein meister18, daz diu sêle kein bilde von ir selber geschepfen enmac noch gewürken. Dar umbe enmac si sich selber mit nihte bekennen, wan bilde koment alles în durch die sinne. Des enmac si kein bilde von ir selber gehaben. Und dâ von weiz si alliu anderiu dinc, und sich selber niht. Keines dinges weiz si als wênic als sich selber durch des mittels willen. Und daz wizzet ouch, daz si innen ledic und vrî ist von allem mittel und von allen bilden. | (349) Und daz ist ouch diu sache, daz sich got lediclîche mit ir vereinen mac sunder bilde oder glîchnisse. Dû enmaht ez niht gelougenen: swaz mügelicheit dû einem werkmeister gibest, dû müestest die selben mügelicheit gote geben sunder alle mâze. Als nû ie ein meister wîser und mehtiger ist, sô ouch sîn werk unmittellîcher geschihet und einveltiger ist. Der mensche hât vil mittels in sînen ûzwendigen werken. Ê er diu volbringe, als er sie in im gebildet hât, dâ hœret vil bereitschaft ze der materien. Mêr: diu sunne in ir meisterschaft und in irm würkenne, daz ist erliuhten, daz tuot si gar snelliclîche. Als schiere als si irn schîn ûzgiuzet, in dem selben ougenblicke sô ist alliu diu werlt vol liehtes an allen enden. Mêr: dar über ist der engel: der bedarf noch minner mittels an sînen werken und hât ouch minner | (350) bilde. Ie hœher der engel ist, ie minner bilde er hât. Der alleroberste Seraphîn der enhât niht dan ein bilde. Alle, die under im19 sint, waz sie nement in manicvalticheit, daz nimet er allez in einem. Mêr: got bedarf keines bildes noch enhât kein bilde. Got würket in der sêle âne alle mittel, bilde oder glîchnisse, jâ, in dem grunde, dâ nie bilde înkam dan er selber mit sînem eigenen wesene. Daz enmac niht getuon kein crêatûre. Wie gebirt got der vater sînen sun in dem grunde der sêle? Als die crêatûren tuont in bilden und in glîchnissen? Nein, entriuwen! Mêr: in aller der wîse als er in in der êwicheit gebirt, noch minner noch mê. Eyâ, wie gebirt er in dâ? Daz merket! Sehet, got der vater hât | (351) ein volkomen însehen in sich selber und ein abgründic durchkennen sîn selbes mit im selber, niht mit keinem bilde. Und alsô gebirt der vater sînen sun in wârer einunge götlîcher natûre. | (352) Sehet, in der selben 18. See Aristotle, De anima III, c. 4, 430a2–3, Averroes, De anima III, comm. 15, ed. Crawford, 434, 6–20. See also Theodericus de Vriberg, De visione beatifica 1.1.1.3.4., ed. Mojsisch, 21: ‘[intellectus] intelligit se, inquantum intelligit se olim factum in actu per aliam intellectionem, et sic intelligit se sicut alia secundum Philosophum et exponit Commentator, quod, sicut alia intelligit per actus et formas suas, quibus talia sunt aliquid in actu, sic intelligit se, inquantum aliquando

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

185

nothing is to the soul as unknown as herself. Accordingly, a master says18 that the soul cannot create or make an image of herself. Hence, she cannot know herself at all, as all images come in through the senses. Thus, she cannot possess an image of herself. Therefore, she knows all other things, except herself. Of nothing does she know as little as of herself, because of the medium. And you should also know that inside she is bare and free of any medium and of all images. And that is also the reason why God can only unite Himself with her without images or likenesses. You cannot deny: whatever capability you ascribe to any craftsman, you would need to ascribe the same capability to God without limit. Now, the more any master is more skilled and powerful, the more immediately is his work effected, and the simpler it is. Man uses many media in his external works. Before he can execute these according to the images that he has created in himself, there is a great preparation of the material needed. In contrast, the sun in its mastery and its activity, namely giving light, acts very fast. As soon as her radiance is poured forth, in the same instant the world is full of light to all its ends. Further, above it is the angel: he needs even fewer media for his works and has even fewer images. The higher the angel is, the fewer images he has. The highest Seraph has but a single image: whatever those underneath him19 take in manifoldness, he takes all in one. Furthermore, God neither needs any image, nor has an image. God acts in the soul without any medium, image or similitude, indeed, in the ground no image ever entered except He Himself with his own being. This no creature can do. How does God the Father give birth to His Son in the ground of the soul? Is it like creatures who act with images and similitudes? No, certainly not! On the contrary: In the same way as He gives birth in eternity, no less no more. Well, but how does He give birth to Him there? Note this! See, God the Father has a perfect insight into Himself and a profound knowledge of Himself through Himself, not through an image. And thus the Father gives birth to His Son in true union of

factus est in actu per speciem intelligibilem aliam ab ea, qua nunc intelligit…’ Auctoritates Aristotelis, 6, n. 147, ed. Hamesse, 186: ‘Intellectus noster intelligit se sicut alia per species aliarum’; Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 658 (LW III 573, 11–2). 19. ‘ihm’: the highest Seraph.

186

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

wîse und in keiner andern gebirt got der vater sînen sun in der sêle grunde und in irm wesene und einiget sich alsô mit ir. Wan wære dâ dehein bilde, sô enwære dâ niht dehein einunge. Und in der wâren einunge liget alliu iriu sælicheit. Nû möhtet ir sprechen, in der sêle ensî niht dan bilde von natûre. Nein, niht! Wan wære daz wâr, sô enwürde diu sêle niemer sælic, wan got enmöhte keine crêatûre machen, in der dû volkomen sælicheit möhtest nemen. Anders enwære got niht diu hœhste sælicheit und daz | (353) jüngste ende, daz doch sîn natûre ist, und wil, daz er sî begin und ende aller dinge. Ez enmac keiniu crêatûre dîniu sælicheit sîn, sô enmac si ouch hie niht dîniu volkomenheit gesîn, wan diu volkomenheit dises lebens, daz ist aller tugende, der volget nâch volkomenheit jenes lebens. Und dâ von muost dû von nôt sîn und wonen in dem wesene und in dem grunde. Dâ muoz dich got rüeren mit sînem einvaltigen wesene âne mittel keines bildes. Ein ieglich bilde daz enwîset noch enmeinet sich selber niht. Ez ziuhet und wîset alles dâ hine, des bilde ez ist20. Und sît daz man kein bilde enhât dan von dem, daz ûzwendic ist und durch die sinne îngezogen wirt von den crêatûren, und wîset ouch alles dâ hine, des bilde ez ist, sô wære daz unmügelich, daz dû iemer möhtest sælic werden von keinem bilde. Dâ von muoz dâ ein swîgen und ein stille sîn und der vater muoz dâ sprechen und gebern sînen sun und würken sîniu werk âne alliu bilde. (354) | Daz ander21 ist: waz dem menschen gehœre sînes werkes her zuo ze würkenne, dâ mite er erwerbe und verdiene, daz disiu geburt in im geschehe und volbrâht werde; ob daz iht bezzer sî, daz der mensche etwaz sînes werkes dar zuo tuo, als ein înbilden und ein gedenken an got, oder daz der mensche sich halte in einem swîgenne, in einer stille und ruowe und lâze got in im sprechen und würken, und warte er aleine gotes werk in im. Ich spriche aber, als ich vor sprach22: disiu rede und disiu wârheit gehœrent aleine guoten und volkomenen menschen zuo, die dâ in sich und an sich gezogen hânt aller tugende wesen, alsô daz die tugende wesenlîche ûz in vliezent sunder ir zuotuon und vor allen dingen | (355) daz wirdic leben und diu edel lêre unsers herren Jêsû Kristî in in lebe. 20. See Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 23 (LW III 19): ‘Imago enim, inquantum imago est, nihil sui accipit a subiecto in quo est, sed totum suum esse accipit ab obiecto, cuius est imago’.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

187

divine nature. Note, in the same way and in no other way, God the Father gives birth to His Son in the soul’s ground and in her being and thus unites Himself with her. If there were an image, there could not be unity. But in true unity all her happiness rests. Now you may say, there is nothing in the soul but images of nature. No, no! Because if this were true, the soul could never be happy, as God does not wish to make a creature from which you can receive perfect happiness. Otherwise, God would not be the highest happiness and the ultimate end which is His nature, and He wishes to be principle and end of all things. No creature can be your happiness; hence, none can here be your perfection, as the perfection of this life, i.e. of all virtues, is followed by perfection of that life. And of that you have to be by necessity and to take lodging in the being and in the ground. There God has to touch you with His simple being without the medium of any image. No image represents and signifies itself. It pulls and points entirely towards that of which it is an image.20 And as you see that you do not have an image except of something external that is pulled from creatures inwards through the senses, and also points entirely towards that of which it is an image, thus it is impossible that you ever might be happy through an image. That is the reason why there must be silence and rest, and the Father must speak there and give His Son, and work His work without any image. The second part21 is: what is man’s own contribution to His action, in order to procure and deserve that this birth takes place in him and would be delivered? Whether it would be better that man would contribute to His action, such as to imagine and think about God, or whether man should remain in silence, still and resting and letting God speak and act in him, and wait alone for God’s work in him. I say, however, as I said before:22 This statement and this truth belong solely to good and perfect men who have pulled in and towards them the being of all virtues, so that these virtues flow substantially out of them without their own doing, and more importantly that worthy life and the noble teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ should live 21. ‘Daz ander’: see the subdivision made by Eckhart above in n. 5. 22. See above n. 3.

188

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Die suln daz wizzen, daz daz aller beste und daz aller edelste, dar man zuo komen mac, in disem lebene ist: dû solt swîgen und lâz got würken und sprechen23. Als dâ alle die krefte sint abegezogen von allen irn werken und von allen bilden, alsô wirt diz wort gesprochen. Dar umbe sprach er gar wol24: ‘enmitten in dem swîgenne’ wart mir diz heimlich wort zuogesprochen. Und dar umbe: sô dû alle dîne krefte ie mê maht geziehen in ein vergezzen aller dinge und ir bilde, diu dû in dich ie gezüge und ie mê dû dich den crêatûren und irn bilden verrest, ie dû disem næher bist und ie enpfenclîcher. Möhtest dû aller dinge zemâle unwizzende werden, jâ, möhtest dû komen in ein unwizzen dînes eigenen | (356) lîbes und lebens, als sant Paulô geschach, dô er sprach25: ‘ob ich wære in dem lîbe oder niht, des enweiz ich niht, got der weiz ez’. Dô hâte der geist alle die krefte alsô gar in sich gezogen, daz im des lîchamen was vergezzen. Dô enworhte weder gehugnisse noch verstantnisse noch sinne noch ouch die krefte, die irn învluz in der wîse solten haben, daz sie den lîchamen solten vüeren und zieren. Der brant und diu hitze was ûfenthalten. Und dâ von ennam der | (357) lîchame niht abe, die wîle er in den drin tagen niht enâz noch entrank. Alsô geschach Moyse26, dô er vastete vierzic tage ûf dem berge und er enwart nie deste krenker. Er was des lesten tages alsô stark als des êrsten. Alsô solte der mensche entwîchen allen sinnen und înkêren alle sîne krefte und komen in ein vergezzen aller dinge und sîn selbes. Hie von sprach ein meister ze der sêle27: ‘entziuch dich von der unruowe ûzwendiger werke. Dar nâch: vliuch und verbirc dich vor dem gestürme inwendiger gedanke, wan sie unvride machent’. Dar umbe, sol got sîn wort sprechen in der sêle, sô muoz si in ruowe und in vride sîn. Und danne sô sprichet er sîn wort und sich selber in der sêle und niht ein bilde, mêr: sich selber. (358)

23. The punctuation of DW has been changed (see also LE I). 24. Eckhart combines two quotations, of which only the first is literal (‘enmitten in einem swîgenne’); see for the second Iob 4:12: ‘Porro ad me dictum est verbum absconditum’. 25. II Cor. 12:2: ‘sive in corpore nescio, sive extra corpus nescio, Deus scit, raptum huiusmodi usque ad tertium caelum’. (Note that the full citation of ‘raptum ad tertium caelum’ never appears in the works of Eckhart).

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

189

in them. They should know that the best and the most noble thing that one can achieve in this life is the following: You should remain silent and let God act and speak.23 When all the powers are withdrawn from all their works and all images, thus this word will be spoken. Therefore he said well:24 ‘In the midst of silence’ this word intimately descended into me. Hence: the more you might pull all your powers towards a forgetfulness of all things and their images which you have ever pulled into you, and the more you withdraw from all creatures and their images, the closer you are to Him and the more receptive of Him. Would you wish to become entirely ignorant of all things; indeed, would you wish to attain an ignorance of your own body and life, as it happened to Saint Paul, when he said: ‘Whether in the body or out of it I cannot tell; God knows’,25 there the Spirit has pulled all powers into Himself so that he forgot about his body. There no memory or intention or senses or even powers worked which could have impacted on the body in order to direct or embellish it. The warmth and the heat were suspended, so that the body did not waste during the three days in which he neither ate nor drank. This also happened to Moses,26 when he fasted for forty days on the mountain, but he never became weaker. He was as powerful on the last day as he was on the first. Thus, man ought to escape all the senses, bring home all his powers and attain an ignorance of all things and of himself. Of this a master spoke to the soul: ‘Withdraw from the unrest of external activities, then flee and hide from the turmoil of inward thoughts, for they but create discord.’27 Therefore, God should speak His Word in the soul, for her to rest and stay in peace. And then, He speaks His Word and Himself in the soul, but not an image, rather, Himself.

26. Exod. 24:18; 23:28. 27. Anselmus, Proslogion, c. 1, ed. Schmitt, 97, 4–5: ‘Eia nunc, homuncio, fuge paululum occupationes tuas, absconde te modicum a tumultuosis cogitationibus tuis. Abice nunc onerosas curas’.

190

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

| Sant Dionysius sprach28: got hât kein bilde noch glîchnisse sîn selbes, wan er ist wesenlîche allez guot, wârheit und wesen. Got würket alliu sîniu werk in im selber und ûz im selber in einem blicke. Niht enwænet, dô got himel und erde mahte und alliu dinc, daz er hiute einez mahte und daz ander morgen. Aleine schrîbet Moyses alsô: er weste doch daz wol, aber er tete ez durch der liute willen, die ez niht anders enkunden genemen. Got entete niht mê dar zuo, dan aleine er wolte. Er | (359) sprach und sie gewurden29. Got würket âne mittel und âne bilde. Ie mê dû âne bilde bist, ie mê dû sînes înwürkennes enpfenclîcher bist, und ie mê îngekêret und vergezzener, ie mê disem næher. Hie zuo mânete Dionysius sînen jünger Timotheum und sprach30: ‘lieber mîn sun Timothee, dû solt mit umbegekêrten sinnen dich erswingen über dich selber und über alle krefte, über redelîcheit und über vernunft, über werk und wîse und wesen in die verborgene | (360) stille dünsternisse, ûf daz dû komest in ein bekantnisse des unbekanten übergoteten gotes’. Ez muoz ein entziehen sîn von allen dingen. Gote dem versmâhet ze würkenne in bilden. Nû möhtest dû sprechen: swaz got würket âne bilde in dem grunde und in dem wesene, des enmac ich niht gewizzen, wan die krefte niht genemen enkünnen dan in bilden, wan sie alliu dinc müezen nemen und bekennen mit irn eigenen bilden. Sie enmügen ein pfert niht | (361) erkennen noch genemen in eines menschen bilde. Und dar umbe, wan alliu bilde in sie31 koment von ûzen her, dar umbe ist ez ir verborgen. Und daz ist ir allernützest. Daz unwizzen ziuhet sie in ein wunder und tuot sie disem nâchjagen, wan si bevindet wol, daz ez ist, und enweiz aber niht, wie noch waz ez ist. Wenne der mensche weiz der dinge sache, alzehant sô ist er der dinge müede und suochet aber ein anderz ze ervarne und ze wizzenne und quilet und jâmert iemer mê alsô nâch wizzenne32 und enhât doch kein bîblîben. Dar umbe, diz unbekante bekantnisse daz enthaltet sie bî disem blîbende und tuot sie disem nâchjagen. 28. Ps.–Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 9, § 6 (PG 3, 913C), Dionysiaca 467: ‘Theologi autem existentem super omnia deum, secundum quod ipse est, nulli dicunt similem…’; 4, § 3 (PG 3, 697A), Dionysiaca 158: ‘in ipso solo non existens substantiae excessus … et sine mente existens excellens sapientia et quaecumque in bono non formatorum sunt excedentis formationis’. 29. Ps. 32:9; 148:5: ‘dixit, et facta sunt’. 30. Ps.–Dionysius, De mystica theologia, c. 1, § 1 (PG 3, 997B), Dionysiaca 557–69: ‘Tu autem, amice Thimothee, circa misticas visiones forti contritione et sensus derelinque et intellectuales operationes,

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

191

Saint Dionysius says:28 God has neither image nor similitude of Himself, because He is substantially total goodness, truth and being. God does all His work in Himself and out of Himself in one instant. Do not imagine that God, when He made heaven and earth and all things, made one day one thing and the next day another. Even though Moses describes it like that: He really knew better, but he did so on account of the people who were not able to grasp it otherwise. God did no more than He wished, He spoke and they came about.29 God acts without intermediary and without image. The more you are without image, the more you are receptive to His inner activity, and the more you are turned inwardly and are ignorant, the more you are close to Him. To this Dionysius exhorted his disciple Timothy by saying: ‘My dear son Timothy, you should with overturned senses soar above yourself and above all your powers, above mind and intellect, above work, modes and being, into the hidden still darkness, that you may come to a knowledge of the unknown beyond–divine God.’30 It needs to be a withdrawal from all things. God scorns to work through images. Now you may say: What does God do without images in the ground and in being? That I cannot know, because the powers can only receive through images, as they have to receive and know everything through their own images. They cannot know or grasp a horse through the image of a man. And because all images come into her31 from outside, that is why it is hidden from her. Yet, this is most useful for her. The ignorance forces her to wonder and to chase after it, because she senses rightly that it exists, yet she does not know what and how it is. As soon as man knows the cause of something, he becomes tired of it and searches to know and understand another one and increasingly is torn and laments for want of knowing,32 yet he does not remain with it. Hence, this unknown knowledge keeps him sticking to it and makes him chase after it. et omnia sensibilia et intelligibilia et omnia existentia et non existentia, et sicut est possibile, ignote consurge ad eius unitionem qui est super omnem substantiam et cognitionem. Et enim excessu tui ipsius et omnium irretentibili absolute, et munde ad supersubstantialem divinarum tenebrarum radium, cuncta aufferens et a cunctis absolutus sursum agens’. The quote could be extended up to ‘allen dingen’. 31. ‘sie’ designates the powers of the soul in the plural, whereas ‘sie’ in the singular refers to the soul. 32. ‘quilet und jâmert … nâch wizzenne’: see Hom. 16* [S 104], n. 15.

192

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Hie von sprach der wîse man33: ‘enmitten in der naht, dô alliu dinc wâren in einer stille und swîgende, dô wart mir zuogesprochen ein verborgen wort, daz kam in einer dieplîchen | (362) wîse verstolnlîche’. Wie nante er ez ein wort, dô ez verborgen was? Des wortes natûre ist, daz ez offenbâret, daz verborgen ist. Ez offente sich und glenzte mir vor, daz ez etwaz wære offenbârende. Und ez was mir got kunt tuonde34. Dâ von heizet ez ein wort. Mêr: ez was mir verborgen, waz ez wære. Daz was sîn verstolnlich komen in einem geriune und in einer stille, umbe daz ez sich offenbârte. Sehet, dar umbe muoz man im und sol im nâchloufen, die wîle ez verborgen ist. Ez schein und was verborgen35. Ez meinet, daz wir im nâchjâmern und nâchqueln36. Hie zuo manet uns sant Paulus37, daz wir disem nâchjagen biz daz wir ez erspüeren, und niemer ûfhœren biz daz wir ez begrîfen. Dô er in den dritten himel gezucket wart in die kuntschaft | (363) gotes und gesehen hâte alliu dinc und dô er wider kam, dô enwas ez im nihtes niht vergezzen. Mêr: ez was im sô verre inne in dem grunde, dar sîne vernunft niht înkomen enmohte. Ez was im bedecket. Dâ von muoste er nâchloufen und ez ervolgen in im, niht ûzer im. Ez ist zemâle inne, niht ûze, mêr: alles inne. Und wan er daz wol weste, dar umbe sprach er38: ‘ich bin sicher, daz noch tôt noch’ kein arbeit ‘mich dâ von gescheiden mac’, des ich in mir bevinde. Hie von sprach ein heidenischer meister39 ein schœne wort ze einem andern meister: ‘ich wirde eines in mir gewâr, daz glenzet vor mîner vernunft. Des bevinde ich wol, daz ez etwaz ist. Aber waz ez sî, des enkan ich niht verstân. Denne aleine dünket mich des: künde ich ez begrîfen, ich bekante alle wârheit’. Dô sprach der ander meister: ‘Eyâ, dem volge nâch! Wan kündest dû daz begrîfen, sô hætest dû eine samenunge aller güete und hætest êwic leben’. Von disem sprach ouch sant Augustînus40: ich wirde eines in mir gewâr, daz vorspilet und vorblicket | (364) mîner sêle. Würde daz volbrâht und bestætiget in mir, daz müeste êwic leben sîn. Ez birget sich und wîset sich doch.

33. Iob 4:12: ‘Porro ad me dictum est verbum absconditum, et quasi furtive’. 34. God as Word is the hidden revealer. 35. Perhaps a reference to Ioh. 1:5: ‘lux in tenebris lucet’. 36. See note 31. 37. See the following note.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

193

Of this the wise man spoke: ‘In the midst of the night, when all things lay in the midst of silence and quietness, then from on high descended down into me a secret word which came like a thief by stealth’;33 Why did he call it a word, when it was hidden? The word’s nature is to reveal what is hidden. It revealed itself to me and clarified before me that it was something revealing. And it was making God known to me.34 Because of this it is called a word. Yet, what it was, remained hidden from me. That was its stealthy coming in a whispering stillness to reveal itself. That is why we have to and should chase after it, while it is hidden. It shone, yet was hidden.35 We are meant to lament and suffer torments for it.36 To this Saint Paul37 exhorts us that we chase after it to the point that we sense it and never stop until we have grasped it. As he was lifted into the third heaven to the message of God and had seen all things and come back, he had forgotten nothing; rather, it was so far deep in the ground that his intellect could not enter. It was concealed. For that reason, he had to chase it and pursue it inside, not outside himself. It is entirely inside, not outside, rather: all is inside. And because he knew this, he said: ‘For I am persuaded that neither death nor any affliction can separate me from what I find within me.’38 About this a pagan master made39 a fine statement to another master: ‘I became aware of something in me which shines in my intellect. I can clearly perceive that it is something, but what it may be I cannot grasp. Yet I think if I could only seize it I should know all truth.’ Then, the other master spoke: ‘Well then, follow it! For if you could seize it you would possess the sum total of all good and have eternal life!’ About this also Saint Augustine spoke: ‘I become aware of something within me that plays and looks before my soul; were this perfected and fully established in me, that would surely be eternal life!’40 It hides, yet shows itself. 38. Rom. 8:38–9: ‘Certus sum enim quia neque mors, neque vita … poterit nos separare a caritate Dei’. The last part ‘des ich in mir bevinde’ is not part of the quote (‘a caritate Dei’). 39. ‘ein heidenischer meister’: unidentified reference. 40. Augustinus, Confessiones X, c. 40, n. 65, ed. Verheijen, 191, 21–3: ‘Et aliquando intromittis me in affectum multum inusitatum introrsus ad nescio quam dulcedinem, quae si perficiatur in me, nescio quid erit, quod vita ista non erit’.

194

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Ez komet aber in einer dieplîchen wîse und meinet, ez welle der sêle alliu dinc benemen und versteln. Aber daz ez sich etwaz wîset und offenbâret, dâ mite wolte ez die sêle reizen und im nâch ziehen und ir selbes berouben und benemen. Hie von sprach der prophête41: ‘herre, nim in irn geist’ und ‘gip in wider dînen geist’. Diz meinte ouch diu minnende sêle, dô si sprach42: ‘mîn sêle zersmalz und zervlôz, dô der liebe sîn wort sprach’. Dô er îngienc, dô muoste ich abenemen. Daz meinte ouch Kristus, dô er sprach43: ‘der iht læzet durch mich, der sol hundertvalt widernemen’. Und wer mich ouch wil haben, ‘der muoz sich sîn selbes und aller dinge verzîhen. Und wer mir wil dienen, der muoz mir volgen’. Er ensol niht den sinnen volgen. Nû möhtest dû sprechen: eyâ, herre, ir wellet der sêle irn natiurlîchen louf umbekêren und wider ir natûre tuon. Ir natûre ist, daz si durch die sinne neme und in bilden. Wellet ir den orden umbekêren? (365) | Nein! Waz weist dû, waz adels got geleget habe in die natûre, diu noch niht alliu geschriben ensint, mêr: noch verborgen? Wan die von dem adel der sêle schrîbent, die enwâren noch niht næher komen, dan sie ir natiurlîche vernunft truoc. Sie enwâren nie in den grunt komen. Des muoste in vil verborgen sîn und blîben unbekant. Dar umbe sprach der prophête44: ‘ich wil sitzen und wil swîgen’ und ‘wil hœren, waz got in mir spreche’. Wan ez ist sô verborgen und dar umbe kam diz wort in der naht in dem dünsternisse45. Dâ von schrîbet | (366) sant Johannes46: ‘daz lieht liuhtet in dem dünsternisse’. ‘Ez kam in sîn eigen und alle die ez enpfiengen, die wurden gewalticlîche gotes süne: in wart gewalt gegeben, gotes süne ze werdenne’. Nû prüeve hie den nutz und die vruht des heimelichen wortes und dis dünsternisses! Der sun des himelschen vaters enwirt niht aleine geborn in disem dünsternisse, daz ‘sîn eigen’ ist. Mêr: dû wirst ouch dâ geborn des selben himelschen vaters kint noch keines andern, und er gibet dir die gewalt. 41. Ps. 103:29–30: ‘Auferes spiritus eorum … emittes spiritum tuum’. 42. Cant. 5:6: ‘Pessulum ostii aperui dilecto meo … Anima mea liquefacta est, ut locutus est’. 43. Matth. 19:29: ‘Et omnis, qui reliquit domum, vel fratres, aut sorores, aut patrem, aut matrem, aut uxorem, aut filios, aut agros propter nomen meum, centuplum accipiet, et vitam aeternam possidebit’. Matth. 16:24: ‘si quis vult post me venire, abneget semet ipsum, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me’; Luc. 9:23: ‘si quis vult post me venire, abneget se ipsum, et tollat crucem suam cotidie, et sequatur me’.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

195

It comes, but like a thief with the intent to take and steal all things from the soul. But by showing and revealing itself it wants to lure the soul and pull her after it and steal and take from her herself. About this the Prophet spoke: ‘Lord, take from them their spirit’ and ‘give them instead your spirit’.41 This is also meant by the loving soul, when she spoke: ‘My soul dissolved and melted away when love spoke his word.’42 When he went in, I had to let go. This is also what Christ meant when He spoke: ‘Whoever abandons anything for my sake shall be repaid a hundredfold’, and whoever would also possess me ‘must deny himself and all things, and whoever will serve me must follow me’,43 he should not go after his own. Now you may say: Well, sir, you would like to change the natural course of the soul and go against her nature! It is her nature to take and create images through the senses. Do you intend to change this order? No! Do you know what nobility God has placed into [human] nature, not yet fully described, rather: still hidden? When they wrote about the nobility of the soul, they had not come closer than to where their natural intellect took them. They had never entered the ground. It must have remained to them utterly hidden and unknown. For this reason, the Prophet spoke: ‘I will sit and be silent’ and ‘will hearken to what God speaks within me’,44 because it is so hidden. That is why the Word came in the darkness of the night.45 About this Saint John writes: ‘The light shone in the darkness.’ ‘It came into its own, and as many as received it became powerful Sons of God; to them was given power to become God’s Sons.’46 Now observe the use and the fruit of this secret word and this darkness! Not only is the Son of the heavenly Father born in this darkness which is ‘His own’; rather: there you also are born as the heavenly Father’s child, not that of somebody else, and He gives you the power.

44. Lam. 3:28: ‘Sedebit solitarius, et tacebit’; Ps. 84:9: ‘Audiam quid loquatur in me Dominus Deus’. 45. The translation follows a punctuation that differs from DW. 46. Ioh. 1:5: ‘lux in tenebris lucet’; 1:11–2: ‘In propria venit, et sui eum non receperunt. quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri’.

196

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Nû merke, welchen nutz. Alle die wârheit, die alle meister ie gelêrten mit irer eigen vernunft und verstantnisse oder iemer mê suln biz an den jüngesten tac, die enverstuonden nie daz allerminste in disem wizzenne und in disem grunde. Swie daz ez doch ein unwizzen heize und ein unbekantheit, sô hât ez doch mê inne dan allez wizzen und bekennen ûzwendic disem. Wan diz unwizzen daz reizet und ziuhet dich von allen wizzenden dingen und ouch von dir selber. | (367) Daz meinte Kristus, dô er sprach47: ‘wer sich sîn selbes niht enverlougent und niht enlæzet vater und muoter und allez daz ûzerlich ist, der enist mîn niht wert’. Er wil sprechen: wer niht enlæzet alle ûzwendicheit der crêatûren, der enmac in dise götlîche geburt weder enpfangen noch geborn werden. Mêr: daz dû dich dîn selbes beroubest und alles des, daz ûzerlich ist, daz gibet ez48 dir in der wârheit. Und in der wârheit gloube ich daz und bin des sicher, daz dirre mensche, der hie inne rehte stüende, niemer enmöhte von gote gescheiden werden nihtes niht, in keiner wîse niht. Ich spriche, er enmac in keiner wîse in tôtsünde gevallen. Sie liten ê den allerschentlîchesten tôt, ê daz sie die allerminste tôtsünde tæten, als ouch die heiligen tâten. Ich spriche, sie enmügen einer tegelîcher sünde niht geleisten noch gestaten mit willen an in selber noch an andern liuten, sô sie ez erwern mügen. Sie werden sô sêre ze disem gereizet und gezogen und gewenet, daz sie sich keinen andern wec niergen enmügent gekêren. Sie kêrent und karment alles her nâch. In dise geburt helfe uns got, der nû geborn ist menschlîche, daz wir kranke menschen in im geborn werden götlîche. Âmen.

47. Matth. 10:37–8: ‘Qui amat patrem aut matrem plus quam me, non est me dignus’.

H OMILY 9* [S 101]

197

Now note the use. Every truth that all the masters ever taught by their own intellect and reasoning, or whatever more should be until Doomsday, they never had the slightest inkling of this knowledge and this ground. And although it is called ignorance and unknowing, it carries more than all external wisdom and knowledge. For this ignorance drags and pulls you away from all knowable things and also from yourself. This is what Christ meant, when He said: ‘Whoever will not deny himself and will not leave his father and mother and all of what is external, is not worthy of me.’47 He wants to say: He who does not leave all exteriority of creatures is not able to either receive this divine birth or be born. Moreover, what you steal from yourself and all that is external, that it48 gives you in truth. And in very truth, I believe this and am sure of this that the man who rightly stands here will under no circumstances and in no possible way be separated from God. I say he can in no way lapse into mortal sin. They would rather suffer the most shameful death, as also the saints did, than commit the least mortal sin. I say they cannot commit or consciously consent to even a venial sin in themselves or with regard to others, if they can prevent it. So much they are lured, pulled and accustomed to it, that they cannot ever choose another way. They turn and rush incessantly towards this. May God who now is born in a human way, help us in this birth that we weak men be born in Him in a divine manner. Amen.

48. ‘ez’: the ignorance.

Homily 10* [S 88] In circumcisione Domini ‘Post dies octo vocatum est nomen eius Iesus’ Introduction

O

n the feast of Jesus’ Circumcision on the 1st of January, Eckhart concentrates on the naming of Jesus: ‘On the eighth day he received the name Jesus’, taken from Luke 2:21, which he immediately combines with I Cor. 12:3, a verse to which he gives a specific twist: ‘The name Jesus does not fit anybody, unless the Holy Spirit allows it.’ The verse from the Gospel is only lightly touched upon and derives from the reading of the day. The opening formula itself, ‘post dies octo’, can be found in John 20:26 with reference to the apparition of the risen Jesus to the Apostles. The second verse of I Cor. 12:3: ‘Et nemo potest dicere: Dominus Iesus, nisi in Spiritu Sancto’, Eckhart has used for the Tenth Sunday after Trinity in his Latin Sermo XXIII, n. 217–25 (LW IV 204–10). The homily is preserved in only two manuscripts of the Paradisus animae intelligentis (n. 8: H2, O) and one manuscript of Nuremberg (N1). Its abridged style reminds us of many of Eckhart’s Latin sermons. The content of the homily With the combination of the Gospel verse with I Cor. 12:3, Eckhart continues to interpret the Christmas message as a personalized birth of the divine Son in man’s soul. Yet, as Jesus’ name does not fit anybody, ‘unless the Holy Spirit allows it’, Eckhart paints an eight–step way for man, from giving one’s will ‘into God’s will’, or a living–for–God, to the eighth day, an indulging in God.

H OMILY 10* [S 88]

199

Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 29–35. Previous English translation The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 156–7.

200

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (32)‘Post dies octo vocatum est nomen eius Iesus.’| ‘An dem ahten tage wart im der name Jêsus’1. ‘Den namen Jêsus ensprichet nieman, der heilige geist enwürke ez dan’2. Ein meister sprichet3: in swelcher sêle der name Jêsus gesprochen sol werden, daz muoz geschehen an dem ahten tage. Der êrste tac ist, daz er sînen willen gebe in gotes willen und dem lebe. Der ander tac ist ein beglîmende beglîmunge götlîches viures. (33)| | Der dritte tac daz ist ein umbeloufende und ein quelnde sêle nâch gote. Der vierde tac ist, daz alle die krefte des menschen sint ûfgerihtet ze gote. Ein meister sprichet4: swenne diu sêle berüeret wirt von êwigen dingen, sô wirt si beweget. Und von der | (34) bewegunge sô wirt si erhitzet. Und von der erhitzunge sô wirt si erwîtet, daz si vil guotes mag enpfâhen. Der vünfte tac daz ist ein înstân in got. Der sehste tac ist, daz got die sêle zerlæzet. Der sibende tac ist, daz diu sêle vereinet wirt mit gote. (35) | Der ahte tac ist ein gebrûchen gotes. Dâ sô wirt dem kinde der name Jêsus gegeben.

1. Luc. 2:21. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 437rb: ‘In circumcisione, secundum Lucam [2, 21]. In illo tempore [Et postquam Vg.] consummati sunt dies octo ut circumcideretur puer: vocatum est nomen eius Ihesus, quod vocatum est ab angelo priusquam in utero conciperetur’. 2. I Cor. 12:3: ‘Et nemo potest dicere: Dominus Iesus, nisi in Spiritu Sancto’.

H OMILY 10* [S 88]

201

‘Post dies octo vocatum est nomen eius Iesus.’ ‘On the eighth day he received the name Jesus.’1 ‘The name Jesus does not fit anybody, unless the Holy Spirit allows it.’2 A master says:3 In whatever soul the name Jesus shall be spoken, this will be done on the eighth day. On the first day, he gives his will into God’s will and lives for Him. On the second day, there is an illuminating illumination of the divine fire. On the third day, the soul runs crazy and is tortured in its quest for God. On the fourth day, all powers of man are directed upwards to God. A master says:4 When the soul is being touched by eternal things, then she is being moved. And from the movement she is heated. And from the heat, she is extended, so that she might receive lots of good things. The fifth day is a staying in God. On the sixth day, God melts the soul. On the seventh day, the soul is united with God. The eighth day is an indulging in God. That way the child is given the name Jesus.

3. ‘Ein meister sprichet’: perhaps Iohannes Damascenus, De fide orthodoxa I, c. 7, ed. Buytaert, 25, 1–27, 30. 4. ‘Ein meister sprichet’: perhaps Augustinus, Enarrationes in Psalmos 83, n. 3, ed. Dekkers and Fraipont, 1148, 31–5: ‘Desiderium eorum differtur, ut crescat; crescit, ut capiat … Ad capiendum Deum exercere’.

Homily 11* [S 89] In vigilia epiphaniae Domini ‘Angelus domini apparuit’ Introduction

T

he Gospel for the Vigil of Epiphany – ‘The angel of the Lord appeared’ – refers to the appearance of the angel to Joseph, with the exhortation to Joseph to return to his country from Egypt, Matth. 2:19– 20. The homily is preserved only through the manuscripts of the Paradisus animae intelligentis (n. 10: H2, O). The content of the homily

Eckhart begins with a reflection on the nature of Scripture (nn. 3–5), taken from Augustine (n. 3). To this he adds his key view that Scripture is ‘usefully obscure’ (nützlîche verborgen), the basis for both the need and the possibility to find ‘many useful and pleasant interpretations’. Yet, he admits that neither of these hit the truth nor could claim to be truthful interpretations; they only ‘come close to the first truth’. The interpretation of the creation in Genesis seems to have been taken as an example. The text, as it has been preserved, gives Moses’ statement about the waters above and underneath us, and further refers to the creation of man as creation’s climax (n. 4) and to God’s notebook of all creation (n. 5). After this pre–topic, Eckhart comes back to the core verse (nn. 6–7). Israel signifies the sin of the soul and the world that did not receive the Word. In order to provide a receptacle for God, man is asked, first, to ‘chase out’ ‘joy, fear and hope’ and come up ‘with a pure heart’; and second (n. 7), to live in peace, in Eckhart’s terms the lowest being obedient to the highest. As the brevity of the text and the missing end

H OMILY 11* [S 89]

203

(‘so help us God’ or the like) show, we are dealing here with an abbreviation either by the author himself or one that occurred during the transmission process. Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 36–42. Previous English translation The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 157–8.

204

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation ‘Angelus domini apparuit’ etc.| ‘Der engel offenbârte sich Jôseph in dem slâfe und sprach ze im: nim daz kint’1 etc. Ein meister sprichet2, daz diu schrift ist an irm sinne als ein vliezende wazzer, daz bî sîten ûzbrichet und machet tiefe und tîche nützlîche und vliuzet doch vür sich. Sant Augustînus sprichet3: diu schrift ist nützlîche verborgen an irm sinne, daz man die êrsten wârheit zehant | (39) niht vinden enkan. Dar umbe vindet man manige nützlîche und lustlîche rede, diu wol bî der êrsten wârheit bestât, als Moyses sprichet4, daz wazzer boben uns und bî nidere uns sint. Wer kan daz bevinden? Die heiligen vrâgent5, war umbe unser herre got den menschen ze leste schuof, dô er alle crêatûren geschaffen hâte. Daz mac diu heimlîchste sache sîn und ein wârhaftigiu sîn, daz er aller crêatûren volkomenheit zemâle hât geschaffen an dem menschen. Dar umbe gienc diu heilige drîvalticheit ze râte, dô si den menschen schepfen wolte und sprach6: ‘machen wir den | (40) menschen ze unserm bilde’. Dar ane ist bewîset, daz diz bilde der heiligen drîvalticheit geschaffen ist an der sêle. Ze dem andern mâle: engelische natûre, die si7 gemeine hât mit den engeln und aller crêatûren glîchnisse und volkomenheit zemâle, ist geschaffen an dem menschen, daz got sîne volkomenheit und aller crêatûren beschouwen und bespiegeln müge an dem menschen. Und hât bewîset8, daz der mensche sî daz beste under allen crêatûren. Moyses hâte gemachet vier buoch, diu nütze wâren. Dar nâch mahte er daz vünfte. Daz was daz | (41) minste und daz beste, und hiez 1. Matth. 2:19–20. Liturgical context: Evangeliar., Arch. f. 437rb: ‘In vigilia Epyphanie. Secundum Matheum [2, 19–23]. In illo tempore [> Vg.] defuncto [+ autem Vg.] Herode, ecce angelus Domini apparuit in somnis Ioseph in Egypto, dicens: Surge, et accipe puerum, et matrem eius, et vade in terram Israel: defuncti sunt enim, qui querebant animam pueri. Qui consurgens, accepit puerum, et matrem eius, et venit in terram Israel. Audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Iudea pro Herode patre suo, timuit illo ire: et admonitus in somnis, secessit in partes Galilee. Et veniens habitavit in civitate que vocatur Nazareth: ut adimpleretur quod dictum est per Prophetas: Quoniam Nazarenus vocabitur’. 2. Augustinus, Confessiones XII, c. 27, n. 37, ed. Verheijen, 236, 1–237, 7: ‘Sicut enim fons in parvo loco uberior est pluribusque rivis in ampliora spatia fluxum ministrat quam quilibet eorum rivorum, qui per multa locorum ab eodem fonte deducitur, ita narratio dispensatoris tui sermocinaturis pluribus profutura parvo sermonis modulo scatet fluenta liquidae veritatis, unde sibi quisque verum, quod de his rebus potest, hic illud, ille illud, per longiores loquellarum anfractus trahat’.

H OMILY 11* [S 89]

205

‘Angelus domini apparuit’ etc. ‘The angel revealed himself to Joseph while he was asleep and spoke to him: take the child’1 etc. A master says2 that Scripture is according to its own understanding a running water which breaks out to both sides and provides deep and useful lakes, and yet itself flows. Saint Augustine speaks:3 Scripture is usefully obscure with regards to its sense, so that one cannot immediately find the first truth. That is the reason why one finds many useful and pleasant interpretations which come close to the first truth, for when Moses says4 that there are waters above us and below us, who can make sense of that? The saints ask5 why did our Lord God, create man last, after He had created all creatures? It might be the most intimate cause and a true thing that He had created the ultimate perfection of all creatures in man. That is why the holy Trinity had a discussion when it wished to create man and said: ‘Let us make man according to our image.’6 This proves that this image of the holy Trinity is created in the soul. In a second way: The angelic nature which she7 has in common with the similitude and the full perfection of the angels and all creatures is created in man, so that God might contemplate and mirror His own perfection and that of all creatures in man. And thus it has proven8 that man is the best among all creatures. Moses had composed four books that are of use. Then he produced the fifth. This was the smallest and the best, and it has been

3. Augustinus, De Trinitate I, c. 2, n. 4, ed. Mountain and Glorie, 31, 9–11: ‘Mentis humanae acies invalida in tam excellenti luce non figitur, nisi per iustitiam fidei nutrita vigoretur’, quoted in Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 745 (LW III 650, 1). 4. Gen. 1:7: ‘Et fecit Deus firmamentum, divisitque aquas, quae erant sub firmamento, ab his, quae erant super firmamentum’. 5. Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae II, d. 15, c. 5 (Grottaferrata, 1971), 402, 2–4: ‘Quare post omnia factus est homo’. 6. Gen. 1:26: ‘Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram’. 7. ‘si’ = the soul. 8. I.e. Scripture has proven.

206

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

ez die wârheit von aller der schrift. Daz gebôt9 got und Moyses ze legenne in die arche. Sant Augustînus machete ouch vil büecher. Ze leste machete er ouch ein kleinez buochelîn10, in dem was geschriben allez, daz man in den andern niht verstân enkunde. Daz hâte er alle zît mit im und bî im und was im daz liebeste. Alsô ist ez zemâle umbe den menschen: den hât got gemachet als ein hantbuoch, dâ er în sihet und dâ er mite spilet und lust ane hât. Dar umbe tuot der mensche grôze sünde, swenne er dise heilige ordenunge zerstœret. Wan an dem jüngesten tage suln alle crêatûren ‘wâfen’ schrîen über den, der daz tuot. Nû suln wir prüeven, daz nâch dem tôde Herôdes Jôseph wider solte komen in daz lant, dâ gote gerûmet was von den, die in hinderten. Alsô muoz gote gerûmet werden von sünden, daz diu sêle gereht sî, ob got mit ir wonen sol. Sant Johannes sprichet11: ‘daz wâre lieht kam in | (42) die werlt und diu werlt enpfienc sîn niht’. Er wil sprechen: ez envant keine stat, dâ ez behaften mohte. Dar umbe enwart ez niht enpfangen12. Ein meister sprichet13: ‘wilt dû got mit einem lûtern herzen enpfâhen und bekennen, sô vertrîp von dir vröude, vorhte, hoffenunge’. Daz ist von dem êrsten, wie man gote rûmen sol. Daz ander ist der vride, der in dem lande was, dâ got inne geborn was. Daz prüevet man dâ bî, daz alliu diu werlt einem keiser zuo gehœrte und undertænic was14. Ouch prüeve ich ez bî den drin künigen, die sô verre landes kâmen15. Alsô sol ganzer vride sîn in der sêle. Dâ ist rehter vride, wâ daz niderste dem obersten undertænic ist16.

9. Deut. 31:26. 10. ‘ein kleinez buochelîn’, see Augustinus, Retractationes. 11. Ioh. 1, 9–11: ‘Erat lux vera … in mundo erat … et sui eum non receperunt’. 12. ‘enpfangen’ here in the twofold sense of received and conceived. 13. Boethius, De consolatione philosophiae I, m. 7, ed. Moreschini, 26, 20–8: ‘tu quoque si vis lumine claro cernere verum … gaudia pelle, pelle timorem spemque fugato nec dolor adsit’, quoted in Eckhart, In Exod. n. 12 (LW II 17, 9–18, 3).

H OMILY 11* [S 89]

207

called the truth of the entire Scripture. This, God and Moses ordered9 to put down into the ark. Augustine, too, produced many books. At last, he also produced a small booklet,10 in which was written everything that one was unable to understand in the others. This he always carried with and close to him, and it was the dearest to him. So it is also with man: God has made him His notebook, to look into it, play with him and have pleasure of him. That is why man commits a gross sin, when he destroys such holy order. As on the day of judgement all creatures must cry ‘halt!’ to the one who does this. Now we have to reflect upon the fact that after the death of Herod, Joseph should return to the country in which God had been been given room by those who had hindered Him. Hence, God must be given room from sins for the soul to be just, so that God can lodge with her. Saint John says: ‘The true light came into the world, but the world did not receive it.’11 He meant to say that there was no place where it could stay. That is why it was not received.12 A master says: ‘If you wish to receive and know God with a pure heart, so chase out of you joy, fear and hope.’13 This about the first way, how to make space for God. The second is peace, which was in the country in which God was born. This one is proven by the fact that the entire world obeyed and was subjugated to one emperor.14 I also prove it by pointing to the three envoys who came from a country so far abroad.15 Likewise, there should be total peace in the soul. Total peace is where the lowest is subjugated to the highest.16

14. Luc. 2:1. 15. Matth. 2:1: ‘ecce magi ab oriente venerunt Hierosolymam…’ 16. See Augustinus, De civitate Dei XIX 13, ed. Dombart and Kalb, 679, 10–1: ‘pax omnium rerum tranquillitas ordinis’.

Homily 12* [Q 14] In epiphania Domini ‘Surge, illuminare Ierusalem’ Introduction

T

he homily refers to the Epistle for the feast of Epiphany (‘vp der heilger dry konyncge dach’: Lo1). Eckhart concentrates on the prophetic reading of Is. 60:1 (‘Stand up, Jerusalem, and arise, and be illumined’), which he renders in several variations, an invocation which Eckhart in his commentary on Wisdom explains as an exhortation to elevate oneself to God (In Sap. n. 294 [LW II 630]: ‘… Hinc est quod in scriptura frequenter nos hortatur deus a temporalibus et corporalibus surgere et aspirare ad caelestia, ad suprema Is. 60: “surge, illuminare, Ierusalem”. Tria dicit: “surge” – “illuminare” – “Ierusalem”’). In Hom. 12* [Q 14], n. 10 he adds the testimony of John 1:11–3, which was part of the third mass of Christmas. Following L. Sturlese and others, this homily seems to have been given at Cologne, as Eckhart refers to two earlier homilies delivered in two convents at Cologne, the Cistercian church of Mariengarten (see n. 5 and n. 12: ‘as ich sprach zo mergarden’), and that of the Benedictines at Saint Maccabees (n. 7: ‘as ich sprach zo sent merueren’). We can identify Mariengarten with Hom. 5* [Q 22], n. 12 (see note ad loc.), while in the case of Saint Maccabees we can compare Hom. 114* [Q 15], n. 5. It is also interesting to see that in this Cologne homily he refers to what he taught in the school at Paris (n. 6). We also have to note Eckhart’s reference to the book in which he writes what comes into his mind by night. A further mention of this book can be found in Hom. 73* [Q 28], n. 5. The text of this homily is preserved in its entirety as we have it in only one manuscript (B16), to which we have to add a fragment of a

210

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

dozen lines (Lo1). The text was published by Quint following the orthography of B16. Not only the many places where the text breaks up, but also the number of times that thoughts are not fully developed show that we are dealing with a defective state of the text. A manuscript only recently discovered (Wartburg–Stiftung, Ms. 1361–50 [Gi2]), Pfeiffer’s so–called codex P from a private collection at Giessen, Germany, which scholars had believed lost, has a clear reference with a quote from this homily and is supporting evidence for its authenticity. Moreover, in this ‘new’ codex, Eckhart gives a thorough defence for one of its incriminated statements. The content of the homily This is another dense homily, in which Eckhart follows up his thoughts on the birth of the Son in us and us giving birth to this Son. New, and even more daring in this text, however, is the emphatic statement that man is not content with being the Son of the Father, but also wants to be endowed with the same paternity as the Father. As he is of His being, he also enjoys His paternity; moreover, Eckhart dares to say that man simply takes it as his own from himself, not from something above. The homily concentrates on the term ‘Jerusalem’, which he first equates with the ‘soul’, while the exhortation to rise and elevate oneself, which the Prophet addresses as ‘Jerusalem’, Eckhart adds as his second interpretation of ‘Jerusalem’, seeing it as ‘top’ (see n. 5). According to the first sense of ‘Jerusalem’, Eckhart shows that the common partition of the soul into her three powers is not of particular interest, as there is nothing new in this view. He is striving, however, for a novel sense of Scripture. Therefore, he pushes this divide to concentrate on ‘the highest’, ‘the very best’, ‘the constant good’, which he finds in God’s being beginning and end (n. 4). This argument leads to his second interpretation of ‘Jerusalem’ as ‘top’ (n. 5). Eckhart starts with the natural tendency of that which is above to pour itself down into what is lowest, and takes from this that man cannot flee God (nn. 6–8). On the other hand, God cannot escape the humility of the truly humble man (nn. 7–8). Based on three scriptural quotes (John 1:12–3; Luke 1:34 and Ps. 2:7) he makes his statement that ‘the noble, humble man is not satisfied to be the only begotten Son that

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

211

the Father has begotten eternally; he wants nothing less than to be also father and enter into the very sameness of eternal paternity and give birth to the one of whom I am eternally born’. What is meant by this, he elaborates, showing the intimacy between God and man, where both are the other’s own and self (nn. 10–1). They mutually condition themselves, as God’s Godhead is nothing, but man’s being is beginning and end. God is a God who comes down and becomes man, this kenotic exchange is what Godhead essentially means. Unfortunately for Eckhart, what he took as Christ’s lesson of humility has not been understood by all of his listeners and readers. Hence, this text features high in the unfolding process against his teachings, but was also defended by Eckhart, as can be seen from the mentioned Wartburg manuscript.1 Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW I 227–41; N. Largier, I 889–94; K.H. Witte, LE III 1–31. Previous English translations J.M. Clark, Meister Eckhart (1957), 246–9; Meister Eckhart, Teacher and Preacher (1987), 271–4; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 266–9.

1. See n. 6: Proc. Col. I, n. 57 (LW V 217,14–20); Proc. Col. II, n. 29 (LW V 324,19–27); n. 9.

212

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (230)‘Surge, illuminare Ierusalem’ etc. Dit wort, dat ich haynt gesprochen in dem latine, Dat steit geschreuen in der epistelen, de man las in der myssen. Der propphete ysaias spricht2: ‘stant vp jherosalem inde erheyff dich inde wirt erluchtet’. Hye synt dry synne3 zo verstayn. Biddet got vmb genade. ‘Stant vp iherusalem ind verheiff dich ind werde verluchtet’. De myster inde de heylgen sprechent4 gemeynlichen, dat de sele5 haue dri creften, dar an sy gelich sy der dryueildicheit. De eirsten craft is gehochnysse, de ment (231) eyne heymeliche, verborgen konst; de nennet den vader. De ander craft heyscht inteligencia, dat is eyne intgegenwordicheit6, eyn bekennen, eyne wysheit. Dey dirde crafte de heysset wylle, eyn vloit des heylgen geistes. hey by in wylen wir neit bleuen, want it in is neyt nuwe materie. ‘Stant vp jherosalem inde wirt erluchtet’. it sprechent de ander myster, de och de sele an dry deylent7: Sy nennent de ouerste craft eyn tzornege craft; de gelichent sy deme vader. Der hait alwege eynen kreich inde eynen tzornicheit weder dat boesse. der tzorn blendet dye sele inde mynne verwint de syne < . . . 8 > De eirste kraft an gyt sych in der leueren, De ander an deme hertzen, De dirde in den heirnen. Got der hait eynen [ge]gegen natoirlichen | (232) kreich, dat < . . . > de eirste de in geruwet numer meir mey, sy en koeme in dat hoegeste; were eit hoeger dan got, sy in woilde gotzs neit. Der ander in genoeget 2. Is. 60:1. Liturgical context: Epistolar., Arch. 423ra–b: ‘In epiphania domini Lectio Ysaie prophete [60, 1–6]. Surge illuminare Iherusalem: quia venit lumen tuum, et gloria Domini super te orta est. Quia ecce tenebre operient terram, et caligo populos: super te autem orietur Dominus, et gloria eius in te videbitur. Et ambulabunt gentes in lumine tuo, et reges in splendore ortus tui. Leva in circuitu oculos tuos, et vide: omnes isti congregati sunt, venerunt tibi: filii tui de longe venient, et filie tue de latere surgent. Tunc videbis, et afflues, et [et > Vg.] mirabitur et dilatabitur cor tuum quando conversa fuerit ad te multitudo maris, fortitudo gentium venerit tibi: inundatio camelorum operiet te, dromedarii Madian et Effa: omnes de Saba venient, aurum et thus deferentes, [+ et Vg.] laudem Domino annuntiantes’. It is interesting that Eckhart takes the last element (‘be illumined’) as passive, while traditionally this is understood as active (we thank Patricia Impey for drawing our attention to this). 3. ‘dry sinne’: the first, below, n. 3; the second, below, n. 4; the third, below, n. 5ff. 4. The threefold psychology in Augustine, De Trinitate X, c. 11, n. 18, ed. Mountain and Glorie, 330, 29–331, 63. See also Eckhart, Sermo II/1, n. 3 (LW IV 6, 4–5): ‘memoria, intellectiva et voluntas’; Sermo XXXIV/3, n. 348 (LW IV 302, 3): ‘sicut Augustinus docet de memoria, intellectiva

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

213

‘Surge, illuminare Ierusalem’ etc. This word I have spoken in Latin is written in the epistle that one was reading in mass. The prophet Isaiah says: ‘Stand up, Jerusalem, and arise, and be illumined.’2 There are three ways to understand this.3 Ask God for grace! ‘Stand up, Jerusalem, get up, and you will be illumined.’ The masters and the saints jointly say4 that the soul5 has three powers, through which she is like the Trinity. The first power is memory, which means an intimate, hidden art; this denotes the Father. The second power is called intelligence, which is one of ever–presence,6 knowledge, wisdom. The third power is called will, a flow of the Holy Spirit. But we do not wish to stop here, for there is nothing new in this. ‘Stand up, Jerusalem, so that you might be illumined.’ There are other masters who also divide the soul into three parts.7 They call the highest power an angry power; this they compare to the Father. This constantly wages war and is full of anger against evil. Anger blinds the soul and love overwhelms the senses < …8>. The first power pours itself into the liver, the second to the heart, the third into the brain. God has given them a natural war that < … > The first never rests, until it comes into the highest; if there was something higher than God, it would not want God. The second is not et voluntate’. Note the difference between intellectiva (LW IV) and intelligentia. In Hom. 9* [S 101], n. 11: ‘verstantnisse … gehugnisse … willen’. 5. For the interpretation of ‘Jerusalem’ as ‘soul’, see Rabanus, De rerum naturis XIV (PL 111, 379B): ‘Hierusalem uero quatuor modis significationem habere, in scripturis repperitur. … Et iuxta tropologiam in quo anima fidelis designatur’. 6. ‘intgegenwordicheit’: ‘praesentialitas’, J. Quint 231. ‘intgegenwordicheit’: this is difficult to translate, but has the notions of ‘realization’, ‘visualization’, ‘presence’; K.H. Witte, LE III 3: ‘Vergegenwärtigung’; J.M. Clark, Meister Eckhart (1957), 246: ‘reason’; J.M. Clark, Meister Eckhart (1957), 246; Meister Eckhart, Teacher and Preacher (1987), 272: ‘a bringing to mind’; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 266: ‘ever–presence’. 7. ‘de ander myster’: Platonic doctrine, according to Albertus, De animalibus XIII, tr. 1, c. 7, ed. Stadler, 917, 39ff. 8. J. Quint attempted a reconstruction, but it is better left blank.

214

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

neit dan an deme alre besten; were eit besser dan got, sy in wolde godes neit. Der dirder ingenoeget neyt dan an eynem goiden; were eit goiders dan got, sy in wolde godes neyt. sy in rastet neit dan an eynem steden goide, in deme alle goit besloissen is, dat sy an in9 einne wesen. Got seluer in rastet dair neyt, dar hey is eyne begyn alles wesses. Hey rastet, dair dar hey is eyn ende inde eyn begyn alles wessens10. (233) | ‘jherosalem’ spricht also vyl as eyne hoe11, as ich sprach zo mergarden12: dat hoege is, zo deme spricht man: koyme heir neder. dat neder is, zo deme spricht man: koime heire vp. Bystu neder inde were ich inbouen dir, so moyste ich heir neder zo dir. also deyt got; so wane du dich oitmoedeges, so kompt got van inbouen heir neder inde compt in dich. De erde is dat alre verste van dem hemele inde hait sych gecrumpene in eynen wynkele inde schampt sych inde solde gerne deme schonen hemel intflyn van eynem wynkel zo deme anderen. wat were dan ire inthalt? Vloet sy nederwert, sy komet zo deme hemele; vloet sy vpwartz, sy in mach eme doch neyt intflyn13. hey jaget sy in eynen wynkel inde drocket syne craft in sy inde macht sy vrochtber, | (234) war omb? dat alre ouerste dat vloyst in dat nederste [Eyn]. Eyn sterne der is bouen der sonnen14; dat is der ouerste sterne; der is edeler dan de sonne; der vloisset in de sonne inde verlochtet de sonne, inde alle den schyne, den de sonne hait, den hait sy van desseme sternen. wat meynt dan, dat de sonne neit in schynet also waile des nachtes as des dages? dat meynt, dat de sonne altzomalle alyne neit creftich in is van ir seluer, dat etzwat gebrechafticheit is in der sonnen, dat seit ire 9. ‘an in’ = goodness. 10. For this topic see also Hom. 5* [Q 22], n. 17. 11. ‘eyne hoe’: see J. Quint 233, quite different from the usual interpretation of ‘Jerusalem’ as peace (for this see Hom. 65* [Q 13], n. 6). On the one as ‘soul’ see Eckhart, In Sap. n. 294 (LW II 630) and Rabanus, De rerum naturis XIV (PL 111, 379B–C): ‘Sion autem eadem ciuitas propter montem in ea situm in australi parte ipsius ciuitatis nominatur, et sensum mysticum habet. Nam Sion specula siue contemplatio interpretatur, et significat aecclesiam siue animam fidelem, siue caelestem patriam. Sion iuxta historiam plebs est Iudaeorum uel ipsa ciuitas in monte Sion quae et Hierusalem dicitur’. 12. Quotation of Hom. 5* [Q 22], n. 12: ‘Wære ich hie oben und spræche ich ze einem: ‘kum her ûf!’ daz wære swære. Mêr: spræche ich: ‘sitz hie nider!’ daz wære lîht. Alsô tuot got. Swenne sich der mensche dêmüetiget, sô enmac sich got niht enthalten von sîner eigenen güete, er enmüeze sich senken und giezen in den dêmüetigen menschen, und dem allerminsten dem gibet er sich in dem allermeisten und gibet sich im alzemâle’. ‘mergarden’ is to be identified with the Cistercian monastery of Mariengarten at Cologne. J. Quint’s interpunction has been altered.

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

215

satisfied except by the very best; if there was something better than God, it would not wish for God. The third is not satisfied either except with something good; if there was something better than God, it would not wish for God. It does not rest except with a constant good in which is contained all goodness, so that it9 is in one substance. God Himself does not find rest as He is a principle of all being. He finds rest where He is an end and a beginning of all being.10 ‘Jerusalem’ also means the top,11 as I said at Mariengarten:12 to that which is high, one says: ‘Come down here!’ To that which is low, one says: ‘Come up here!’ If you were low and if I were above you, I would have to come down to you. And so does God: hence, when you humble yourself, God comes down from above into you. The earth is what is furthest away from heaven, and she has crept into a corner, is ashamed, and would like to flee from the beautiful heaven from one corner to another. But then what would be the place where she stops? If she flees downwards, she comes to heaven; if she flees upwards, she cannot escape from Him.13 He drives her into a corner, pushes his power into her and makes her fruitful. Why? Because the highest flows into the lowest. There is a star that is above the sun;14 this is the highest star. It is more noble than the sun. It flows into the sun and illumines the sun, and all brightness that the sun has, it has from this star. What then does it mean that the sun does not shine as bright during the night as she does during the day? This means that the sun does not have the power in her entirely by herself and that there is some frailty in the sun which

13. It is unclear whether the subject is heaven or God, and Eckhart seems to play with this ambiguity. 14. ‘Eyn sterne is bouen der sonnen…’: unidentified doctrine, perhaps derived from the idea of the empyreal heaven as primary source of light according to the Glossa ordinaria to Gen. 1:1: ‘Caelum … empyreum id est igneum … quod non ab ardore sed a splendore dicitur’. See also Hom. 43* [Q 54a], n. 6. The idea could be connected with the hypothesis that the sun takes its energy from the fiery heaven, where however the element is present in pure form; see on this Moses Maimonides, Dux neutrorum II, c. 31 (1520), f. 60r: ‘Ignis vero primus vocatus est illo nomine, quia non est lucidus, sed est pervius visui, neque comprehenditur ab eo, quia si ignis ille lucidus esset, videremus totum aera de nocte quasi ignem’, and does not burn, see Albertus, De caelo et mundo II, tr. 3 c. 2, ed. Hossfeld, 144, 24–7: ‘ignis in terrestri combusto carbo est, in vapore autem, qui quasi medius est inter terrestre et aqueum et aereum, flamma est, et in aereo lux esse videtur’.

216

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

wayl, dat sy dunkel is an eyme ende, inde des nachtes [nachtes] nemet ir der mant inde de sternen eren schyne, inde de driuent sy anders wair; dan schynet sy anders wair in eyn ander lant. Der sterne in vloysset neit aleyne in de sonne, meir hey vlosset dorch de sonne inde dorch alle sternen inde vloisset in de erde inde macht sy vrochtber. also is it vmb den rechten oitmoedegen mynschen, der onder sych geworpen hait alle creatoren inde sych onder got drocket; dat in leist got neyt dorch synne goitheit, hey in gusset sych altzomaile in den mynschen; hey wirt getwongen dar zo, dat hey it van noit doyne mois. woltu nu hoege syn inde verhauen syn, so mostu neder syn van der vloit des blodes off des vlisches, want eynne voirtzele aller | (235) sunden inde aller vlecken dat is verborgen bedrogen houart, jnde in is neit dan leit inde weye nauolgende. Also is de oitmodicheit eyne wortzele alles goiden inde dar na volgende is. jch sprach zo paris in der schoelen, dat alle dynck sollen volbracht werden an deme rechten oitmoedegen mynschene15. De sne antwert16 gode. dat alre hoegesten in syner grondeloesser gotheit antwert dem alrer nedersten in der doifden der oitmoedicheit. Der geware oitmodege mynsche der in darff got neit byden, hey mach gode gebeden, want de hoede der gotheit in suit neyt anders an den de doifde der oitmoedicheit, also as ich sprach zo sent merueren17. Der oitmodege mynsche inde got dat is eyn; der oitmoedege mynsche der is godes also geweldich as hey syns selues is, jnde allett, dat in allen engelen is, dat is deis oitmoedege mynschen eygen; wat got wircket, dat wirket der oitmoedege mynsche, inde dat got is, dat is hey: eyn leuen inde eyn wessen; inde Dar | (236) ombe sprach onsse leue here18: ‘leirt van myr, dat ich byn sanftmoedich inde van eynem oitmodegen hertzen’. (237) | Der mynsche, der recht oitmodich were, antwer got moiste alle syne gotheit verlesen inde moiste der altzo maile vsgayn, off hey moyste sych vs geyssen inde moste altzo Mayle in den mynschen vlissen.

15. See also Hom. 114* [Q 15], n. 5 and Hom. 2* [Q 24], nn. 10–1. It is important to note that all the references to Eckhart’s teaching in Paris refer to the topic of humility, see Acta Echardiana, n. 37 (LW V 181) and A. de Libera, ‘Avant–propos’ (1988). 16. The manuscript here gives ‘De sonne’ which has been accepted by Quint, but in his note indicates that this is a corruption. The parallel in Pr. 114* [Q15], n. 5 helps, and it should be cor-

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

217

you can easily see, namely that she is dark at one end and that at night the moon and the stars take her brightness and drive her elsewhere; then she shines elsewhere in another region. This star not only flows into the sun; rather it flows through the sun and also through all the stars, flows also into the earth and makes her fruitful. Thus it is with the truly humble man who has subjected to himself all creatures and himself is subjugated to God. God in His goodness does not fail to pour Himself out completely in this man; He is forced to do this by necessity. Now if you want to be high and exalted, then you must be lowly, far from the flow of the blood of the flesh, for one root of all sins and all stains is the hidden and deceptive pride, and in it is nothing but suffering and woe. In contrast, humility is one root of all goodness and of what follows it. I said in the school at Paris that all things should be accomplished by the truly humble man.15 What is his corresponds16 to God: the highest in His groundless Godhead corresponds to the absolutely lowest in the depth of humility. The truly humble man is not allowed to ask God, he can command God, for the height of the Godhead does not seek anything else than the depth of humility, as I said at Saint Maccabees.17 The humble man and God, they are one; the humble man has as much power over God as He has over Himself, and everything that is in all angels the humble man has for his own. What God performs, the humble man performs, and what God is, that he is: one life and one being; and that is why our beloved Lord says here: ‘Learn from me, who am gentle and humble– hearted.’18 |The man who is truly humble, God must either let go of all His Godhead and must entirely go out, or He must pour Himself and must flow right into that man.

rected into ‘D sine’ (which is man’s own) of which this paragraph in Pr. 15 says that ‘whatever is God’s own is his own’ (‘... das ist sin aigen’); ‘antwert’: obviously taken in a more allusive sense. 17. This is the Benedictine Convent of Saint Maccabees at Cologne, see also Hom. 114* [Q 15], n. 5. 18. Matth. 11:29: ‘discite a me, quia mitis sum, et humilis corde’.

218

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

jch dachte zo nachte, godes hoicheit lege an myner nederheit; dar ich mych nederde, dair wirt got erhoeget. jherosalem sal erluchtet werden, sprycht de schryft inde der proppehete19. mer ich gedachte zo nachte, dat got inthoeget solde werden, neit ey alle me ey in, ind sprycht also vyle as inthoeget20 got, dat myr also wayle behagede, dat ich it in myn boich schryff. it sprycht also: ein inthoeget got, neit ey ale meir ey in; dat wir verhoeget solden werdene. dat ouen was, dat wart in. du salt geinneget werden inde van dich seluer in dich seluer, dat hey in dir sy. neit, dat wir eit nemen van deme, dat bouen ons sy; wir solent in ons nemen inde solent neimen van ons in ons seluer. (238) | Sente johanes spricht21: ‘de in intfingen, den gaff hey gewalt, godes sune zo werden. dit is godes sun, dese in synt neyt van vlisch noch van blode; sy synt vs gode geborene’, neit ey mer in. onsse leue vrouwe sprach22: ‘wey mach | (239) dat syn, dat ich godes moder werde? do sprach der engel: der heylge geist sal van bouen in dich comen’. Dauit sprach23: ‘hoede hayn ich dich geboren’. wat is hoede? ewicheit. ich hayn mych dich inde dich mych eweclichen geboren. nochtant in genoeget den edelen oitmoedegen mynschen da myt neit, dat hey der eynege geboren sun is, den der vader ewenclichen geboren hait, hey in wylt och vader syn inde treden in de selue gelicheit24 der eweger vaderschafft inde geberen den, van dem ich [ewen] Ewenclichen geboren byn, also as ich sprach zo mergarden25; dar kommet got in syne eygen26. eygen dich gode, so is got dyn eygen, as hey syns selues eygen is. dat myr ingeboren wirt, dat blyft; got in schydet sych numer van dem mynschen, war sych der mynsche heyne keirt. der mynsche mach sych van gode keren; we verne der mynsche | (240) van gode geyt, got styt inde wart synre inde vurgeit in, ey hey it wis. voltu, dat got dyn eygen sy, so salstu syn eygen syne as myn tzonge off myne hant, [dat] dat ich myt eme doyn mach, wat ich wyle27. as wenych, as ich eit don

19. Is. 60:1. 20. Paronomasia: ‘verhoegen (verhœhen)’ / ‘inthoegen (enthœhen)’. 21. Ioh. 1:12–3: ‘quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri, his … qui non ex sanguinibus, neque ex voluntate carnis, … sed ex Deo nati sunt’. 22. Luc. 1:34: ‘Dixit autem Maria ad Angelum: Quomodo fiet istud…?’ Luc. 1:35: ‘Et respondens Angelus dixit ei: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te…’ (see also Hom. 5* [Q 22], n. 6). 23. Ps. 2:7: ‘Ego hodie genui te’.

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

219

I thought by night that God’s height lies in my lowliness; when I humble myself, God is exalted. ‘Jerusalem shall be illumined’, Scripture says and the Prophet.19 Moreover, I thought by night that God should be brought down,20 not entirely, rather brought in, which means ‘God brought down’, and it pleased me so much that I wrote it down in my book. It reads thus: A God brought down, not entirely, rather brought in, that we may be raised up. What was above, that is within. You must become inwardly, from yourself into yourself, so that He be in you. Not that we should take anything from what is above us; instead we should take into us and should take from us into ourselves. Saint John says: ‘Those who received Him, to them He gave power to become the sons of God. They who are God’s sons are so not from flesh and blood, but they are born of God’,21 not in a specific moment, but within. Our beloved Lady said: ‘How can it be that I should be the mother of God?’ Then, the angel said: ‘The Holy Spirit will come into you from above.’22 David said: ‘Today I have born you.’23 What is ‘today’? Eternity. Eternally I have born me as you and you as me. However, the noble, humble man is not satisfied to be the only begotten Son that the Father has begotten eternally; he wants nothing more than to be also father and enter into the very sameness24 of eternal paternity and give birth to the one of whom I am eternally born, as I said at Mariengarten.25 There, God ‘comes into his own’.26 Make yourself God’s own, then God is your own, as He is His own. What is inborn in me, remains. God never separates from man wherever that man goes. Man might turn away from God, but however far he goes from God, God stands still and waits for him and is his precursor, before he knows it. If you wish that God be your own, be His own as my tongue or my hand, with which I can do as I will.27 As little as I can do without Him, as little He may do without me. If you then

24. Here ‘gelicheit’ is not only alikeness, but sameness. 25. See Hom. 5* [Q 22], n. 10: ‘Alsô tuot got: er gebirt sînen einbornen sun in daz hœhste teil der sêle. In dem selben, daz er gebirt sînen eingebornen sun in mich, sô gebir ich in wider in den vater’. 26. Ioh. 1:11: ‘in propria venit’. 27. ‘… dat ich … wyle’: The text also appears problematic to J. Quint, who is forced to expunge a ‘dat’.

220

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

mach sunder in, also wenych mach hey eit gewirken bussen mych. woltu dan, dat got dyn eygen alsus sy, so mach dich eme eygene inde behalt in dinre mynungen neit dan in; so is hey eyn begyne inde eyn ende ales dynes werkens, also as syne gotheit dan dai an lyget, dat hey got is. Der mynsche, der alsus in alle synen werken neyt in meynt noch in mynt dan got, dem geit got syne gotheit. allet, dat der mynsche wirket < . . . > want myn[n]e oitmodicheit geit gode [in] syne gotheit. ‘dat licht luchtet in de dosternysse, inde dat licht dat inbegryff der dusternis neit’28; dit meynt, dat got neyt aleyne eyn begynne in is Ale onsser werken inde onsses weses, hey is och eyne enden inde eyn rouwe alen wesses. (241) | Dat wir van jhms xps de letze der oitmodycheit leren, des helpe vns alle samen god vader, son inde heylger gyst. Amen. deo gracias.

28. Ioh. 1:5: ‘et lux in tenebris lucet, et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt’.

H OMILY 12* [Q 14]

221

wish that God be your own, make yourself His own and keep in your mind nothing but Him. So He is a beginning and an end of all your activity, just as His Godhead depends on His being God. To that man who thus in all his works intends and loves nothing but God, God gives His Godhead. Everything that man acts < … >, because my humility gives God His Godhead. ‘The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it’,28 which means that God is not only a beginning of all our activity and our being, He is also an end and rest of all our being. That we may learn from Jesus Christ the lesson of humility, may God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit help us all. Amen. Deo gratias.

Homily 13* [S 102] In epiphania Domini ‘Ubi est, qui natus est rex Iudaeorum?’ Introduction

T

his homily centres on a verse taken from the Gospel reading for the feast of Epiphany, namely the question posed by the Magi: ‘Where is the one who is born king of the Jews?’ (Matth. 2:1) The text of the homily is preserved in its entirety in 18 manuscripts, and is also attested by various fragments. Together with Hom. 9* [S 101], Hom. 15* [S 103] and Hom. 16* [S 104] it constitutes a series on the topic of the birth of the Word in the soul. The content of the homily

Eckhart must have been attracted by the opening ‘ubi’ of the Magi’s question, as it matches his own concern as to where the birth of the Word has to be located. Common understanding of the scriptural passages was based on a historical reading of the birth stories, whereas Eckhart suggests a spiritual sense. How does he reach this? As this homily in the style of questions and answers shows, Eckhart confronts himself with critical interventions to his spiritual reading of Christmas. Right in the opening, he refers back to the earlier Hom. 9* (and probably others, when he says ‘mê’), which states that the place of this birth is the ground of the soul. This statement is challenged by five sets of questions: 1)

‘Since God is intellectually in all things and is more within things than things are in themselves, and as he is more naturally in them – and where God is, there He must act, know Himself and speak His Word –, what property of its own does the soul have with

224

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

respect to this acting of God on the other intellectual creatures, in which God is as well?’ (n. 4) 2) ‘Since this act of this birth happens in the being and in the ground of the soul, it happens in a sinner as well as in a good man. What grace and what use come for me with it, if the ground of nature is the same in both; indeed, even in those who are in hell, does the nobility of nature remain eternally?’ (n. 6) 3) ‘Since God, the Father, gives birth alone in the being and in the ground of the soul and not in the powers, what has it to do with the powers? What should be their contribution, that they should allow this to happen and be idle? What necessity exists, since it does not happen in the powers?’ (n. 11) 4) ‘Would it not be more noble that every power possesses its own activity and that the one does not hinder the other from acting, nor hinder God in his activity? Might there not be in me a manner of creaturely knowing that is not a hindrance, just as God knows all things without hindrance, and so too the blessed?’ (n. 14) 5) ‘Sir, you put all our happiness on ignorance. That sounds like a weakness. God has made man as somebody who knows, as the Prophet says: “Lord, make them know!” (Tob. 13:4) Where there is ignorance, there is weakness and idleness ... an animal like man, an ape, a fool’ (n. 17). The common elements of these questions are the following: They are all based on Eckhart’s core teaching of God as the sole primary actor and ask, if not defend or fight for, the contribution that man himself makes or wants to make towards his own happiness and spiritual state and the self–standing outside and next to God, be it the soul’s own property (question 1), one’s particularly received grace with one’s own special standing that differentiates oneself from sinners (question 2), or the impact of the soul’s powers (question 3), particularly that of knowing (question 4); hence question 5, is ignorance not ‘weakness and idleness’? The challenges, therefore, are not mirroring questions by ignorant people or by members of his audience who do not want to engage with Eckhart’s thinking, but are genuine attempts that seem to pick up the most serious problems that Eckhart may have faced himself, and questions that he has asked himself. It is a particular testing of an intellect–oriented radicalism

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

225

which ends in a negation of human knowing where ignorance is pushed as the core place where human and divine are one. This central homily, which has to be read alongside another, Hom. 15* [S 103], proposes a subtle and refined way in which Eckhart articulates the reliable basis for true knowledge in a dialectical reversal of knowing and not knowing through receptivity of the supreme God acting alone. Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 368–425. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 9–14; Meister Eckhart: A modern Translation, by R.B. Blakney (1941), 103–8; M. Fox, Breakthrough (1980), 251–7; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 39–45; Meister Eckhart, Selected Writings, ed. and trans. O. Davies (1994), 215–22.

226

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (407)‘Ubi est, qui natus est rex Iudaeorum?’ ‘Wâ ist, der geborn ist der juden künic?’1 Nû merket hie von dirre geburt, wâ si geschehe. ‘Wâ ist, der geborn ist?’ Ich spriche aber, als ich mê gesprochen hân2, daz disiu êwige geburt geschihet in der sêle in aller der wîse, als si geschihet in der êwicheit, noch minner noch mê, wan ez ist éiniu geburt. Und disiu geburt geschihet in dem wesene und in dem grunde der sêle. (408) | Sehet, nû vallent vrâgen.| Ze dem êrsten: sît daz got in allen dingen ist vernünfticlîche und den dingen mê inne ist, dan diu dinc in selber sint, und natiurlîcher – und wâ got ist, dâ muoz er würken und sich | (409) selben bekennen und sîn wort sprechen, waz eigener eigenschaft diu sêle habe ze disem würkenne gotes vür andern vernünftigen crêatûren, in den got ouch ist. Diz underscheit daz merket! Got ist in allen dingen wesenlîche, würklîche und gewalticlîche3, mêr: er ist aleine gebernde in der sêle. Wan alle crêatûren sint ein vuozstaphe | (410) gotes, mêr: diu sêle ist natiurlîche nâch gote gebildet. Diz bilde muoz gezieret und volbrâht werden mit dirre geburt. Dises werkes noch dirre geburt enist kein crêatûre enpfenclich dan diu sêle aleine. In der wârheit, swaz volkomenheit in die sêle komen sol, ez sî götlich einförmiclich lieht oder gnâde und sælicheit, daz muoz allez von nôt mit dirre geburt komen in | (411) die sêle und niht anders, in keiner wîse. Warte aleine dirre geburt in dir, sô vindest dû allez guot, allen trôst, alle wunne, wesen und wârheit. Versûmest dû diz, sô versûmest dû allez guot und alle sælicheit. Und swaz dir in disem înkumet, daz bringet lûter wesen und stæticheit. Und swaz 1. Matth. 2:1. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 437vb: ‘Ad Missam. Secundum Mattheum [2, 1–12]. Cum [+ ergo Vg.] natus esset Ihesus in Bethleem Iude in diebus Herodis regis, ecce Magi ab oriente venerunt Ierosolimam, dicentes: Ubi est qui natus est rex Iudeorum? vidimus enim stellam eius in oriente, et venimus adorare eum. Audiens autem Herodes rex, turbatus est, et omnis Ierosolima cum illo. Et congregans omnes principes sacerdotum, et scribas populi, sciscitabatur ab eis ubi Christus nasceretur. At illi dixerunt ei [ei > Vg.]: In Bethleem Iude: Sic enim scriptum est per Prophetam: Et tu Bethleem terra Iuda, nequaquam minima es in principibus Iuda: ex te enim exiet dux, qui regat populum meum Israel. Tunc Herodes clam vocatis Magis diligenter didicit ab eis tempus stelle, que apparuit eis: et mittens illos in Bethleem, dixit: Ite, et interrogate diligenter de puero: et cum inveneritis, renuntiate michi, ut et ego veniens adorem eum. Qui cum audissent regem, abierunt. Et ecce stella, quam viderant in oriente, antecedebat eos, usque dum

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

227

‘Ubi est, qui natus est rex Iudaeorum?’ ‘Where is the one who is born king of the Jews?’1 Now note here about this birth, where it has taken place. ‘Where is the one who has been born?’ I say, however, as I have said before,2 that this eternal birth happens in the soul in the same way as it happens in eternity, not less not more, because it is one birth. And this birth happens in the being and in the ground of the soul. Look, now the questions arise. First: Since God is intellectually in all things and is more within things than things are in themselves, and as He is more naturally in them – and where God is, there He must act, know Himself and speak His Word –, what proper property has the soul with respect to this acting of God more than the other intellectual creatures, in which God is as well? Note the differentiation! God is in all things essentially, as the one active and powerful;3 moreover, He alone is the one who gives birth in the soul. While all creatures are a footprint of God, the soul is naturally made according to the image of God. This image must be embellished and perfected with this birth. Neither this action nor this birth can be received by any creature except the soul. In truth, whatever perfection is to come into the soul, be it divine uniform light, grace or happiness, by necessity has to come into the soul with this birth, nothing else and in no other way. If you wait for this birth alone in you, you will find all good, all comfort, all gladness, being and truth. If you miss this, you will miss all good and all happiness. Yet, what comes into you through this, this brings pure being and constancy. And what you look veniens staret supra, ubi erat puer. Videntes autem stellam gavisi sunt gaudio magno valde. Et intrantes domum, invenerunt puerum cum Maria matre eius, et procidentes adoraverunt eum: et apertis thesauris suis obtulerunt ei munera, aurum, thus et mirram. Et responso accepto in somnis ne redirent ad Herodem, per aliam viam reversi sunt in regionem suam’. 2. Reference to Hom. 9* [S 101], n. 2. ‘mê’; J. Quint translates ‘schon öfters’. 3. The triad of ‘wesenlîche, würklîche und gewalticlîche’ probably reflects the lat. ‘substantia, virtus et operatio’: see Ps.–Dionysius, De caelesti hierarchia, c. 11, § 2 (PG 3, 28D), Dionysiaca 930: ‘Omnes divinae mentes in substantiam virtutem et operationem (divisae sunt)’; Albertus, Quaestiones, ed. Fries, 140, 1–2: ‘dicit Dionysius, quod in re tria sunt: substantia, virtus et operatio’; Albertus, Summa theologiae I, tr. 6, q. 29, c. 1, a. 1, ed. Siedler, Kübel and Vogels, 216, 37–8: ‘fides ponit et similiter philosophi, quod in deo idem sunt substantia, virtus et operatio’.

228

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

dû suochest oder minnest ûzwendic disem, daz verdirbet; nim ez, swie dû wilt und swâ dû wilt, ez verdirbet. Aber diz aleine gibet wesen und allez daz ander verdirbet. Aber in dirre geburt sô wirst dû teilhaftic des götlîchen învluzzes und aller sîner gâben. Des enwerdent die crêatûren niht enpfenclich, in den daz bilde gotes niht enist, wan der sêle bilde gehœret sunderlîche ze dirre êwigen geburt, diu eigenlîche und sunderlîche in der sêle geschihet und geborn wirt von dem vater in dem grunde und in dem inwendigesten der sêle, dar nie bilde îngelûhte noch nie kraft îngeluogete. (412) | Diu ander vrâge ist: sît daz diz werk dirre geburt geschihet in dem wesene und in dem grunde der sêle, sô geschihet diz alsô wol in einem sünder als in einem guoten menschen. Waz gnâden oder waz nutzes geliget mir denne hie ane, wan der grunt der natûre ist in in beiden glîch, jâ, noch den, die in der helle sint, blîbet der adel der natûre êwiclîche? Nû merket diz underscheit!4 Eigenschaft dirre geburt ist, daz si alwege geschihet mit niuwem liehte. Si bringet alwege grôz lieht in die sêle, wan der güete art ist, daz si sich muoz ergiezen, swâ si ist. In dirre geburt ergiuzet sich got in die sêle mit liehte alsô, daz daz lieht alsô grôz wirt in dem wesene und in dem grunde der sêle, daz ez sich ûzwirfet und übervliuzet in die krefte und ouch in den ûzern menschen. Alsô geschach sant Paulô, dô in got ruorte mit sînem liehte ûf dem wege und im zuosprach. Ein glîchnisse des liehtes erschein ûzwendic, daz ez sîne gesellen sâhen, und umbevienc Paulum5. Alsô spriche ich von den sæligen von übervlüzzicheit des liehtes, daz in der sêle grunde ist, daz übergiuzet sich in den lîchamen und | (413) wirt dâ von vol klârheit. Des enmac der sünder niht enpfâhen noch enist sîn niht wirdic, wan er ervüllet ist mit den sünden und mit bôsheit, daz dâ heizet vinsternisse. Dar umbe sprichet er6: ‘die vinsternisse enenpfiengen noch enbegriffen niht daz lieht’. Daz ist des schult, wan die wege, dâ daz lieht în solte gân, bekümbert7 und versperret sint mit valscheit und mit vinsternisse, wan lieht und vinsternisse enmügen 4. Compare Wittgenstein, who apparently wanted at one point to use as a motto for Philosophical Investigations the Earl of Kent’s phrase from King Lear (Act I, sc. iv): ‘I’ll teach you differences’. See R. Monk, Ludwig Wittgenstein (1990), 537. We thank John Connolly for this reference.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

229

for or love apart from this, will perish; take it how you will and where you will, all will perish. This, however, alone will provide being, while all else perishes. Yet in this birth you will become partaker of the divine influx and all its gifts. These cannot be received by the creatures in which God’s image does not exist, for the soul’s image belongs especially to this birth which happens properly and especially in the soul, born from the Father in the ground and in the innermost being of the soul, into which never an image ever shone nor a power looked. The second question is: Since this act of this birth happens in the being and in the ground of the soul, it happens in a sinner as well as in a good man. What grace and what use come for me with it, if the ground of nature is the same in both; indeed, even in those who are in hell, does the nobility of nature remain eternally? Now note the differentiation!4 It is the property of this birth that it always happens with fresh light. She always brings great light into the soul, as it is the mode of grace that she has to pour herself wherever she is. In this birth, God pours Himself into the soul with such a light, so that the light grows big in the being and in the ground of the soul, so that it throws itself out and flows over into the powers and also into the external man. Such happened to Saint Paul, when God touched him with His light on the way and spoke to him. A similitude of the light shines externally, so that his companions saw it, and it surrounded Paul.5 Thus, I speak about those who are happy in the overflow of light that is in the ground of the soul, which pours itself out into the body and through it becomes fully clear. This the sinner cannot receive nor is he worthy to, being full of sin and wickedness, which is called ‘darkness’. That is the reason why he says: ‘The darkness shall neither receive nor comprehend the light.’6 The responsibility lies with the ways the light should take, but which are preoccupied7 and barred by falsity and darkness, as light and darkness cannot exist together, nor 5. See Act. 9:3: ‘et subito circumfulsit eum lux de caelo…’ 6. Ioh. 1:5: ‘et lux in tenebris lucet, et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt’. 7. ‘bekümbert’: in the sense of preoccupation.

230

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

niht mit einander bestân, noch got und crêatûre. Sol got îngân, sô muoz überein diu crêatûre ûz8. Dises liehtes wirt der mensche wol gewar. Swenne er sich ze gote kêret, alzehant glestet und glenzet in im ein lieht und gibet im ze erkennenne, waz er tuon und lâzen sol und vil guoter anewîsunge, dâ er vor niht abe enweste noch verstuont. Wâ von und wie weist dû daz? Sich, daz merke! Dîn herze wirt dicke berüeret und bekêret von der werlt. Wie möhte daz geschehen wan mit der înliuhtunge? Daz ist sô zart und sô lustic, daz dich alles des verdriuzet, daz got oder götlich niht enist. Ez reizet dich ze gote und wirst vil guoter vermânunge gewar und dû enweist niht, wannen sie dir koment. Daz inwendic neigen enkumet enkeine wîs niht von keiner crêatûre noch von keiner ir anwîsungen, wan | (414) waz crêatûre wîset oder würket, daz kumet allez von ûzen zuo. Aber der grunt wirt aleine berüeret von disem werke. Und ie dû dich mê ledic haltest, ie mê dû liehtes und wârheit und underscheides9 vindest. Und dar umbe enverirrete nie kein mensche an keinen dingen dan aleine umbe daz, daz er disem von êrste entgangen was und sich ûzwendic ze vil behelfen wolte. Dar umbe sprichet Sant Augustînus10: vil ist der, die lieht und wârheit hânt gesuochet, und aber alles ûzwendic, dâ si niht enwas. Des koment sie ze dem lesten alsô verre ûz, daz sie niemer wider heim noch wider în enkoment. Und des enhânt sie die wârheit niht vunden, wan wârheit ist inwendic in dem grunde und niht ûzwendic. Wer nû wil vinden lieht und underscheit aller wârheit, der warte und neme war dirre geburt in im und in dem grunde, sô werdent alle krefte erliuhtet und der ûzer mensche. Wan alzehant sô got den grunt gerüeret inwendic, mit der vart sô wirfet sich daz lieht in die krefte und kan der mensche mê underwîlen, dan in | (415) ieman gelêren mac. Alsô sprichet der prophête11: ‘ich hân verstanden über alle, die mich ie gelêrten’. Sehet, umbe daz diz lieht niht schînen noch liuhten enmac in dem sünder, dar umbe ist daz unmügelich, daz disiu geburt in im geschehen müge. Disiu geburt enmac niht bestân mit vinsternisse der sünden, aleine si doch niht engeschihet in den kreften, sunder in dem wesene und in dem grunde der sêle.| 8. ‘Sol … ûz’: See Reden, c. 1 (DW V 187, 1–2): ‘Swâ der mensche in gehôrsame des sînen ûzgât und sich des sînen erwiget, dâ an dem selben muoz got von nôt wider îngân’. 9. ‘underscheides’: also refers to the kind of arguments and proofs that Eckhart is giving in his responses to the questions.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

231

can God and creature. Should God go in, at the same time, the creature must go out.8 Man realizes this light. As soon as he turns towards God, a light begins to gleam and glow within him and makes known to him what he has to do and what to leave undone, and gives lots of good instructions in regard to things of which before he knew or understood nothing. Whence and how do you know this? See, note this! Your heart will often be touched and turned away from the world. How else could this happen, except through illumination? This is so gentle and delightful that you become weary of all things which are not God or divine. It lures you to God, you become aware of lots of good instructions, but you do not know whence these arrive. This inward inclination is in no way due to a creature or any instruction from one, for what creatures direct or effect, all that comes from outside. The ground, however, alone is being touched by this activity. And the more you stay naked, the more you find light, truth and differentiation.9 And, therefore, man will never go astray for any other reason than that he first departed from this, and then sought too much for external help. For this reason, Saint Augustine says:10 Many have searched for light and truth, but all outside, where they were not. Finally they go out so far that they never get back home or find their way in again. Thus, they have not found the truth, as truth is inside the ground and not outside. Whoever wishes to find light and differentiation of all truth should wait and realize this birth in himself and in the ground, so that all powers and the external man become illumined. In fact, as soon as God has touched the ground inside, the light throws itself into the powers and man is sometimes capable of more than someone else could teach him to do. Hence, the Prophet says: ‘I have gained greater understanding than all who ever taught me.’11 See, because this light cannot shine or light up in the sinner, it is impossible that this birth happens in him. This birth cannot exist together with the darkness of sinners, as she does not happen in the powers, but in the being and in the ground of the soul. 10. Augustinus, Enarrationes in Psalmos 4, n. 8, ed. Dekkers and Fraipont, 18, 1–3: ‘Sed homines temporalia sectantes, qui certe multi sunt, nihil aliud nouerunt dicere, nisi “Quis ostendit nobis bona”, cum uera et certa bona intra semetipsos uidere non possint’. 11. Ps. 118:99: ‘Super omnes docentes me intellexi’.

232

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Nû vellet ein vrâge: sît got der vater gebirt aleine in dem wesene und in dem grunde der sêle und niht in den kreften, waz gât ez die krefte ane? Waz sol ir dienst her zuo, daz sie sich her zuo müezigen suln und disem vîren? Waz nôt ist des, sît daz ez in den kreften niht engeschihet? Daz ist wol gevrâget. Nû merke diz underscheit! Ein ieglîchiu crêatûre würket ir werk durch ein ende. Daz ende ist alwege daz êrste in der meinunge und daz leste in dem werke12. Alsô meinet got in allen sînen werken gar ein sælic ende, daz ist: sich selben und daz er die sêle mit allen irn kreften in daz ende bringe, daz ist: in sich selben. Durch daz würket got alliu sîniu werk, durch daz gebirt der vater sînen sun in der sêle, daz alle die krefte der sêle in daz selbe komen. Er lâget aleine dem, daz in der sêle ist, und ladet ez allez ze dirre wirtschaft und ze disem hove. Nû hât sich diu sêle ûzgespreitet13 mit den kreften und zerströuwet ieglîche in ir werk: die kraft des sehennes in daz | (416) ouge, die kraft des hœrennes in die ôren, die kraft des sprechennes in die zungen; und alsô sint iriu werk deste krenker inwendic ze wirkenne, wan ein ieglîchiu zerspreitetiu kraft ist unvolkomen. Her umbe, wil si krefticlîche14 würken inwendic, sô muoz si wider heim ruofen allen irn kreften und samenen von allen zerspreiten dingen in ein inwendic würken. Wan sant Augustînus sprichet15: ‘diu sêle ist mê dâ si minnet, dan dâ si in dem lîbe ist, dem si doch leben gibet’. Ein glîchnisse16: Ez was ein heidenischer meister, der was gekêret ûf eine kunst, daz was ein rechenunge. Er hâte alle sîne krefte dar zuo gekêret und saz vor äschen und zalte und suochte die kunst17. Dô kam einer und roufte ein swert und er enweste niht, daz ez der meister was, und sprach: ‘balde sprich, wie heizest dû, oder ich tœte dich’. Der meister was sô sere îngezogen, daz er des vîendes weder ensach noch 12. ‘Daz ende … werke’: lat. ‘finis est primum in intentione et ultimum in exsecutione’. See Averroes, Physica II, comm. 89 (1562), f. 174raA: ‘principium operationis est finis cognitionis, et principium cognitionis est finis operationis’; Albertus, Summa theologiae I, tr. 6, q. 20, c. 1, a.x2, ed. Siedler, Kübel and Vogels, 174, 27–8: ‘Finis autem est in exsecutione ultimum, licet in intentione sit primum’. See also Th. Aqu., Summa theologiae I–II, q. 1, art. 1 ad 1: ‘finis, etsi sit postremus in executione, est tamen primus in intentione agentis’; id., Quodlibet VIII, q. 1, ed. Leonina, 55 note to 75–6. ‘praestantiora sunt prima in intentione et ultima in exsecutione’: Eckhart, In Gen. n. 131 (LW I/1, 284, 11–2; LW I/2, 169, 5–6); In Ioh. n. 145 (LW III 121, 9) with the apparatus.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

233

Now, a further question might arise: Since God, the Father, gives birth alone in the being and in the ground of the soul and not in the powers, what has it to do with the powers? What should be their contribution, that they should submit themselves to this and be idle? What necessity exists, since it does not happen in the powers? This is well asked. Now, note this differentiation! Every creature does her work in light of the end. The end is always the first thing in one’s intention and the last thing in one’s action.12 Thus, God intends in all His actions clearly a happy end, that is, Himself and that He brings the soul together with all her powers into this end, that is, into Himself. God does all His work through the Father giving birth to His Son in the soul, so that all the powers of the soul come into the same. He waits solely for what is in the soul, bidding all to this inn and to this court. Now, the soul has expanded herself  13 with the powers and dispersed all into her work: the power of sight into the eye, the power of listening into the ears, the power of speech into the tongue; hence her actions are the weaker to work inside, as every dispersed power is imperfect. Therefore, if she wishes to act powerfully 14 inside, she must call all her powers back home from all dispersed things and collect them to act internally. In fact, Saint Augustine says: ‘The soul is more where she loves than where she gives life to the body.’15 An example:16 There was a pagan master who was devoted to the art of calculus. He had directed all his powers to it, sat by the embers, making calculations and practicing the art.17 Along came somebody and drew a sword without knowing that it was the master, and said: ‘Quick, tell me you name or I’ll kill you.’ The master was too deeply absorbed to see or hear the foe or to catch what he said; he was 13. ‘hat sich … ûzgespreitet’: see also the ‘laboriosas distentiones’ of which Anselm speaks, see note 20 below. 14. Paronomasia of ‘kraft’ and ‘kreftecliche’. 15. Ps.-Augustinus, or rather Bernardus, De praecepto et dispensatione, c. 20, n. 60, ed. Leclerq and Rochais, 292, 24–5: ‘Neque enim praesentior spiritus noster est ubi animat, quam ubi amat’. 16. ‘Ein glîchnisse’: The source for the following example, referring to the killing of Archimedes after the siege of Syracuse, is Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia VIII, c. 7, ext. 7, ed. Briscoe, 526–7. 17. Here ‘kunst’ is his specific undertaking, not generally ‘science’.

234

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

enhôrte noch enmohte gemerken, waz er meinte, noch | (417) enkunde sich sô vil geûzern, daz er sprechen möhte ‘ich heize alsô’. Und dô der vîent lange und sô vil geruofte und er niht ensprach, dô sluoc er im den hals abe. Diz was umbe eine natiurlîche kunst ze gewinnenne. Wie unglîche mê wir uns entziehen solten von allen dingen und samenen alle unsere krefte ze schouwenne und ze bekennenne die einige, ungemezzene, êwige wârheit! Her zuo samene alle dîne krefte, alle dîne sinne, alle dîne vernunft18 und allez dîn gehugnisse: daz kêre in den grunt, dâ dirre schatz inne verborgen liget. Sol diz geschehen, sô muost dû allen werken entvallen und komen in ein unwizzen, solt dû diz vinden.| Nû vellet ein vrâge: enwære ez niht edeler, daz ein ieglîchiu kraft ir eigen werk behielte und daz einiu die andern niht enhinderte an irn werken, und daz ez ouch got niht enhînderte an sînem werke? In mir enmac enkeîne wîs sîn crêatiurlîches wizzennes, daz niht enhindere, alsô als got alliu dinc weiz âne hindernisse, alsô als die sæligen tuont. Diz ist ein nütze vrâge. Nû merket diz underscheit! Die sæligen sehent ane in gote ein bilde und in dem bilde bekennent sie alliu dinc; jâ, got selber der sihet alsô in sich und bekennet in im alliu dinc. Er enbedarf sich niht kêren von einem ûf daz ander, als wir müezen. Wære ez alsô in disem lebene, daz wir einen spiegel vor uns hæten alle zît, in dem wir in einem ougenblicke alliu dinc | (418) sæhen und bekenten in einem bilde, sô enwære uns würken noch wizzen kein hindernisse. Mêr: wan wir uns kêren müezen von einem ûf daz ander, dar umbe enmac ez niht an uns in einem gesîn âne hindernisse des andern, wan diu sêle ist alsô gar gebunden ze den kreften, daz si mit in hine vliuzet, swar sie hine vliezent, wan in allen den werken, diu sie würkent, dâ muoz diu sêle bî sîn – und mit andâht, oder sie enmöhten ir gewürken mit nihte. Vliuzet si denne mit ir andâht ze ûzerlîchen werken, sô muoz si von nôt inwendic deste krenker sîn an irn inwendigen werken, wan ze dirre geburt sô wil got und muoz haben ein ledige, unbekümberte, vrîe sêle, in der niht ensî dan er aleine, noch diu nihtes noch niemannes enwarte dan sîn aleine.

18. ‘vernunft’ is here one of the three Augustinian elements of the soul.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

235

unable to utter a word, even to say: ‘My name is so–and–so.’ And as the enemy had called long and often, but without him answering, he cut his head off. And this happened to gain a natural art. How much more should we remove ourselves from all those things and collect all our powers, in order to contemplate and to know the one incommensurable, eternal truth! To this end collect all your powers, all your senses, your entire intellect18 and your entire memory; turn these into the ground, where this treasure rests hidden internally. If this should happen, you have to fall away from all actions and come into ignorance, if you would find this. Now, a question might arise: Would it not be more noble that every power possesses its own activity and that the one does not hinder the other from acting, nor hinder God in His activity? Might there not be in me a manner of creaturely knowing that is not a hindrance, just as God knows all things without hindrance, and so too the blessed? This is a useful question. Now, note this differentiation! The blessed see an image in God and in this image they know all things; indeed, God Himself looks into Himself and knows in Himself all things. He does not need to turn from one thing to another, as we need to do. If we had in this life all the time a mirror in front of us in which in an instant we saw and knew all things in an image, acting and knowing would be no hindrances. Moreover, as we need to turn ourselves from one thing to another, we can attend to one thing only at the expense of another. For the soul is so firmly attached to the powers that she has to flow with them wherever they flow, because in all the activities they do, the soul has to be with them and attentive, or they could not work at all. If she flows, then, attentively to external activities, by necessity she has to be weaker internally in her inward activities, as for this birth God wishes and needs to have a naked, unencumbered, free soul, in which is nothing else but Him alone and which does not pay heed to anything or to anybody but Him only.

236

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Her ûf sprach Kristus19: ‘wer iht anders minnet dan mich und zalt vater und muoter und vil anderiu dinc, der enist mîn niht wirdic’. ‘Ich enbin niht komen ûf ertrîche vriden ze bringenne, sunder daz swert, umbe daz ich alliu dinc abesnîde und abescheide die swester, den bruoder, daz kint, die muoter, den vriunt, der wærlîche dîn vîent ist’. Wan swaz dir heimlich ist und dir inne ist, daz ist wærlîche dîn vîent. Wil dîn ouge alliu dinc sehen und dîn ôre alliu dinc hœren und dîn herze alliu dinc bedenken, in der wârheit: in allen disen dingen muoz dîn | (419) sêle zerströuwet werden. Dar umbe sprichet ein meister20: swenne der mensche ein inwendic werk sol würken, sô muoz er alle sîne krefte înziehen rehte als in einen winkel sîner sêle und sich verbergen vor allen bilden und formen, und aldâ mac er würken. Hie muoz er komen in ein vergezzen und in ein nihtwizzen. Ez muoz sîn in einer stille und in einem swîgenne, dâ diz wort sol gehœret werden. Man enmac disem worte mit nihte baz gedienen dan mit stilheit und mit swîgenne. Dâ mac man ez gehœren und aldâ verstât man ez rehte in dem unwizzenne. Dâ man niht enweiz, dâ wîset ez sich und offenbâret ez sich21. (420)| | Nû vellet aber ein vrâge: ir möhtet sprechen: herre, ir setzet allez unser heil in ein unwizzen. Daz lûtet als ein gebreste. Got hât den menschen gemachet, daz er wizze, als der prophête sprichet22: ‘herre, mache sie wizzende’. Wan swâ ein unwizzen ist, dâ ist gebreste und ist îtelkeit … ein vihelîcher mensche, ein affe und ein tôre. Daz ist wâr, als verre er in dem unwizzenne blîbet. Mêr: man sol hie komen in ein überformet wizzen. Noch diz unwizzen ensol niht komen von unwizzenne, mêr: von wizzenne sol man komen in ein unwizzen. Danne suln wir werden wizzende mit dem götlîchen wizzenne und danne wirt geadelt und gezieret unser unwizzen mit dem übernatiurlîchen wizzenne. | (421) Und hie in disem, dâ wir uns halten lîdende, dâ sîn wir volkomener, dan ob wir würhten23.

19. Matth. 10:37: ‘Qui amat patrem aut matrem plus quam me, non est me dignus’. Matth. 10:34–6: ‘Nolite arbitrari quia pacem venerim mittere in terram: non veni pacem mittere, sed gladium. Veni enim separare hominem adversus patrem suum, et filiam adversus matrem suam, et nurum adversus socrum suam: et inimici hominis, domestici eius’. 20. Anselmus, Proslogion, c. 1, ed. Schmitt, 97, 4–6: ‘Eia nunc, homuncio, fuge paululum occupationes tuas, absconde te modicum a tumultuosis cogitationibus tuis. Abice nunc onerosas curas, et postpone laboriosas distentiones tuas’.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

237

To this Christ said: ‘Whoever loves anything but me and loves father and mother or many other things is not worthy of me.’ ‘I did not come upon earth to bring peace but a sword, to cut away all things and detach from sister, brother, mother, child, and friend who in truth are your foes.’19 Because what is intimate to you and close to you, this is truly your enemy. If your eye wishes to see everything, your ear hear everything and your heart reflect upon everything, in truth, in all these things, your soul must be dispersed. Therefore, a master says:20 when man is meant to do an interior activity, he must pull into a corner of his soul all his powers and hide himself away from all images and forms, and then there he might act. Here he must come to forgetting and ignorance. It must be in stillness and in silence, when this Word should be heard. One cannot serve this Word with anything but with stillness and with silence. Then, one might hear it and then also rightly understand it in ignorance. As one does not know of it, it shows itself and reveals itself.21 Now a question might arise. You may say: Sir, you put all our happiness in ignorance. That sounds like a weakness. God has made man to know, as the Prophet says: ‘Lord, make them know!’22 Where there is ignorance, there is weakness and idleness ... an animal–like man, an ape, a fool. This is true, as long as he remains in ignorance. But here one should come into a transformed knowing. This knowing should not derive from ignorance; rather one should come from knowing to unknowing. Then we should become knowing with divine knowing and then our unknowing will become noble and embellished with transnatural knowing. And in this, where we keep ourselves receptive, we are more perfect than if we were active.23

21. ‘ez’: the Word. 22. Tob. 13:4: ‘et faciatis scire eos’. 23. Following the different structuring of the text by L. Sturlese in contrast to that of G. Steer: ‘Und hie in disem’ is not a new argument, but a conclusion from the previous one.

238

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Dar umbe sprichet ein meister24, daz diu kraft des hœrennes vil edeler sî dan diu kraft des sehennes, wan man lernet mê wîsheit mit hœrenne dan mit sehenne und lebet hie mê in der wîsheit. Man vindet25 von einem heidenischen meister26: dô er lac und sterben wolte, dô redeten sîne jünger vor im von grôzer kunst, und er huop sîn houbet ûf alsô sterbende und hôrte zuo und sprach: ‘eyâ, lâzet mich noch dise kunst lernen, daz ich ir êwiclîche gebrûche’. Daz hœren bringet mê în, aber daz sehen wîset mê ûz, jâ, daz werk des sehennes an im selber. Und dar umbe suln wir in dem êwigen lebene vil sæliger sîn in der kraft des hœrennes dan in der kraft des sehennes. Wan daz werk des hœrennes des êwigen wortes daz ist in mir und daz werk des sehennes daz gât von mir. Und daz hœren bin ich lîdende, aber daz sehen bin ich würkende. (422) | Aber unser sælikeit enliget niht an unsern werken, mêr: an dem daz wir got lîden. Wan als vil got edeler ist denne diu crêatûre, als vil ist daz werk gotes edeler dan daz mîn. Jâ, von | (423) unmæziger minne hât got unser sælicheit geleget in ein lîden, wan wir mê lîden dan würken und unglîche mê nemen dan geben. Und ein ieglîchiu gâbe bereitet die enpfenclicheit ze einer niuwen gâbe, jâ, ze einer mêrern gâbe. Ein ieglîchiu götlîchiu gâbe wîtert die enpfenclicheit und die begerunge ze eînem merern und grœzern ze enpfâhenne. Und her umbe sprechent etlîche meister27, daz an dem sî diu sêle gote ebenmæzic. Wan als got unmæzic ist | (424) an dem gebenne, alsô ist ouch diu sêle unmæzic an dem nemenne oder enpfâhenne. Und als got ist almehtic an dem würkenne, alsô ist diu sêle abgründic an dem lîdenne. Und dar umbe wirt si überformet mit gote und in gote. Got der sol würken und diu sêle sol lîden: er sol sich selben bekennen und minnen in ir, si sol bekennen mit sîner bekantnisse und sol minnen mit sîner minne. Und dar umbe ist si vil sæliger mit dem sînen dan mit dem irn. Und alsô ist ouch ir sælicheit mê gelegen in sînem würkenne dan in dem irn. Sant Dionysius wart eines gevrâget von sînen jüngern, war umbe sie Timotheus alle vürliefe an volkomenheit. Dô sprach Dionysius28: 24. Topic of Bernard of Clairvaux, see the documentation in DW IV 421. 25. An ellipsis of ‘saying’ or ‘writing’. 26. Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia VIII, c. 7, ext. 8, ed. Briscoe, 527. 27. ‘etlîche meister’: unidentified reference, perhaps an interpretation of ‘quo est omnia fieri’ attributed to the intellect by Aristotle, De anima III, c. 5, 430a14 (see A. Beccarisi, in Studi sulle fonti di Meister Eckhart I 36).

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

239

Therefore, a master says24 that the power to listen is much more noble than the power to see, because one learns more wisdom by listening than by seeing, and thus lives more according to wisdom. One finds25 in a pagan master:26 when he lay dying, his disciples discussed in his presence about great skills, and he lifted his head to listen, dying though he was, and said: ‘Oh, let me learn this skill so that I can eternally make use of it.’ Listening draws in more, while seeing directs me towards the outside, indeed, the very act of seeing does it. Hence, we shall be more happy in life eternal through the power of hearing than through the power of seeing, as the activity of listening to the eternal Word is within me, while the activity of seeing goes out from me. While listening, I am receptive, but while seeing I am the one who acts. Our happiness, however, does not consist in our activity, rather in us being receptive of God. For as God is more noble than the creature, so much more noble is the activity of God than my own. Indeed, out of incommensurable love God has set our happiness in receptivity, as we are more receptive than active and receive incomparably more than we give. And each gift prepares receptivity for a new gift, indeed, a greater gift. Each divine gift broadens receptivity and desire to receive a greater and bigger one. For this reason some masters say27 that in this the soul would be like God. For as much as God is incommensurable in giving, so the soul is also incommensurable in taking and receiving. And as God is almighty in acting, so is the soul abyssal in receiving. And that is why she is transformed by God into God. God should act and the soul should receive: He should know Himself and love Himself in her, she should know with His knowledge and should love with His love. And that is why she is so much more happy with what is His than with her own. Hence also her happiness rests more in His activity than in her own. Saint Dionysius was once asked by his disciples, why Timothy surpassed them all in perfection. And Dionysius said: 28

28. According to G. Steer (and J. Koch in LW IV 95 n. 3) Eckhart mistakes Timothy for ‘Hierotheus’, of whom speaks Ps.–Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 2 § 9 (PG 3, 647B), Dionysiaca 104, 3: ‘patiens divina’. See also Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 191 (LW III 160): ‘Unde Hierotheus didicit divina patiendo…’

240

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Timotheus ist ein gotlîdender man. Der in dem wol künde, der vürliefe alle menschen. (425) | Und alsus enist dîn unwizzen niht ein gebreste, sunder dîn hœhste volkomenheit, und dîn lîden ist alsus dîn oberstez werk. Und alsus in dirre wîse muost dû abeslahen alliu dîniu werk und muost tuon swîgen alle dîne krefte, solt dû in der wârheit bevinden dirre geburt. In dir solt dû vinden den gebornen. Allez daz dû anders vinden maht, daz muost dû vürloufen und zerücke werfen. Daz wir allez daz vürloufen und verliesen, daz disem geborn künige niht wol engevellet, des helfe uns der, der dar umbe ist worden des menschen kint, daz wir werden gotes kint. Âmen.

H OMILY 13* [S 102]

241

Timothy is a God–receptive man. Whoever is expert in this, would surpass all men. Hence, your ignorance is no weakness, but your highest perfection, and your receptivity is your highest activity. Thus you must cut off all your activities and must keep all your powers silent, should you wish to really experience this birth. In yourself you should find the one who is born. Anything else that you may find, you must surpass and reject. That we surpass and leave behind all of what this newborn king does not like, may He help us who became a child of man, in order for us to become a child of God. Amen.

Homily 14* [S 90] Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae ‘Sedebat Iesus docens in templo’ Introduction

E

ckhart focuses here on a verse taken from the Gospel reading for the Sunday in the Octave of Epiphany (Luke. 2:46). Even though Eckhart deviates from the Gospel reading, the text and also the homily are linked to this liturgical day. Amongst his vernacular homilies, there exist three for the Sunday in the Octave of Epiphany: In addition to the present one these are Hom. 15* [S 103] and Hom. 16* [S 104]. The three sermons examine respectively the fact that Jesus was sitting in the temple when he taught (Hom. 14*), an interpretation of the entire episode (Hom. 15*), and finally the response of Jesus to his parents (Hom. 16*). We have two traditions for this text, three witnesses for what G. Steer sees as representing the authentic version A, preserved in two codices of the Paradisus animae intelligentis (H2, O, Sermon no. 15 Strauch) and a fragment (K1a), and a redacted version B, to be found in six codices, but not reproduced here. In one place the fragment (K1a) which represents the oldest manuscript that we can draw on for this homily gives us an additional text which is also missing in the Steer edition, but has been complemented here (see below n. 4). The content of the homily Straight away, Eckhart’s first reading of the verse is remarkable. He does not focus on Jesus teaching in the temple, but on the fact that Jesus was sitting while teaching (nn. 2–3). From this he deduces that the soul too should sit, i.e. rest.

244

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Only as a second topic does Eckhart introduce the fact that Jesus taught (nn. 4–8). What He taught is not entirely clear, as the object of His teaching could be ‘unser verstantnisse, wie daz würken solte’ or, if ‘unser verstantnisse’ is a dative, then the matter of teaching would be only ‘wie daz würken solte’. The following sentence ‘Wan swaz lêren sol, daz lêret nâch dem, daz ez selber ist’ points to the first option, although the further development of the homily, which deals first with Christ Himself being understanding (nn. 4–8) and then speaks about understanding as the object of teaching (nn. 9–13), shows that, indeed, Eckhart had a double meaning in mind for this ambiguous sounding introduction. Jesus teaches ‘our understanding’, that which He Himself is, or, as Eckhart further explains: ‘Christ being understanding, he teaches our understanding’, because in Him teacher and the subject taught are the same (n. 4). And, the identity of teacher and teaching impacts on what the teacher teaches us. This topic of Christ being understanding is unfolded in the next arguments. Christ ‘has a fourfold knowledge and wisdom’ (n. 5). The first form is divine (n. 5), while the second, ‘creature’ – another term that is not entirely clear: should it be or mean ‘created’? (n. 6) – is further explained as ‘the knowledge that was poured into His soul, when she was made, and it is supernatural. Hence, it is of the created soul, but also a knowledge that knows ‘everything that God ever created and that He is still going to create’. So ‘creature’ might be the correct term (‘this light is a creature, yet it is supernatural to His soul’), as it encompasses various notions of creation. The third form of Christ’s knowledge and wisdom ‘He shares with the angels’ (n. 7); His soul ‘naturally has an image of all things’. Then the fourth ‘knowledge which He has is sensibility’ or ‘the power of the senses’ (n. 8). Just as he unfolds Christ as being understanding in four ways, Eckhart develops the ‘what’ of Christ’s teaching according to the four ways that He is knowledge (nn. 9–12). First, as ‘knowledge which is God’ (n. 9; see n. 6); second ‘with the knowledge that is supernatural’ (n. 10; see n. 6); third with the knowledge ‘that He has in common with the angels’ (n. 11; see n. 7), and finally with the increasing knowledge of the senses (n. 12; see n. 8). To this, Eckhart adds the question ‘who are those whom He taught?’ (n. 13), and the answer, ‘these are the simple minded’ (n. 13).

H OMILY 14* [S 90]

245

Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 43–71. Previous English translation The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 158–61.

246

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (54)‘Sedebat Iesus docens in templo.’| Daz êwangelium sprichet1, daz ‘Kristus saz in dem tempel und lêrte’. Daz er saz, daz meinet ruowe. Wan swer dâ sitzet, der ist bereiter lûter dinc vürzebringenne dan der dâ gât oder | (55) stât. Sitzen bediutet ruowe, stân arbeit, gân unstæticheit2. Her umbe sol diu sêle sitzen, daz ist in einer verdrücketer dêmüeticheit under alle | (56) crêatûren. Danne kumet si in einen gerasteten vride. Den vride erkrieget si in einem liehte. Daz lieht wirt ir gegeben in einer stilheit, dâ si inne sitzet und wonet. Ez sprichet ouch Albertus3: daz ist diu sache, daz die meister sitzent, die dâ | (57) lêren suln die künste. Wan swer dâ liget, dem gânt die groben geiste, daz ist daz grobe bluot, ûf in daz hirne und verdunstert daz verstantnisse. Swenne aber der mensche sitzet, sô sinket daz grobe bluot und die liehten geiste dringent sich ûf ze dem hirne. Sô wirt diu memoria erliuhtet. Her umbe saz Kristus in dem tempel, daz ist in der sêle. Daz ander stücke ist, daz er lêrte. Waz lêret er? Er lêrte unser verstantnisse, wie | (58) daz würken solte. Wan swaz lêren sol, daz lêret nâch dem, daz ez selber ist. Her umbe, wan Kristus ein verstantnisse ist, sô lêret er unser verstantnisse. Kristus hâte vierleie kunst und wîsheit4. (61) | Diu êrste was götlich. Dâ mite bekante er, daz dâ ist an der êwigen vürsihticheit: niht aleine daz dâ ist und werden sol, mêr: ouch allez daz, daz got vermohte, ob er wolde. Mit dirre kunst sach er in der liute

1. Luc. 2:46. The topic is not found in literal form in Vg. The liturgical context is Evangelistar., Arch. f. 437vb: ‘Dominica infra octavam Epyphanie. Secundum Lucam [2, 42–52]. In illo tempore cum factus esset Ihesus [In … Ihesus: Et cum factus esset Vg.] annorum duodecim, ascendentibus parentibus eius [parentibus eius: illis Vg.] Ierosolimam secundum consuetudinem diei festi, consummatisque diebus, cum redirent, remansit puer Ihesus in Ierusalem, et non cognoverunt parentes eius. Existimantes autem illum esse in comitatu, venerunt iter diei, et requirebant eum inter cognatos, et notos. Et non invenientes, regressi sunt in Ierusalem, requirentes eum. Et factum est, post triduum invenerunt illum in templo sedentem in medio doctorum, audientem illos, et interrogantem [+ eos Vg.]. Stupebant autem omnes, qui eum audiebant, super prudentia, et responsis eius. Et videntes admirati sunt. Et dixit mater eius ad illum: Fili, quid fecisti nobis sic? ecce pater tuus, et ego dolentes querebamus te. Et ait ad illos: Quid est quod me querebatis? nesciebatis quia in his, que patris mei sunt, oportet me esse? Et ipsi non intellexerunt verbum, quod locutus est ad illos [eos Vg.]. Et descendit cum eis, et venit Nazareth: et erat subditus illis. Et mater

H OMILY 14* [S 90]

247

‘Sedebat Iesus docens in templo.’ The Gospel says1 that ‘Jesus sat in the temple and taught’. That He ‘sat’ means ‘rest’. Because the one who sits is more prepared to utter pure things than the one who walks around or stands. Sitting means resting, standing work, and walking around non–stability.2 Therefore, the soul should sit, i.e. in a remote humility below all creatures. Then she comes into a restful peace. This peace she receives in a light. The light is given to her in quietness, when she sits and dwells in there. Albert, too, says3 this is the reason why the masters sit when they are supposed to teach the arts. Because when one lies down, coarse thoughts, i.e. coarse blood, will push to the brain and darken the understanding. But when man sits, the coarse blood sinks and light thoughts enforce themselves on the brain. So, the memory will be enlightened. This is why Christ sat in the temple, i.e. in the soul. The other topic is that He taught. What did He teach? He taught our understanding how it should act. Because what ought to teach, teaches according to what it is itself. Therefore, with Christ being understanding, He teaches our understanding. Christ has a fourfold skill and wisdom.4 The first is divine. With this He knew what is there according to eternal providence: not only what there is and will be; rather also all that God could do, if He wished to. With this skill He looked into people’s

eius conservabat omnia verba hec in corde suo. Et Ihesus proficiebat sapientia, [+ et Vg.] etate, et gratia apud Deum et homines’. 2. ‘unstæticheit’: a parallel interpretation see LW IV 418, 5; on Albert see the next note. 3. Albertus, Super Matthaeum, c. 5, 1, ed. Schmidt, 102, 26–42: ‘Primum notatur in hoc quod dicit: cum sedisset; sedere enim quiescentis est; stans enim laborat, et vadens instabilis est. Et cum laborat corpus, non potest in perfecta quiete esse animus, sed abstrahitur, et tunc non bene concipit et confert et ordinat dicenda et causas dicendorum et differentias et accidentia communia et propria et alia, quae in dicendo considerantur. Iacens autem est inordinatur, quia caput non sursum porrigitur. Et ideo grossi fumi et grossi spiritus et sanguis in eo multiplicantur … subtilia autem et levia et clara in calore et sanguine et spiritu ad ipsum tunc, quando elevatur, deveniunt. Et haec faciunt bonos intellectus et memorias. Haec est causa, quod cathedra ponitur doctoribus’. 4. See Th. Aqu., Summa theologiae III, q. 10: ‘de scientia divina dictum est in Prima parte, restat nunc videre … de scientia beata … de scientia indita … de scientia acquisita’.

248

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

herzen, und alliu diu werk, diu gote zuohœrent, diu worhte er mit dirre kunst. Daz vermohte Kristus mit der kunst, diu got ist. (62) | Diu ander kunst Kristî, diu ist crêatûre, daz ist diu kunst, diu sîner sêle îngegozzen wart, dô si geschaffen wart, und diu ist übernatiurlich. Dar umbe gebrûchete si5 gotes und schouwete got an sînem wesene. An dirre kunst engienc im nie zuo oder abe. Mit dirre kunst vermohte er, daz er bekante allez, daz got ie geschuof und daz er noch schaffen wil; aber niht daz sîne unendelicheit ane tritet, daz enkennet si niht. Diz lieht ist crêatûre und ist doch sîner sêle übernatiurlich. (63) | Diu dritte kunst ist, die er hât mit den engeln, die in in hânt bilde aller dinge6. Sant Dionysius der sprichet7: dô got die engel geschuof, dô gap er in bilde aller dinge, daz hânt sie natiurlîche. Alsô hât Kristî sêle natiurlîche aller dinge bilde, | (64) daz er ir gegeben hât, und er doch daz selbe bilde niht enist, als daz ingesigel dem wahse sîne forme gibet und doch ein mit im niht enist. An dirre kunst ennam er niht zuo noch abe. Hie mite vermohte si8, daz si vernam alliu gescheheniu dinc und niht diu geschehen suln, als der engel niht bekennet zuokünftigiu dinc, ez enwerde im denne geoffenbâret. Von natûre enhât er ez niht. Diu vierde kunst, die er hâte, diu was an der sinnelîcheit. Wan swaz die sinne begrîfent von bûzen, daz wirt geistlîche getragen | (65) in die fanthasie, daz ist in die bildærinnen. Alse Aristoteles sprichet In libro de anima. Oportet intelligentem fantasma speculari. Eine craft der selen in deme libe heiszet fanthasia in der craft sament. vnde vaszet sich daz. daz da von den vszern sinnen. wirt vernomen vnd wirt also braht in daz virstentnůsse. do von der mensche mag zů nemen an wisheyde. An der kůnst hade auch Cristus ein zů nemen alse Sanctus thomas sprichet9. Quod puer ihesus crescebat uirtutibus sensitiuis. Jhesus Cristus vnser herre. der wůsch in sinre mensheit an den creften der sinne (66).|10

5. i.e. the soul. 6. ‘bilde aller dinge’: ‘bilde’ can be singular or plural. 7. Ps.–Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 7, § 2 (PG 3, 868B), Dionysiaca 388,1–390,3. 8. i.e. the soul. 9. Th. Aqu., Compendium theologiae I, c. 216: ‘quantum ad cognitionem experimentalem Christus potuit proficere’.

H OMILY 14* [S 90]

249

hearts, and all actions that belong to God He performed through this skill. This Christ was capable of through the skill which is God’s. The second skill of Christ is a creature. It is the skill that was poured into His soul, when she was made, and it is supernatural. Therefore, she5 made use of God and contemplated God in her being. This skill of His never increased or decreased. With this skill He was capable of knowing everything that God ever created and that He is still going to create; but He does not know anything that does not belong to His infinity. This light is a creature, yet it is supernatural to His soul. The third skill He shares with the angels, who in themselves have an image of all things.6 Saint Dionysius says:7 When God created the angels, He gave them an image of all things which they have naturally. Hence, Christ’s soul naturally has an image of all things, which He has given to her, while He Himself is not the same image, just as the seal imprinted in wax gives its forms, yet is not one with the imprint. This skill neither increased nor decreased. With it she8 was able to grasp all things past and not those that are yet to happen, just as the angel does not know future things, unless they are revealed to him. He does not have it naturally. The fourth skill that He has is sensibility. Indeed, what the senses grasp from outside is mentally carried into the fantasies, that is the imaginations. Consequently, Aristotle says in the book De anima: The one who understands needs to behold images. One power of the soul in this body is called image together with the power. Und what is received from the outer senses is being caught and brought into the intellect, from which the person can grow in wisdom. In this skill also Christ had a growth as Saint Thomas says:9 Quod puer ihesus crescebat uirtutibus sensitiuis. Jesus Christ, our Lord, he grew in his humanity in the powers of the senses.10

10. ‘Alse Aristoteles ... creften der sinne’ is taken from K1a; see Liber Positionum (668,20–34 Pfeiffer); Tauler, Pr. 37 (144,8–14 Vetter): „Diser grunt můs gesůcht und funden werden. In dis hus můs der mensche gon und enpfallen allen den sinnen und das sinnelich ist, und allem dem das mit den sinnen zůgetragen wirt und in getragen ist von bilden und von formen, und von allem dem das die fantasie und die bilderinne und alle sinneliche bilde ie in getrůgen in eigener wise, ja och úber die vernúnftigen bilde und die wirkunge der vernunft nach vernúnftiger wise und irre wúrkunge“; see also Pr. 49 (217,7–14 Vetter); Das Geistbuch (65,12–66,14 Gottschall).

250

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

| Nû sol man merken, waz er uns lêret mit disen künsten. Diu êrste kunst, diu got ist, ûz der gevlozzen sint alliu dinc, mit der lêrte er uns, wie wir widerkêren suln und ordenen alliu dinc in irn êrsten ursprunc: Daz geschihet in dem menschen, in dem gesament werdent alliu manicvelticheit und alliu lîplîchiu dinc ûfgetragen werdent in got in irn êrsten ursprunc, daz got ist. Und swenne der mensche dar zuo kumet, daz er sich ein mit gote vindet, denne aller êrste kêret er alliu dinc ze irn êrsten sachen11. | (67) Hie von sprichet sant Bernhart12: ‘Herre, waz ist der mensche, daz dû in sô sêre geminnet hâst?’ Er ist ein guot, ‘in dem gesament werdent alliu manicvaltigiu dinc in eine einicheit’13. Diz lêrte er uns mit der kunst, diu got ist. Waz lêret er uns mit der kunst, diu übernatiurlich ist? Dâ mite lêret er uns, daz wir übergân allez daz natiurlich ist. Ze dem êrsten suln wir übergân unsere eigene sinne und dar nâch dünken | (68) und wænen. Nû schrît, edeliu sêle, ziuch ane dîne schritschuohe, daz ist verstantnisse und minne. Dâ mite schrît über diu werk dîner krefte und über dîn eigen verstantnisse und über die drîe ierarchien und über daz lieht, daz dich kreftiget, und sprinc in daz herze gotes, daz ist in sîne verborgenheit: dâ solt dû inne verborgen werden allen crêatûren. Diz lêret er uns mit der übernatiurlîchen kunst. Dar umbe sprichet sant Paulus14: ‘ir sît tôt und iuwer leben ist verborgen mit Kristô in gote’. (69) | Waz lêret er uns mit der natiurlîchen kunst, die er hât mit den engeln, die aller dinge bilde in in hânt? Alsô hât diu sêle eine mügelicheit, alliu dinc ze begrîfenne15. Her umbe solte si wonen in ir selber, wan diu wârheit ist von binnen und niht von bûzen. Her umbe sprichet sant Augustînus16: ô herre, wie vil ist der, die ûz in selber | (70) gegangen sint ze suochenne die wârheit, die noch nie ze in selber enkâmen? Hie umbe enhânt sie die wârheit niht vunden, wan got ist der sêle innerste innicheit. Diz lêret er uns mit der natiurlîchen kunst.

11. ‘ze irn êrsten sachen’: note the plural. 12. Bernardus, In dedicatione ecclesiae, Sermo V, n. 3, ed. Leclercq, Talbot and Rochais, 390, 17–8: ‘Quid est homo … quid apponis erga eum cor tuum?’ 13. Bernardus, In dedicatione ecclesiae, Sermo V, n. 7, ed. Leclercq, Talbot and Rochais, 393, 15–6: ‘… si sollerter advertas quanta et in ipsa substantia convenisse videtur diversitas naturarum’ (‘guot’ is absent from the quoted text).

H OMILY 14* [S 90]

251

Now one should note what He teaches us with these skills. With the first skill, which is God’s, from which all things were poured forth, He taught us how we should come back to arrange all things into their first origin: This happens in man, into whom is sown so that all multiplicity and all corporeal things are carried up into God, into their first origin, that is God. And when man achieves oneness with God, then, for the first time he turns all things to their first causes.11 Of this Saint Bernard says: ‘Lord, what is man that you loved Him so much?’12 He is a good thing ‘into whom are sown all multiplicity into one unity.’13 This He taught us with the skill that is God’s. What does He teach us with the skill that is supernatural? With it He teaches us that we should overcome everything natural. First we should overcome our own senses and after that, thinking and assuming. Now go, noble soul, put on your walking boots, i.e. understanding and love. With them go beyond the actions of your powers and beyond your own understanding and beyond the three hierarchies and beyond the light that empowers you, and jump into the heart of God, that is into His hiding: in there you should be hidden from all creatures. This He teaches us with the supernatural skill. For this reason, Saint Paul says: ‘You are dead and your life is hidden with Christ in God.’14 What does He teach us with the natural skill that He has in common with the angels, which have the image of all things in themselves? That thus the soul has the possibility to grasp all things.15 For this reason she has to reside in herself, as the truth is one from the inside and not from outside. Therefore, Saint Augustine says:16 O Lord, how many have gone out of themselves to search for the truth and never came to themselves? Thus they did not find the truth, as God is the soul’s innermost inner being. This He teaches us with natural skill.

14. Col. 3:3: ‘Mortui enim estis, et vita vestra abscondita est cum Christo in Deo’. 15. ‘Alsô … begrîfenne’: see Aristotle, De anima III, c. 5, 430a14 (see also A. Beccarisi, in Studi sulle fonti di Meister Eckhart I 36 nn. 153–6). 16. Augustinus, De vera religione, c. 49, ed. Daur, 249, 16: ‘palma cognitioni datur et artificio et comprehensioni veritatis, ad quam nullo modo perveniunt, qui foris eam quaerunt’.

252

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Waz lêret er uns mit der zuonemenden kunst? Daz ist, wie wir unsern ûzern menschen ordenen suln. Diu ordenunge wirt volbrâht mit prüevenne: der mensche sînes selbes. Wan daz sich der mensche selber bekenne, daz ist bezzer dan bekantnisse aller geschaffener dinge. ‘Kristus lêrte’ sie. Wer sint die er lêret? Daz sint die einvaltigen. Wer ist rehte einvaltic? Daz ist der nieman betrüebet noch betriuget mit nihte und ouch von niemanne betrogen mac werden. Daz sint die rehten einvaltigen. (71) | In die rehten einvalticheit helfe uns got. Âmen.

H OMILY 14* [S 90]

253

What does He teach us with the increasing skill? It is how we should order our external man. This order is perfected through reflection: man reflecting on himself. For man knowing himself is better than knowledge of all created things. ‘Christ taught’ them. Who are those whom He taught? These are the simple–minded. Who is rightly simple–minded? It is the one who does neither sadden nor deceive anybody and who does not wish to be deceived by anybody. These are the rightly simple–minded. God help us towards the right simple–mindedness. Amen.

Homily 15* [S 103] Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae ‘Cum factus esset Iesus annorum duodecim’

Introduction

T

his homily focuses on one particular aspect of the Gospel reading for the Sunday in the Octave of Epiphany: Luc. 2:42–6: the fact that Jesus stayed in the temple and could not be found by his parents amongst ‘acquaintances’, ‘relatives’ or ‘the crowd’. One also has to compare the previous homily, Hom. 14* [S 90], and the one that follows, Hom. 16* [S 104]. The homily was widely circulated; it is preserved in its entirety in 16 manuscripts and four older editions, and was part of a set together with Hom. 9* [S 101], 12* [S 102] and 16* [S 104]. The content of the homily Eckhart reports the Gospel story by first stressing his topic, how Mary and Joseph lost Jesus, and how, after their return ‘to the original place’, namely the temple, ‘there they found him’. Applied to the soul, he draws from this text that one must ‘leave all the crowds and … come back into the origin’, which is the ground from which one has come forth (n. 3). A number of questions are raised: First, ‘whether man can find this birth in several things that are divine, but are carried into us by our senses’ (n. 4). The response is ‘no’, God alone must act (n. 5). Eckhart gives the example of the (Samaritan) woman meeting Jesus at the well (n. 6). A second question is added: ‘What should my intellect do, when it should stay so naked without any activity?’ – ‘Should I then stay in total darkness?’ (n. 7), and here the answer to the latter question is ‘yes’ (n. 8).

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

255

The questions, then, turn into a kind of dialogue about the darkness without return (nn. 9–12), a darkness which is nothing but the potential of receptivity (nn. 12–3), and a deserted depletedness (nn. 14–5). Naturally, the further question arises whether it would not be better if man tried to chase away such standing back by God by imploring Him (n. 15). But, again, the answer is ‘no’ (n. 16). Even the preparation is not man’s task, but that of God, who is quicker to help man before man even asks for divine support (n. 17). The birth of a child, into whose soul God has poured Himself even prior to its birth, serves as an example (n. 18). Yet, Eckhart then continues that God’s grace and man’s action are not to be understood in terms of a sequence in time, but as one single instance. If this were so, however, the further question is added: ‘How can that be?’ And the answer is: When man does not notice God’s grace (n. 19). Eckhart’s answer that even this form of knowledge does not depend on man, but solely on God (n. 20), does not satisfy the fictive interlocutor, so the question follows: ‘Can I have a sign by which I know that it (the birth of the Son in me) has happened?’ (n. 21). And, it seems, Eckhart has driven the arguments to this point, to state that there are ‘three true signs’, of which, however, he finds it worth explaining only one (n. 22). This one sign is being caught by divine love, expressed in one’s turning to creatures, as no creature will hinder the one who is full of love (nn. 23–8). Even penitence or any other divine exercise has not the power that such love for creatures has. The latter is the sole hook by which one should be caught (n. 27). Editions, commentaries and notes G. Steer, DW IV 426–92; L. Sturlese, LE IV 171–99. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 20–5; Meister Eckhart: A Modern Translation, by R.B. Blakney (1941), 118–24; Meister Eckhart, Selected Writings, ed. and trans. O. Davies (1994), 222–30; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 55–61.

256

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (474) ‘Cum factus esset Iesus annorum duodecim’. Man liset in dem êwangeliô1: ‘dô unser herre zwelf jâr alt wart, dô gienc er mit sînen eltern ze Jêrusalem in den tempel. Und dô sie dannen giengen, dô bleip Jêsus in dem tempel und des enwesten sie niht. Und dô sie heim kâmen und sîn vermisten, dô suochten sie in under den bekanten und under den mâgen und bî der menige2 und envunden sîn dâ niht’, mêr: sie hâten in verlorn under der menige. ‘Und dar umbe muosten sie wider gân, dannen sie her wâren komen. Und’ dô sie wider in den ursprunc3 kâmen, ‘in den tempel, dô vunden sie in’. (475) | Alsô in der wârheit: solt dû dise edele geburt vinden, sô muost dû alle menige lâzen und muost wider in den ursprunc und in den grunt komen, dâ dû ûzkomen bist. Alle die krefte der sêle und alliu iriu werk daz sint allez menige: gehugnisse, verstantnisse und wille, diz allez vermanicvaltiget dich. Dar umbe muost dû sie alle lâzen: sinnelicheit, bildunge und allez daz, dâ dû dich selber inne vindest oder meinest. Dar nâch maht dû vinden dise geburt und anders niht, gewærlîche. Er enwart nie vunden under vriunden noch under mâgen noch bî den bekanten, mêr: alles verliuset man in dâ. Dar umbe sô hân wir hie ein vrâge: ob der mensche dise geburt iht vinden müge in etlîchen dingen, diu doch götlich sint und aber von ûzen îngetragen sint durch die sinne, als etlîche bildunge von gote, alsô daz got guot sî, wîse, erbarmherzic oder swaz des ist, daz diu | (476) vernunft in ir schepfen mac, daz doch götlich ist; in der wârheit: ob man in disem allem dise geburt iht vinden müge? In der wârheit: nein, swie daz ez doch allez guot und götlich sî, wan ez ist allez dar îngetragen von ûzen durch die sinne. Ez muoz aleine von innen ûf von gote herûzquellen, sol disiu geburt eigenlîche und 1. Luc. 2:42. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 437vb: ‘Dominica infra octavam Epyphanie. Secundum Lucam [2:46–52]. In illo tempore cum factus esset Ihesus [In … Ihesus: Et cum factus esset Vg.] annorum duodecim, ascendentibus parentibus eius [parentibus eius: illis Vg.] Ierosolimam secundum consuetudinem diei festi, consummatisque diebus, cum redirent, remansit puer Ihesus in Ierusalem, et non cognoverunt parentes eius. Existimantes autem illum esse in comitatu, venerunt iter diei, et requirebant eum inter cognatos, et notos. Et non invenientes, regressi sunt in Ierusalem, requirentes eum. Et factum est, post triduum invenerunt illum in templo sedentem in medio doctorum, audientem illos, et interrogantem [+ eos Vg.]. Stupebant autem omnes, qui eum audiebant, super prudentia, et responsis eius. Et videntes admirati sunt. Et dixit mater eius ad illum: Fili, quid fecisti nobis sic? ecce pater tuus, et ego dolentes querebamus te. Et ait ad illos:

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

257

‘Cum factus esset Iesus annorum duodecim’. One reads in the Gospel: ‘as our Lord turned twelve, He went together with His parents to Jerusalem into the temple. And when they had left, Jesus remained in the temple, which they did not notice. And when they had returned home and missed Him, they looked for Him amongst acquaintances, their relatives and the crowd, but they did not find Him there’,1 rather they had lost Him in the crowd.2 ‘And therefore, they had to go back to where they had come from. And’ when they had come back to the original place,3 ‘into the temple, there they found him’. And so in truth: if you would find this noble birth, you have to leave all the crowds and have to come back into the origin and into the ground from where you have come forth. All the powers of the soul and all their activities are all crowds: memory, understanding and will, these all distract you. Hence, you have to leave them all: sensibility, imagination and all that in which you find or intend to find yourself. After that you can find this birth and in no other way, indeed. He was never found amongst friends, not amongst relatives, not amongst acquaintances, rather one lost Him there entirely. Thus, a question arises for us: whether man can find this birth in several things that are divine, but are carried into us by our senses, for example by many notions of God, that God be good, wise, merciful or whatever our intellect can create in itself which is divine. In truth, whether one can find in all of this this birth? In truth, no. While all might be good and divine, all of it is carried into us from outside through the senses. Yet it has to swell up from inside, from God, if this birth there will shine properly and purely,

Quid est quod me querebatis? nesciebatis quia in his, que patris mei sunt, oportet me esse? Et ipsi non intellexerunt verbum, quod locutus est ad illos [eos Vg.]. Et descendit cum eis, et venit Nazareth: et erat subditus illis. Et mater eius conservabat omnia verba hec in corde suo. Et Ihesus proficiebat sapientia, [+ et Vg.] etate, et gratia apud Deum et homines’. While the specification ‘went ... into the temple’, could have been introduced by Eckhart as clarification of a self–evident fact, it is rather to emphasize the notion that His parents who had lost Him had to return to the place where they had lost Him. 2. ‘menige’ can mean ‘multitude’, but also ‘multiplicity’, see n. 3. 3. ‘ursprunc’: as ‘original place’ pointing to the following notion of ‘origin’, see n. 3.

258

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

lûterlîche dâ liuhten, und muoz allez dîn würken geligen und müezen alle dîne krefte dem sînen dienen, niht dem dînen. Sol diz werk volkomen sîn, sô muoz ez got aleine würken und dû solt ez aleine lîden. Dâ dû dînes willen und wizzennes wærlîche ûzgâst, dâ gât got wærlîche und williclîche în mit sînem wizzenne und liuhtet dâ klærlîche. Dâ sich got alsô sol wizzen, dâ enmac dîn wizzen niht bestân noch dar zuo dienen. Dû ensolt des niht wænen, daz dîn vernunft dar zuo wahsen müge, daz dû got erkennen mügest. Mêr: sol got götlîche in dir liuhten, dar envürdert dich dîn natiurlich lieht | (477) zemâle niht zuo, mêr: ez muoz ze einem lûtern nihte werden und sîn selbes ûzgân zemâle; und danne sô mac got îngân mit sînem liehte und bringet allez daz mit im în, dem dû ûzgegangen bist und tûsentwarbe mê, dar zuo eine niuwe forme, diu al in ir beslozzen hât. Des hân wir ein glîchnisse in dem êwangeliô, dô unser herre ûf dem brunnen vil minniclîche geredet mit der vrouwen und si irn kruoc liez und lief in die stat und kundete dem volken, daz der wâre Messias komen wære. Daz volk gloubte ir und giengen ûz und sâhen in selber. Dô sprâchen sie ze ir 4: ‘von dînen worten englouben wir nû niht, mêr: von dem, daz wir in selber gesehen hân’. Alsô, in der wârheit: aller crêatûren kunst noch dîn eigen wîsheit noch dîn wizzen enmac dich dar zuo niht bringen, daz dû got götlîche mügest wizzen. Solt dû got götlîche wizzen, sô muoz dîn wizzen komen in ein lûter unwizzen und in ein vergezzen dîn selbes und aller crêatûren. (478) | Nû möhtest dû sprechen: Eyâ, herre, waz sol denne mîn vernunft tuon, sô si alsô gar ledic muoz stân âne allez würken? Ist diz diu næhste wîse, daz ich erhebe mîn gemüete in ein unbekantez bekantnisse, daz doch niht sîn enmac? Wan bekente ich iht, daz enwære niht ein unbekantnisse noch enwære niht ledic und blôz. Sol ich denne zemâle stân in einem dünsternisse? Jâ, sicherlîche! Dû enkanst niemer baz gestân, dan daz dû dich zemâle setzest in ein dünsternisse und in ein unwizzen. Ach, herre, muoz ez allez abe, enmac dâ kein widerkêren sîn? Nein, entriuwen, dâ enmac kein widerkêren sîn.

4. Ioh. 4:28: ‘Reliquit ergo hydriam suam mulier, et abiit in civitatem, et dicit illis hominibus: Venite … Exierunt de civitate, et veniebant ad eum … Et mulieri dicebant: Quia

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

259

and all your powers have to subside and all your powers have to serve His, not yours. Should this activity be perfect, God alone has to perform it and you should solely receive it. When you truly leave your will and your knowledge, then God truly and willingly enters you with His knowledge and He enlightens you clearly. As God should know Himself, your knowledge can neither remain nor serve it. You should not assume that your intellect grows into knowing God. Instead, should God divinely shine in you, your natural light will not help you there at all; instead, it has to become a pure nothing and entirely go out itself; and then God can enter with His light and bring all that in with Him, that which you have left and a thousand times more on top, and in addition a new form which contains all in it. Of this we have an example in the Gospel, when our Lord speaks full of love to the lady at the well, and she left her jug, ran into town and announced to the people that the true Messiah had come. The people believed her, they went out and saw Him themselves. Then they said to her: ‘Now we do not believe because of your words; rather, because we ourselves have seen Him.’4 Thus, in truth, neither all creatures’ skill nor your own wisdom, nor your knowledge enable you to get to know God in a divine way. If you would know God divinely, your knowing has to become a pure unknowing and a forgetting of yourself and of all creatures. Now you may say: Ah, Lord, what should my intellect do, if it should stay so naked without any activity? Is this the closest way that I lift my mind towards an unknown knowledge which, however, cannot be? Because if I knew it to be, it would not be unknown, nor would I be naked and bare. Should I then stay in total darkness? Yes, of course! You cannot stand in a better place than to put yourself into darkness and ignorance. Ah Lord, has everything to go, is there no return? No, indeed not, there can be no return.

iam non propter tuam loquelam credimus: ipsi enim audivimus, et scimus quia hic est vere salvator mundi’.

260

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Waz ist aber daz dünsternisse, wie heizet ez oder waz ist sîn name? Sîn name enist niht anders dan ein mügelich5 enpfenclicheit, diu zemâle wesennes niht enmangelt noch ouch darbende | (479) enist, mêr: aleine ein mügelich enpfenclicheit, in dem dû volbrâht solt werden. Dar umbe enist kein widerkêren dar ûz. Ist aber, daz dû widerkêrest, daz enmac niht sîn von keiner wârheit wegen, ez muoz ein anderz sîn: entweder die sinne oder diu werlt oder der tiuvel. Und volgest dû dem kêre6, von nôt vallest dû in gebresten, und dû maht alsô verre kêren, daz dû hâst den êwigen val. Dar umbe enist kein widerkêren, mêr: alles ein vür sich dringen und die mügelicheit erlangen und ervolgen. Si enruowet niemer, si enwerde ervüllet mit vollem wesene. Rehte als diu materie niemer engeruowet, si enwerde denne ervüllet mit allen | (480) formen, die ir mügelich sint, alsô engeruowet diu vernunft niemer, si enwerde denne ervüllet mit allem dem, daz ir mügelich ist7. (481) | Her ûf sprichet ein heidenischer meister8: diu natûre enhât niht, daz sneller sî dan der himel; der übersnellet alliu dinc an sînem loufe. Aber sicherlîche des menschen gemüete ist unglouplîche vil sneller an sînem loufe. Wære, daz ez in sînem mügenne blîbe würklich und daz ez sich hielte unverhœnet und unzerrizzen von nidern dingen und von groben dingen, ez überliefe den obersten himel und erwünde niemer, ez enkæme in daz allerhœhste und enwürde gespîset und gevuoret von dem aller besten guote. Und dar umbe, swie nütze dirre mügelicheit nâch ze volgenne sî und sich ledic und blôz halten und aleine disem dünsternisse nâchhangen und nâchspüeren und niht widerkêren, sô ist ir9 wol mügelich ze gewinnenne den, der dâ alliu dinc ist. Und ie mê dû dîn selbes wüester | (481) stâst und unwizzende aller dinge, ie næher dû disem komest. Von dirre wüestunge stât geschriben10: ‘ich wil mîne vriundinne vüeren in die wüeste und wil ir zuosprechen in ir herze’. Daz wâre wort 5. ‘mügelich’: here meaning the ‘potential’, which, of course, alludes to the Aristotelean intellectus possibile. 6. Paronomasia of ‘kêren’ and ‘widerkêren’. 7. ‘alsô engeruowet … ist’: G. Steer in DW IV 480 interprets this as ‘intellectus adeptus’, but the comparison with the raw material suggests rather the intellectus possibile, see previous footnote.

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

261

What, then, is this darkness, how do you call it or what is its name? Its name is nothing but the potential5 of receptivity, which does neither entirely miss being nor is it in need of it; rather a potential of receptivity alone, in which you shall be perfected. That is why there is no return from it. Should you return, that cannot possibly be on account of the truth, it has to be something else, either the senses or the world or the devil. And if you followed this turn,6 by necessity you would fall into weakness and you could turn back so far that you have an eternal fall. That is why there is no return; instead all is a pressing forth, a potential reception and achieving. It will never stop, unless it is fulfilled by full being. Just as matter never stops, unless it is filled with all forms that are possible for it, so the intellect never stops, unless it is filled with all that is possible for it.7

Regarding this, a pagan master says:8 nature has nothing that is quicker than heaven; it overtakes everything in its course. But for sure, the human mind is unbelievably faster in its run. If only it were to truly remain in its potentiality and were to keep unashamed and untorn by base and coarse things, it would overtake the highest heaven and it never would stop until they arrived in the highest and were fed and nourished by the greatest good. Therefore, as much as this possibility profits you to follow, keep yourself naked and bare and long for and track this darkness, and do not return; for it is possible for it9 to gain the one who is all things. And the more you stay deserted of yourself and are ignorant of all things, the closer you come to this. Of this desert it is written: ‘I will lead my friend into the wilderness and will encourage and speak into her heart.’10 The true word of eternity is only spoken in solitude, where man is

8. Aristotle, De caelo II, c. 4, 287a26: ‘velocior omnibus motibus motus caeli’ (trans. in Albertus, De caelo II, tr. 2, c. 2, ed. Opelt, 129, 83). 9. ‘ir’: the possibility. 10. Os. 2:14: ‘Ducam eam in solitudinem, et loquar ad cor eius’.

262

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

der êwicheit wirt aleine gesprochen in der einicheit, dâ der mensche verwüestet und verellendet11 ist sîn selbes und aller manicvalticheit. Dirre verwüesteten ellendicheit begerte der prophête, dô er sprach12: ‘ach, wer gibet mir vedern als der tûben, daz ich gevliegen müge, dâ ich ruowe vinde?’ Wâ vindet man ruowe und rast? Daz tuot man wærlîche in der | (483) verworfenheit und in der wüeste und ellendicheit aller crêatûren. Her ûf sprichet Dâvît13: ‘ich erwelte mê verworfen ze sînne und versmâhet in mînes gotes hûse, dan’ mit grôzen êren und rîchtuome ‘ze habenne in der sünder tabernakel’. Nû möhtest dû sprechen: Eyâ, herre, muoz daz iemer sîn von nôt, daz man aller dinge verellendet und verwüestet sî ûzerlîche und innerlîche, krefte und ir werk, muoz daz allez abe? Daz ist ein swære stân, ob got den menschen alsô lât stân âne sînen enthalt, als der prophête sprichet14: ‘wê mir, mîn ellende ist mir erlenget’, ob got mîn ellende alsô lenget, daz er mir weder liuhtende noch zuosprechende noch in mir würkende enist, als ir hie lêret und meinet. Sô der mensche alsô stât in einem lûtern nihte, enist denne niht bezzer, er tuo etwaz, daz im daz dünsternisse und daz ellende vertrîbe, alsô daz der mensche bete oder lese oder predige hœre oder ander werk, diu doch tugende sint, daz man sich dâ mite behelfe? Nein! Daz wizzest in der wârheit: Aller stillest stân und aller lengest ist dâ dîn aller bestez. (484) | Âne schaden enmaht dû dannen niht kêren ze keinen dingen, daz ist sicher. Dû woltest gerne bereit werden ein teil von dir und ein teil von im, daz doch niht gesîn enmac. Mêr: dû enkanst des bereitennes niemer sô schiere gedenken noch begern, got der ensî vor dâ, daz er dich bereite. Nû sî, daz ez geteilet sî, daz dîn sî daz bereiten und sîn sî daz înwürken oder îngiezen, daz doch unmügelich ist, sô wizzest daz, daz got würken und îngiezen muoz, als schiere er dich bereit vindet. Niht enwæne, daz ez sî mit gote als mit einem lîplîchen zimbermanne, der würket und enwürket niht, sô er wil: in sînem willen stât ez, swie in lustet ze tuonne und ze lâzenne. Alsô enist ez niht an gote. Wâ oder wenne dich got bereit vindet, sô muoz er würken und sich in dich

11. ‘verellendet’: together with ‘ellende’ and ‘esilio’ means being in misery, in the desert and being depleted, see n. 15. 12. Ps. 54:7–8: ‘Quis dabit mihi pinnas sicut columbae, et volabo, et requiescam?’

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

263

deserted and depleted11 of his own self and all multiplicity. This deserted depletion the Prophet longed for when he said: ‘Ah, who will give me the wings of a dove that I may fly away and be at rest?’12 Where does one find quietness and rest? This one does truly, being rejected, in the desert and depleted of all creatures. To this David says: ‘I have chosen more to be rejected and spurned in the house of my God than to have’ great honours and riches ‘in the tavern of sinners’.13

Now you may say: O well, Lord, is it always necessary that one has to be depleted of all things and deserted, outside and inside, of powers and their activity, does all of this have to be gone? This is a difficult position, that God lets man stay without His support, as the Prophet says: ‘Woe to me as my misery is prolonged’,14 as God prolonged my misery by neither enlightening nor encouraging me nor acting in me, as you teach and suggest. When man thus stays in a pure nothing, would it not be better if he did something so that darkness and misery would be chased away by him praying, reading, listening to preaching or other activities, which surely are virtues, so that one makes use of them? No! This you should know in truth: To remain silent for a very long time, that is here the very best. Without harm you cannot turn to anything, that is certain. You would love to be part of yourself and part of Him, but this is not possible. Rather, you cannot think or desire to prepare yourself quicker than God, who is there before to prepare you. But even if it were shared that it were your part to prepare and His part that He acts or pours Himself in you, something impossible, you should know that God must act and pour Himself in you as soon as He finds you prepared. Don’t think that it is with God as with a physical carpenter who, as he wishes, works and does not work, depending on his will, whether he is in a good mood to work or to let it be. It is not so with God. Where and when God finds you prepared, He must act and pour Himself into

13. Ps. 83:11: ‘Elegi abiectus esse in domo Dei mei: magis quam habitare in tabernaculis peccatorum’. 14. Ps. 119:5 (Hebr.): ‘Heu mihi, quia peregrinatio mea prolongata est’.

264

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

ergiezen. Ze glîcher wîse als der luft lûter und rein ist, sô muoz sich diu sunne ergiezen und enmac sich niht enthalten. Sicherlîche, ez wære ein grôz gebreste an gote, ob er niht grôziu werk in dich enwürhte und grôz guot in dich niht engüzze, sô er dich alsô ledic und blôz vindet. (485) | Alsô schrîbent die meister15, daz in dem selben puncten, sô diu materie des kindes ist bereit in der muoter lîbe, in dem selben ougenblicke sô giuzet got în den lebendigen geist, die sêle, diu des lîbes forme ist. Ez ist ein blik bereiten und îngiezen. Wenne diu natûre ûf ir hœhstez kumet, sô gibet got gnâde. In dem selben puncten, sô der geist bereit ist, sô gât got în âne ûfzuc und âne beiten. In dem buoche der tougene stât geschriben, daz unser herre dem | (486) volke enbôt: ‘ich stân vor der tür klopfende und beitende16. Swer mich înlât, mit dem wil ich haben ein âbentwirtschaft’.17 Dû endarft in niht suochen weder hie noch dâ, er enist niht verrer dan vor der tür. Dâ stât er und beitet und wartet, wen er bereit vinde, der im ûftuo und in înlâ. Dû endarft im niht verre ruofen, er mac ez kûme erbeiten, daz dû ûftuost. Im ist tûsent stunt nœter dan dir. Ez enist niht dan ein puncte daz ûftuon und daz îngân. Nû möhtest dû sprechen: Wie mac daz gesîn? Ich enbevinde sîn doch niht. Nû merke! Daz bevinden enist niht in dînem gewalt, mêr: ez ist in dem sînen, sô ez im vüeget. Er mac sich zöugen, sô er wil, und mac sich bergen, sô er wil. Diz meinte unser herre, dô er sprach ze Nicodemô18: ‘der geist geistet, dâ er wil. Sîn stimme hœrest dû und dû enweist, | (487) wannen er kumet oder war er vert’. Er sprichet alhie19 und widersprichet: dû hœrest und enweist doch niht. Mit hœrenne wirt man wizzende. Kristus meinte: mit hœrenne nimet man in oder ziuhet man in în, als ob er sprechen wolte: dû enpfâhest in und enweist des niht. Daz wizzest: got enmac niht lære noch îtel lâzen. Got und diu 15. The commentary by G. Steer ad loc. does not seem to be adequate: here it is the infusion of the rational soul after the provision of the vegetative one. See also Albertus, De natura et origine animae, tr. I, c. 5, ed. Geyer, 14: ‘Ostensum est etiam per antedicta, quod substantia illa quae est anima hominis, partim est ab intrinseco et partim ab extrinseco ingrediens, quia licet vegetativum et sensitivum in homine de materia educantur virtute formativa, quae est in gutta matris et patris, tamen haec formativa non educeret eas hoc modo, prout sunt potentiae rationalis et intellectualis formae et substantiae, nisi secundum quod ipsa formativa movetur informata ab intellectu universaliter movente in opere generationis. Et ideo complementum ultimum, quod est intellectualis formae, non per instrumentum neque ex materia, sed per suam lucem influit intellectus primae causae purus et

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

265

you. In the same way, as soon as air is clear and pure the sun must pour herself into it and cannot withold herself from it. For sure, it would be a great weakness of God, if He did not do great work in you and would not pour great good into you, when He finds you naked and bare. So the masters15 write, that in the very instant the body of the child is prepared in the womb of the mother, God at once pours the living spirit, the soul, in which is the form of the body. Preparing and pouring is one instant. As soon as nature comes into its highest, God gives grace. In the same instant that the spirit is prepared, God goes in without hesitation or delay. In the Book of Secrets it says that our Lord declared to the people: ‘I stand at the door knocking and waiting;16 whoever lets me in, with him I will sup.’17 You need not search for him either here or there; He is not further away than in front of the door. There He stands, abides and awaits whom He finds prepared to open for Him and let Him in. You need not call to Him from afar; He can hardly wait for you to open up. He is a thousand times more in need than you. The opening up and the going in, therefore, is nothing but one instant. Now, you may say: How can that be? I do not notice Him. Now note! To notice something is not in your power; instead it is in His, if it is convenient to Him. He might give birth to Himself and He might hide Himself, as He wishes. This is what our Lord meant when He said to Nicodemus: ‘The spirit breathes where it will: you hear its voice but do not know where it comes from, or where it is going.’18 He contradicts Himself here by saying: ‘You hear ... but do not know.’19 Through hearing you get to know. Christ meant: through hearing one takes or pulls Him in, as if He wanted to say: You receive Him, but you do not know. Do know: God cannot leave anything void immixtus. Propter quod etiam ex non praeiacenti aliquo creare rationalem deus dicitur animam; et hoc modo intellectus ingreditur in embryonem ab extrinseco materiae, non tamen ab extrinseco agente, quia intellectus, qui est auctor naturae, non est extrinsecus naturae…’ 16. ‘klopfende und beitende’: the durative form of the MHG is not found in the Scripture, but is often found in Eckhart when he speaks of God. 17. Apoc. 3:20: ‘Ecce sto ad ostium, et pulso: siquis audierit vocem meam, et aperuerit mihi ianuam, intrabo ad illum, et coenabo cum illo, et ipse mecum’. 18. Ioh. 3:8: ‘Spiritus ubi vult spirat: et vocem eius audis, sed nescis unde veniat, et quo vadat’. 19. ‘alhie’: the translation is based on a punctuation that differs from the DW edition.

266

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

natûre enmügen daz niht lîden, daz ihtes iht îtel oder lære sî. Dar umbe: wie daz sî, daz dich des dünke, daz dû sîn niht enbevindest und daz dû noch îtel sîst, des enist doch niht. Wan wære iht îtels under dem himel, ez wære swaz ez wære, kleine oder grôz, entweder der himel züge ez ûf an sich oder er müeste sich her nider neigen und ez ervüllen mit im selben. Got, der meister der natûre, enlîdet ez niht, daz ihtes iht îtel oder lære sî. Dar umbe stant alhie stille und enwenke niht von dirre îtelkeit. Wan dû maht dich ze der stunde dâ von ziehen, dû enkumest niemermê dar zuo. Nû möhtest dû sprechen: Eyâ, herre, ir meinet alles, ez sülle dar zuo komen, daz disiu geburt geschehe: daz der sun geborn werde in mir. Eyâ, möhte ich des ein zeichen hân, dâ bî ich möhte wizzen, ob ez geschehen wære? (488) | Jâ, sicherlîche! Wârer zeichen wol driu. Der wil ich nû einez sagen. Man vrâget mich dicke, ob der mensche dar zuo komen müge, daz in zît niht enhindere noch menige noch materie. Jâ, in der wârheit, swenne disiu geburt in der wârheit geschehen ist, sô enmügen dich alle crêatûren niht gehindern, mêr: sie wîsent dich alle ze gote und ze dîrre geburt, als wir vinden ein glîchnisse an dem blitzen. Swenne der blitze triffet, sô ersleht er, swaz dâ ist. Ez sî boum oder tier oder mensche, daz kêret er mit der vart ze im. Und hæte ein mensche den rücken dar gekêret, ûf der stunde wirfet er in umbe mit dem antlütze. Hæte ein boum tûsent bleter, sie kêrent sich alliu umbe gegen dem slage mit irm rehten ende20. Sich, alsô geschihet allen den, die von dirre geburt werdent berüeret und getroffen: die werdent snelliclîche gekêret ze dirre geburt in einem ieglîchen, daz gegenwertic ist. Jâ, swie grop ez joch ist, jâ, daz dir vor ein hindernisse was, daz vürdert dich nû zemâle. Daz antlütze wirt dir alsô gar gekêret ze dirre geburt; jâ, allez daz dû sihest oder hœrest, swaz daz sî, sô enmaht dû in allen dingen niht anders genemen dan dise geburt; jâ, alliu dinc werdent dir lûter got, wan in allen dingen sô enmeinest noch enminnest dû niht dan lûter got. Rehte als ob ein mensche lange die sunne anesæhe an | (489) dem himel, swaz er dar nâch sæhe, dâ bildete sich diu sunne inne. Swâ dir dises 20. See Albertus, Meteora III, tr. 3, c. 19, ed. Hossfeld, 171, 1–6: ‘Quod autem animal percussum fulmine vertit caput et frontem ad fulmen et hastulae arborum diriguntur ad ipsum ex impetu, est ictus vehementis, qui convertit ea, quae percutit contra impetum’.

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

267

or unfilled. God and nature cannot endure that anything should be unfilled or void. Hence, even if you think that you cannot notice Him and that you are still unfilled, the contrary is true. For if there were anything unfilled under heaven, whatever it were, small or great, either heaven pulled it up towards itself or it would bow down and have filled it by itself. God, the master of nature, does not endure that anything is unfilled or void. Therefore, stand still and do not waver from your emptiness; for if in this hour you move away, you will never come back to it again. Now you may say: Ah, Lord, you mean, this birth should happen, so that the Son be born in me. Ah, can I have a sign by which I know that it has happened? Of course! Three true signs! Of them I will now mention one. I am often asked whether man can achieve that he is not hindered by time, crowd or matter. Yes, in truth, when this birth has taken place in truth, none of the creatures will hinder you; rather, they all point you to God and to this birth. Take lightning as an example. Whatever the lightning hits, it strikes; whatever it hits, be it a tree, an animal or a man, it turns it immediately to itself. And if a man had turned his back to it, in this moment it would turn him round to face it. If a tree had a thousand leaves, they would all turn right side up towards the strike.20 See, so it happens with all who are touched and struck by this birth, they will suddenly turn to this birth with everything that is present. Yes, as far as something can be coarse, yes, what before was an impediment for you, now will fully help you. Your face, therefore, will be turned towards this birth. Indeed, everything that you see or hear, whatever it is, you can only grasp in all things nothing but this birth. Indeed, all things become the naked God, as in all things you cannot recognize or love but the naked God. Just as if man had looked for a long time into the sun in heaven, what he sees after that is that the sun is placed in him. If you fail to search for God,

268

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

gebristet, daz dû got niht ensuochest noch enmeinest noch enminnest in allen dingen und in einem ieglîchen dinge, dâ gebristet dir dirre geburt. Nû möhtest dû vrâgen: sol der mensche iht pênitencie üeben, der in disem stât, oder versûme er iht, ob er sich niht enüebet in pênitencie? (490) | Nû merket. Allez pênitencie leben ist under andern sachen dar umbe vunden, ez sî wachen, vasten, beten, weinen, disciplîne nemen, hærîniu hemede tragen, harte ligen und swaz des ist, daz ist allez dar umbe, wan der lîchame und daz vleisch sich alwege stellet wider den geist. Er ist im dicke ze stark; rehte als ein kampf ist under in, ein êwic strît. Der lîp ist hie küene und stark, wan er ist hie in sînem heimuote. Diu werlt hilfet im, diz ertrîche ist sîn vaterlant, im helfent hie alle sîne mâge: diu spîse, daz trank, diu zartheit; daz ist allez wider den geist. Wan der geist ist hie ellende, aber in dem himel sint alle sîne mâge und allez sîn geslehte. Dâ ist er vil wol gevriunt, ob er sich dar gerihtet und geheimlîchet. Und umbe daz, daz man dem geiste ze helfe kome in disem ellende und man daz vleisch etwaz krenke in disem strîte, daz ez dem geiste niht anegesige, her umbe tuot man im ane den zoum der pênitencie und drücket in dar umbe, daz sich der geist sîn erwern müge. (491) | Sît daz man im daz tuot umbe gevancnisse, wilt dû in denne tûsent stunt baz vâhen und beladen, sô lege im ane den zoum und daz bant der minne. Mit der minne überwindest dû in allerschierest und mit der minne beladest dû in allersêrest. Dar umbe enlâget got keinem dinge sô sêre an uns als der minne. Wan ez ist rehte mit der minne als mit dem angele des vischers. Der visch enmac im niht werden, er enhafte denne an dem angele. Wenne er den angel gevâhet, sô ist der vischer des visches sicher; war sich joch der visch hin oder her kêret, sô ist sîn doch der vischer sicher. Alsô spriche ich von der minne: wer von ir wirt gevangen, der hât daz allersterkeste bant und doch eine süeze bürde21. Wer dise süeze bürde ûf sich hât | (492) genomen, der ervolget mê und kumet ouch dâ mite næher dan mit aller üebunge und herticheit, die alle menschen geüeben möhten. Er mac ouch süeziclîche tragen und lîden allez daz, daz in anegât und got über in verhenget, und mac ouch süeziclîche vergeben, swaz man im übels tuot.

21. See Matth. 11:30: ‘Iugum enim meum suave est’.

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

269

to grasp and love Him in all things and in each thing, there you miss this birth. Now you may ask: Ought anyone who is in this state do penitence, or would he not miss anything by dropping penitential practice? Now note. All penitential life, amongst other concerns, be it vigils, fasting, praying, weeping, being disciplined, wearing hair shirts, lying on a hard bed, or whatever it may be, all has been invented, because body and flesh are always opposed to the spirit. The [body] is often too strong for the [spirit], just as if a battle took place amongst them, an eternal fight. Here the body is bold and strong, as here it is in its home. The world helps it, this earth is the land of its fathers, all its relatives come here to help it: the food, the drink, the delicacy, all this is against the spirit. Although the spirit is here in misery, in heaven are all its relatives and all its ancestors. There he has many good friends, if he settles there and makes his home. And to help the spirit in this misery and to weaken the flesh a bit in this battle, so that it cannot overcome the spirit, one therefore puts on the bridle of penance and presses it, so that the spirit can fight it off. From the moment that you do this to keep it imprisoned, if you want to bind and press it a thousand times better, put on the bridle and the bond of love. With love you will overcome it best and with love you burden it most. For that reason God does not wish anything more in us than love. For with love it is just as with the hook of a fisherman. The fish cannot be caught by him if it does not get hooked. When it takes the hook, then the fisherman has secured the catch, even if the fish turns back and forth, the fisherman has it secured. Thus I speak of love: whoever has been caught by it, has the strongest bond, and yet a sweet burden.21 Whoever has taken on this sweet burden, follows more intensely and with it comes much closer than with all exercises and endurance that any man might try. He will also be able to carry and suffer with delight all that comes to him and is hung on him by God, and he will be able to forgive with delight anything that one has inflicted on him.

270

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Kein dinc enmachet dich gote næher und got dir alsô eigen als diz süeze bant der minne. Der disen wec habe vunden, der ensuoche keinen andern wec. Swer an disem angele haftet, der ist alsô gevangen, daz der vuoz und diu hant, der munt, diu ougen und herze und allez daz, daz an dem menschen ist, daz muoz gotes eigen sîn. Und dar umbe enmaht dû dîsen vîent niemer baz überwinden, daz er dir niht enschade, dan mit der minne. Dar umbe stât geschriben22: ‘diu minne ist stark als der tôt, herte als diu helle’. Der tôt scheidet die sêle von dem lîbe, aber diu minne scheidet alliu dinc von der sêle. Swaz got oder götlich niht enist, daz enlîdet si niht. Der in disem stricke gevangen ist und in disem wege wandelt, waz werkes er iemer gewürket oder niht enwürket, daz ist zemâle al ein; er tuo iht oder niht, dâ enliget zemâle niht ane. Doch ist des menschen minstez werk oder üebunge nützer und fruhtbærer im selber und allen menschen und ist gote lobelîcher dan aller menschen üebunge, die joch âne tôtsünden sint und aber in minner minne stânt. Sîn ruowen ist nützer dan eines andern würken. Dar umbe lâge aleine disem angele, sô wirst dû sæliclîche gevangen, und ie gevangener, ie vrîer. Daz wir alsus gevangen und gevrîet werden, des helfe uns der, der selbe diu minne ist. Âmen.

22. Cant. 8:6: ‘Fortis est ut mors dilectio, dura sicut inferus (… aemulatio)’.

H OMILY 15* [S 103]

271

Nothing brings God closer to you and makes God your own as much as this sweet bond of love. Whoever has found this way will not look for another one. Whoever has taken this hook, is caught, so that the foot and the hand, the mouth and the eyes, the heart and anything of man must be God’s own. For this reason you will not be able to overcome this enemy better than with love, so that he will not harm you. Hence, it is written: ‘Love is strong as death, stronger than hell.’22 Death separates the soul from the body, but love separates everything from the soul. Whatever is not God or divine she will not receive. Whoever is caught by this trap and walks this way, the actions he has ever performed or has not performed are all but absolutely one: whether he acts or does not act, is entirely irrelevant. However, the slightest action or exercise of this man is more useful and fruitful to himself and to all men and to God, more worthy of praise than the exercises of all the men who are without mortal sins, but are smaller in love. His rest is more useful than the actions of the other. So get hooked by it alone, and you will happily be caught, and the more you are caught, the more you are free. That thus we will be caught and be freed, may the one help us who Himself is love. Amen.

Homily 16* [S 104] Dominica infra octavam epiphaniae ‘In his, quae patris mei sunt, oportet me esse’ Introduction

T

he verse Luke 2:49 (‘It is necessary that I will be in – the usual translation is ‘about’ – the things that belong to my Father’) is taken from the Gospel reading for the Sunday of the Octave of Epiphany. It is another homily on the ‘eternal birth which has come in time and is still daily being born in the innermost being of the soul’ (n. 2), part of the story of young Jesus in the temple. The passage links this text with Hom. 9* [S 101], Hom. 13* [S 102] and Hom. 15* [S 103]. The text is preserved in over 50 manuscripts and has been edited by G. Steer in two versions, the first of which he takes as authentic (‘A–Fassung’), while the second he sees as a redacted version. Yet, as we will see in at least one passage (see note below), it seems that both versions show signs of redactions and, although version A serves as the leading one, we need to take both into account. The content of the homily To start with, it is interesting to note that Eckhart has been asked to give this homily ‘about the eternal birth’ (n. 2), which indicates that he is speaking not in his own Dominican church, but rather by special invitation in some other place. As he talks extensively about joining the order and about vows, and later mentions that this homily is given to ‘learned and enlightened people who are taught and enlightened by God and the Scriptures’ (n. 23), it seems obvious that he is preaching in a monastic environment with close links to scholastic university discourses. One of the questions, therefore, pertains to the activity of teaching (n. 8).

274

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

The main thrust of this homily is to encourage the audience to follow one’s inner calling to wherever it takes one, may the journey last for ‘a week, a month, a year’ (n. 23), during which time no monk or nun would fail in their obligations, even though, for example, they had made their vow to attend the hours. Even in retrospect, once the person has come back to the community, she or he should not think of having missed anything during the time of the special calling. This Eckhart takes to endorse that being close to, or rather one with, God is worth more than any of the vows from which neither Pope nor Bishop can absolve (n. 23). This is another learned homily in the style of rhetorical questions and Eckhart’s answers. He opens with the question of ‘which properties the Father has’ – a central topic for Eckhart, as he mentions in his Latin Sermo II that he had put together a collection of Questions on the Attributes (of God), some of which have survived and have been recently re–discovered by us. Here as in these re–discovered Questions, the topic of God’s omnipotence is dealt with first: What power does God have ‘with regards to the other persons’, meaning not only the Trinitarian persons, but persons in general? (n. 2) Eckhart continues that ‘no man can notice this birth or come close to it, unless through great power’ – hence, the question here as well as in the re–discovered Questions is whether the Father’s omnipotence can be communicated to other persons. In answering this question, Eckhart begins with the detachment of man from ‘all his senses in all things’, to free himself from all his own powers and activities, to make place for those of God and be able to suffer and receive His powers. A further question is introduced: ‘One may ask ... about the birth ... whether it happens continuously or only for a certain time’ (n. 3). To clarify his position, Eckhart introduces the rather technical differentiation between the active, the passive and the potential intellect (nn. 4–7). The next question reads: ‘Ah, Lord, as one needs for this a mind free of all images and of all actions which by nature are also still in the powers, what, then, must happen with external actions that sometimes one has to do, such as acts of love, which take place all in the outside world, as, for example, teaching and consoling the needy?’ (n. 8) In the response to this question, Eckhart speaks of the difference and unity between Mary

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

275

and Martha’s behaviour, as known from the passage of Luke 10:38 (n. 9). At the end of this paragraph we find a rather difficult text which seems to be corrupt: ‘This, he asks him to preach openly, so that it becomes known to the powers and they are nourished by it, and so that also the external man offers himself with all [his] external life, because the smooth man is in need that one finds all this in you being fulfilled according to your power.’ The opening is clear, the powers of the soul are fed by the Word. As a result, the powers have an effect on the outer man, the external man, so that the external man opens up with all what is external to man in his life. Eckhart introduces then the ‘smooth’ man (ebenmensche) as opposed to the often mentioned ‘coarse’ or rude man, the one who is not sensitive to his internal Word. Without indicating a switch, the text changes the perspective and from reflecting on the outer and inner, the coarse and the refined people, the preacher switches to address the audience who he regards as representing ‘smooth’ men. As indicated above, in n. 10 version A has a redacted text that is less consistent with the context than version B; hence, we have altered the text of the critical edition, as one can see from the note ad loc. For Eckhart, although Mary’s contemplation might sound more noble, Martha’s external activity is not only praiseworthy, but in some sense is even better than Mary’s contemplation. This, he supports by Thomas Aquinas’ example of going into a house from one end to the other, and by 2Tim. 4:2, according to which external works are the necessary expression and fulfilment of that which exists already within. It is not enough that God is inside man, in his thought, intellect and will; He also needs to shine out through man (n. 10). The next question seems to note the tension between a striving for action and a contemplative life: ‘Now, you may say: Ah, Lord, what does it then mean to be silent, of which you speak so lengthily to us?’ (n. 11) Is Eckhart contradicting himself? In his answer Eckhart comes back to the threefold intellect using the language of pregnancy and birth, and explains that such activity is no longer that of man, but of God Himself (nn. 12–3). Yet, Eckhart paints the audience as not yet satisfied: ‘Since the time that my intellect has bereaved itself of its natural action, so that it has neither its own image nor its action, on what does it rest?’ (n. 14) In reply, Eckhart points out that the object of the intellect is nothing but

276

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

being (n. 15), even though God reveals Himself in this life more in what He is not than in what He is (n. 16). As this creates a great torment for man, not so much a question, but rather an intervention, is put forward: How can Eckhart speak of ‘pure rest or total silence’ in the light of such torment? (n. 17) For Eckhart, experiences, whether internal or external, be they pleasurable or painful, have to be referred back to God (nn. 18–9). To this he adds his exhortation to detachment (n. 20). The next question picks up the earlier topic of support and reliance, but linked to the question of co–activities and virtuous actions we have come across in earlier homilies: ‘How shall man support himself, who should become entirely free and empty of himself and of all things?’ (n. 21) If he does external things – and above Eckhart had made a strong case for those – they are done not for their own or man’s sake, but at best to keep man away from himself (n. 22). Practicing virtuous deeds, therefore, is for Eckhart not a sign of a pious or good man, but of somebody whom God has left alone, in whom He does not act, even though this practicing might be most useful and necessary (n. 23). In a radical position, Eckhart states that a well ordered life ‘towards true interiority’ is a bold move away from even the vows ‘from which neither Pope nor Bishop can absolve’. But, he cautiously adds that this is said only ‘to learned and enlightened people who are taught and enlightened by God and the Scriptures’. What Eckhart has said about nuns and monks, he also wants to be applied to lay people who have made vows; they too should be ‘daringly free, because anything that brings you closer to God and places you closer to God is the very best ‘ (n. 24). Eckhart knows that this implies a different and more confident attitude, particularly as lay people, even more than members of the orders, might think hierarchically and bow down, physically and mentally; instead they should hold their minds high, look for and go their own way, in order to be one with God, the way they are shown to go (nn. 24–5). This is one of the programmatic homilies in which Eckhart formulates what he means by detachment, and also what personal consequences such teaching produces, both for members of the orders and for lay people. It is supported by a thorough reflection on the basis of Aristotelean thought about the intellect, yet ends not in speculation, but rather in very practical suggestions. Given the number of manuscripts, we get a sense of the importance and impact of Eckhart’s programme.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

277

Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 493–610. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 14–20; Meister Eckhart: A modern Translation, by R.B. Blakney (1941), 109–17; M. Fox, Breakthrough (1980), 238–45; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 46–54.

278

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (565)‘In his, quae patris mei sunt, oportet me esse.’ ‘Ez ist nôt, daz ich sî in den dingen, diu mînes vaters sint’1. Diz wort kumet uns gar ebene ze unser rede, die wir ze sprechenne | (566) hân von der êwigen geburt, diu zîtlich ist worden und noch tegelîche geborn wirt in der sêle innerstem und in irm grunde âne allen zuoval. Wer dirre geburt sol gewar werden in im ‘des ist vor allen dingen nôt, daz er in den dingen sî, diu des vaters sint’. Waz eigenschaft hât der vater? Man zelt im zuo den gewalt2 vür die andern persônen. Alsô enmac niemer kein mensche sicherlîche bevinden dirre geburt noch dar zuo genâhen, ez engeschehe denne mit grôzem gewalt. (567) | Der mensche enmac niht komen ze dîrre geburt, er entziehe sich denne aller sîner sînne in allen dingen. Und daz muoz geschehen mit grôzem gewalt3, daz alle krefte ze rücke suln getriben werden und irs werkes abegân. Disem allem muoz gewalt geschehen, ez engât anders niht zuo dan mit gewalt. Hierumbe sprichet Kristus4: ‘daz himelrîche lîdet gewalt und die gewaltigen begrîfent ez und zuckent ez’. (568) | Nû vellet ein vrâge în von der geburt, dâ wir von gesprochen hân, ob si geschehe âne underlâz oder under wîlen, sô sich der mensche dar zuo vüeget und alle sîne maht dar zuo tuot, daz er aller dinge vergezze und sich aleine hie inne wizze. Nû nim den underscheit. Der mensche hât eine würkende vernunft und eine lîdende vernunft und eine mügelîche vernunft5. Diu würkende vernunft | (569) stât alwege gegenwertic iemer etwaz ze würkenne, | (570) ez sî in gote oder in der crêature. Swenne sî sîch vernünftlîche üebet in der crêatûre als in eîner ordenunge und widertragenne der crêatûre wider in irn ursprunc oder sich selber ûftreget ze götlîcher êre

1. Luc. 2:49. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 437vb: ‘Dominica infra octavam Epyphanie. Secundum Lucam [2, 46–52]. In illo tempore cum factus esset Ihesus [In … Ihesus: Et cum factus esset Vg.] annorum duodecim, ascendentibus parentibus eius [parentibus eius: illis Vg.] Ierosolimam secundum consuetudinem diei festi, consummatisque diebus, cum redirent, remansit puer Ihesus in Ierusalem, et non cognoverunt parentes eius. Existimantes autem illum esse in comitatu, venerunt iter diei, et requirebant eum inter cognatos, et notos. Et non invenientes, regressi sunt in Ierusalem, requirentes eum. Et factum est, post triduum invenerunt illum in templo sedentem in medio doctorum, audientem illos, et interrogantem [+ eos Vg.]. Stupebant autem omnes, qui eum audiebant, super prudentia, et responsis eius. Et videntes admirati sunt. Et dixit

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

279

‘In his, quae patris mei sunt, oportet me esse.’ ‘It is necessary that I will be in the things that belong to my Father.’1 This saying suits us well for our homily we have to give about the eternal birth that has come in time and is still daily being born in the innermost being of the soul and in her ground without any accident. Whoever shall take note of this birth in himself, ‘it is necessary above all that he should be in all things that belong to the Father’. Which property does the Father have? One attributes to Him the power with regards to the other persons.2 Therefore, no man can notice this birth or come close to it, unless through great power. Man cannot come to this birth, unless he withdraws from all his senses in all things. And this must happen through great power,3 so that all the powers should be pushed back and let go of their activity. All of this has to suffer power, as it does not work otherwise, except through power. For that reason, Christ says: ‘The kingdom of heaven suffers violence and the powerful grasp it and take it.’4 Now, one may ask Him about the birth of which we have spoken, whether it happens continuously or only for a certain time, as long as man adapts and applies all his power to forget everything and just know himself in here. Now note the differentiation. Man has an active, a passive and a potential intellect.5 The active intellect is always present, prepared to act on anything, be it in God or in creature. When it acts intellectually in a creature as in ordering and carrying the creature back into its origin or swinging itself up towards divine honour and divine praise, all that is still in its might and power and is still called ‘active’. When, however,

mater eius ad illum: Fili, quid fecisti nobis sic? ecce pater tuus, et ego dolentes querebamus te. Et ait ad illos: Quid est quod me querebatis? nesciebatis quia in his, que patris mei sunt, oportet me esse? Et ipsi non intellexerunt verbum, quod locutus est ad illos [eos Vg.]. Et descendit cum eis, et venit Nazareth: et erat subditus illis. Et mater eius conservabat omnia verba hec in corde suo. Et Ihesus proficiebat sapientia, [+ et Vg.] etate, et gratia apud Deum et homines’. 2. ‘gewalt’: lat. ‘potentia’. The term, as we will see later in the homily, also means ‘violence’. 3. See the previous footnote. 4. Matth. 11:12: ‘Regnum caelorum vim patitur, et violenti rapiunt illud’.

280

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

und ze götlîchem lobe, daz stât noch allez wol in ir maht und in îrm gewalt und heizet noch würkende. Sô sich aber got des werkes underwindet, sô muoz der geist sich halten in einer lîdelicheit. Aber diu mügelîche vernunft diu luoget ze in beiden: | (571) swaz got gewürken müge und der geist gelîden, daz daz ervolget werde nâch mügelicheit. Einez hât er in einem würkenne, daz ist, sô der geist selber des werkes pfliget. Daz ander hât er in einem lîdenne, daz ist, sô sîch got des werkes underwindet, sô sol und muoz sich der geist stille halten und got | (572) lâzen würken. Und ê diz anegevangen werde von dem geiste und von gote volbrâht, sô hât der geist ein anesehen6 dar zuo und ein mügelich erkennen, daz ez allez wol geschehen mac und möhte, und daz heizet diu mügelîche vernunft, aleine daz si doch vil versûmet werde und niemer ze vruht enkome. Sô sich aber der geist üebet nâch sîner maht in rehten triuwen, sô underwindet sich sîn gotes geist und des werkes und denne sô schouwet und lîdet der geist got. Wan aber daz lîden und daz | (573) schouwen gotes dem geiste überlestic ist sunderlîche în disem lîbe, dar umbe underziuhet sich got dem geiste underwîlen. Und daz ist, daz er dô sprach7: ‘ein kleine sehet ir mich, und ein kleine ensehet ir mich niht’. Dô unser herre die drîe jünger mit im hâte gevüeret ûf den berg und in aleine bewîsete die klârheit sînes lîbes, die er hâte von der einunge der gotheit und wir ouch haben suln nâch der urstende, alzehant dô | (574) sant Pêter daz ersach, dô wære er gerne iemer mê dâ blîben8.| Alsô in der wârheit: swâ der mensche guot vindet, dâ von enmac er sich mit nihte gescheiden, als verre als ez guot ist. Swâ diu bekantnîsse daz vindet, dâ muoz diu minne nâchvolgen und daz gehugnisse und diu sêle alzemâle.

5. ‘würkende’, ‘lîdende’ and ‘mügelîche vernunft’ correspond to the ‘intellectus agens’, ‘passivus’ and ‘possibilis’ (or ‘materialis’) according to the Averroistic tradition. For Averroes, the passive intellect (the pathetikos nous of Aristotle, De anima III, c. 5, 430a24) is the fantasmal or imaginative power, see Averroes, Commentum in De anima III, comm. 5, ed. Crawford, 409, 640: ‘Et intendit per intellectum passivum virtutem imaginativam’. The intellectus possibilis – for Averroes synonymous with the material intellect (hulikos) – is pure capacity and potential of knowing and is deprived of all forms (ibid. 387, 14–6: ‘… naturam possibilitatis, cum denudetur ab omnibus formis materialibus et intelligibilibus’), because, as the intellect needs to know via forms it receives, it cannot itself contain any form (ibid. 388, 38: ‘non est aliquid hoc’). From the passive intellect emerges the intellection of the material intellect. The active intellect is nonetheless one and so is

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

281

God starts acting, the intellect has to remain receptive. The potential intellect, however, comes forth in both: What God wishes to act and the spirit to receive, this happens through potentiality.

One thing it has as acting is when the spirit itself attends to the action. The other it has is receiving, when God Himself supports acting, and the spirit must remain silent and let God do the acting. But before this is started by the spirit and completed by God, the spirit has a regard6 towards it and a potential knowledge that all may and will well happen, and this is called the potential intellect, although a lot of it will be missed and will never come to fruition. However, as long as the spirit exercises itself according to its power in right fidelity, God’s spirit supports it and the action and this way the spirit contemplates and receives God. But because receiving and contemplating God is too burdensome for the spirit, particularly in this body, every time God escapes the spirit. And this is meant when He spoke in that passage: ‘You will see me for a while, and a little while and you will not see me.’7 When the Lord had brought with Him the three disciples on to the mountain and proved to them alone the splendour of His body which He had from the union with God and which we also ought to have according to our original state, then, when Peter saw this, he would have loved to remain there.8 So, in truth: where man finds God, from this place he cannot move away, as far as it is good. Where knowledge discovers it, love must follow and memory and the soul, entirely, too.

the intellection, see K. Bormann, ‘Wahrheitsbegriff und nous–Lehre bei Aristoteles und einigen seiner Kommentatoren’ (1982), 21. The Averroist doctrine seems to be the key to a more satisfying reading of this passage, which, so far, scholars have not convincingly understood (DW IV 568–9). Different from here, Eckhart simplifies the teaching in Hom. 22* [Q 37], n. 9, where he speaks more generically of the Aristotelean distinction of the active and passive intellect: ‘Nu sprechen wir in einem andern sinne von den “zwein sünen” der vernünfticheit. Der ein ist diu mügelicheit, der ander ist diu würklicheit…’ 6. ‘anesehen’: lat. ‘respectus’. 7. Ioh. 16:16: ‘Modicum, et iam non videbitis me: et iterum modicum, et videbitis me’. 8. See Matth. 17:1–4.

282

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Und wan unser herre daz wol weiz, dar umbe muoz er sich underwîlen verbergen | (575) wan diu sêle ist ein einvaltigiu forme des lîbes. Und swar si sich hine kêret, dâ kêret si sîch zemâle hine. Wære ir denne daz guot, daz got ist, alles âne mittel und âne underlâz bekant, sô enmöhte si sich enkeine wîs dâ von gekêren, daz si dem lîbe keinen învluz engæbe. Alsô geschach sant Paulô: wære er hundert jâr dâ bliben, dâ er daz guot bekante, er enwære die wîle niemer ze dem lîbe gekêret, er hæte sîn zemâle vergezzen. (576) | Her umbe, wan daz ze dîsem lebene niht envüeget noch zuogehœret, dar umbe bedecket ez der getriuwe got, sô er wil, und wîset ez ouch, sô er wil und sô er weîz, daz ez aller nützest ist und uns aller beste vüeget, als ein getriuwer arzât. Diz entziehen enist dîn niht, sunder des, des ouch daz werk ist. Der mac ouch tuon und lâzen, swaz er wil, wan er wol weiz, wanne ez dir aller beste vüeget. In sîner hant stât ez ze wîsenne und ze lâzenne, und als er weiz, daz ez dir lîdelich ist. Wan got enist niht ein zerstœrer der natûre, mêr: er volbringet sie. Und daz tuot got ie mê und ie mê, dar nâch dû dich ie mê und ie mê dar zu vüegest. (577) | Nû möhtest dû sprechen: ach, herre, sît daz man hie zuo bedarf eines ledigen gemüetes von allen bilden und von allen werken, diu nochdenne in den kreften sint joch von natûre, wie sol ez denne ergân von den ûtzern werken, diu man doch underwîlen tuon muoz, als minnewerk, diu alliu ûzwendic geschehent, als lêren | (578) und trœsten die dürftigen, sol man in disem beroubet werden, als die jünger unsers herren sich dicke müezic mahten, als sant Augustînus sprichet9, daz sant Paulus alsô sêre mit den liuten beladen und bekümbert was, als ob er sie alle ze der werlt geborn hæte? Sol man dises grôzen guotes her umbe beroubet sîn, daz man sich alsô üebet an tugentlîchen werken? Nû merke hie underscheit dirre vrâge! Einez ist wol edeler und daz ander ist lobelîcher. Aleine Marîâ was gelobet, daz si daz beste hæte erwelt, sô doch was Marthen leben in einem teile nützer, wan si die|(579)nete Kristô und sînen jüngern. Meister Thomas sprichet10: Dâ 9. Augustinus, Enarrationes in Psalmos 147, n. 14, ed. Dekkers and Fraipont, 2149, 6–9: ‘Audi caritatem parturientem illos: qua praeditus Paulus apostolus, non solum paternum, sed et maternum cor gerens in filios: Filii mei, inquit, quos iterum parturio’ (Gal. 4:19). 10. The logic of the passage shows that version B here has the original form and that version A has a redacted form, which runs as follows: ‘Einez ist gar edel, daz ander ist sêre nütze. Marîâ was sêre gelobet, daz si daz beste hæte erwelt, sô was ouch Marthen leben gar nütze, wan si dienete | (579) Kristô und sînen jüngern. Meister Thomas sprichet’; Th. Aqu., Summa theolo-

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

283

And as our Lord knew this well, He had to hide Himself from time to time, as the soul is a simple form of the body. And what she turns towards, she turns entirely to. If the good which is God would be known to her without any mediation and without interruption, she could not turn away at all and allow the body to have any impact. So it happened to Saint Paul: had he remained there for a hundred years where he got to know the good, he would never have returned to the body and would have forgotten about it entirely. Therefore what neither fits nor belongs to this life the trustworthy God covers over, as He wishes, and shows, as He wishes and as He knows it to be most useful and fits us best, like a trustworthy doctor. To remove this is not your task, but the one’s whose action it is. He, too, may act or let it be, as He wishes, because He knows well when it best fits you. It stays in His hands to know and to let be, because He also knows when it is painful for you. For God is not a destroyer of nature, rather He perfects it. And this God does more and more, the more you adapt to this. Now you may say: Ah, Lord, as one needs for this a mind free of all images and of all actions which by nature are also still in the powers, what, then, must happen with external actions that sometimes one has to do, such as acts of love, which take place all in the outside world, as, for example, teaching and consoling the needy? Shall one be deprived in these, as our Lord’s disciples were so much occupied with such things, as Saint Augustine says,9 that Saint Paul was so overwhelmed and worried about people as if he had given birth to them all? Shall one, therefore, be deprived of this great good, so that one practice good deeds? Now note here the differentiation in this question! One thing seems more noble, the other more praiseworthy. Mary alone was praised for having chosen the best, but the life of Martha was in one way more useful when she served Christ and His disciples. Master Thomas says:10 giae III, q. 40, a. 1, ad 2: ‘Ad secundum dicendum quod … vita contemplativa simpliciter est melior quam activa quae occupatur circa corporales actus: sed vita activa secundum quam aliquid praedicando et docendo contemplata aliis tradit, est perfectior quam vita quae solum contemplatur, quia talis vita praesupponit abundantiam contemplationis. Et ideo Christus talem vitam elegit’. We have to note that here Thomas is not designated as ‘Saint’, but simply as ‘Master’, which points to the text probably dating prior to Thomas’ canonization, which took place in the year 1323.

284

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

sî daz würkende leben bezzer dan daz schouwende leben, | (580) dâ man in der würklicheit ûzgiuzet von minne, daz man îngenomen hât in der schouwunge. Dâ enist niht dan einez, wan man engrîfet niergen dan in den selben grunde der schouwunge und maht daz vruhtbære in der würkunge; und dâ wirt diu meinunge der schouwunge volbrâht. Aleine beschehent dâ bewegunge, ez enist niht dan einez: ez kumet ûz einem ende, daz got ist, und gât wider in daz selbe, als ob ich gienge in dem hûse von einem ende an daz ander. Daz wære wol bewegunge und enwære doch niht dan einez in einem. Alsô in dirre würklicheit enhat man anders niht | (581) dan eine schouwelicheit in gote: daz eine ruowet in dem andern und volbringet daz ander. Wan got meinet in der einicheit der schouwunge die vruhtbærkeit der würkunge. Wan in der schouwunge dienest dû aleine dir selber, aber in der tugentlîchen würkunge dâ dienest dû der menige. Hie zuo manet uns Kristus mit allem sînem lebene und mit dem lebene aller sîner heiligen, die er alle hât ûzgetribene ze dienenne der menige. (582) | Sant Paulus sprichet ze Timotheô11: lieber vriunt Timothee, ‘dû solt ûzpredigen daz wort’. Meinet er daz ûzer wort, daz den luft sleht? Nein, sicherlîche. Er meinet daz inwendic geborn und doch verborgen wort, daz dâ liget bedecket in der sêle: daz heizet er in ûzpredigen, daz ez den kreften kunt werde und dar abe gespîset | (583) werden, und sich ouch der ûzer mensche her ûz gebe in allez daz ûzer leben, dâ ez der ebenmensche bedürfe, daz man daz allez an dir vinde volvüerende nâch dîner maht. Ez sol in dir sîn in dem gedanke, in der vernunft und in dem willen, und sol ouch ûzliuhten an den werken. Alsô sprach Kristus12: ‘iuwer lieht sol liuhten vor den liuten’. Er meinte die liute, die aleine ahtent der schouwelicheit | (584) und niht enahtent tugentlîcher würkunge und sprechent, sie enbedürfen sîn niht, sie sin dar über komen13. Die enmeinte Kristus niht, dô er sprach14: ‘der sâme viel in ein guot ertrîche und brâhte hundertveltige vruht’. Mêr: ez sint die, die er meinte, dô er sprach15: ‘der boum, der niht vruht enbringet, den sol man abehouwen’.

11. II Tim. 4:2: ‘praedica verbum’. 12. Matth. 5:16: ‘Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus’. 13. Eckhart criticizes the quietistic doctrine of contemplation using the terminus technicus ‘über komen’, which designates the state of perfection, see the Geistbuch, c. 5, ed. Gottschall, 49:

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

285

The active life is better than the contemplative life, because by acting one pours out of love, what one has taken in by contemplation. There is nothing but one, as one grasps only what is in the same ground of contemplation and makes it come to fruition in action; and there the intention of the contemplation is being fulfilled. If there seems to be movement, it is nevertheless nothing but one: it comes from one end which is God, and goes into the same, just like me going into the same house from one end to the other. This would certainly be movement, but it would be nothing but one within one. Likewise, in this action one has nothing but contemplation in God; the one rests in the other and perfects the other. In fact, God intends in the unity of contemplation the fruitfulness of action. Because in contemplation you only serve yourself, but in virtuous action, there you serve the multitude. To this Christ exhorts us by His entire life and with the lives of all His Saints whom He has sent out to serve the multitude. Saint Paul says to Timothy:11 Dear friend Timothy, ‘You should preach the word’. Does he mean the external word which moves the air? Surely not. He means the word that is born inside and is yet hidden, which lies covered in the soul: This, he asks him to preach openly, so that it becomes known to the powers and they are nourished by it, and so that also the external man offers himself with all [his] external life, because the refined man is in need that one finds all this in you being fulfilled according to your capacity. It has to be in your thoughts, in your intellect and in your will, and it has to shine out into action. Thus, Christ spoke: ‘Your light should shine for the people.’12 He meant the people who care solely for contemplation have no regard for virtuous deeds and say that they have no need of Him, because they have already managed to go beyond.13 These Christ did not mean, when He said: ‘The seed fell in good ground and produced hundredfold fruit.’14 Rather they are those people whom He meant, when He said: ‘The tree that does not bear fruit should be cut down.’15

‘Di vierden daz sint die vberkommen menschen oder die toten, Johannes sprichet: “Selig sint die toten, die in got sterbent”’. 14. Luc. 8:8: ‘Et aliud cecidit in terram bonam: et ortum fecit fructum centuplum’. 15. Matth. 3:10: ‘Omnis ergo arbor, quae non facit fructum bonum, excidetur’.

286

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Nû mohtest dû sprechen: Ach, herre, waz sol ez denne sîn mit dem stilleswîgenne, von dem ir uns sô vil gesaget hât?16 Wan hie zuo gehœrent vil bilde, wan ein ieglich werk muoz geschehen in sînem eigenen | (585) bilde, ez sîn inwendigiu oder ûzwendigiu werk, ez sî, daz ich disen lêre oder den trœste und diz und daz berihte. Waz stille mac ich dâ gehaben? Wan sô diu vernunft bekennet und bildet und daz der wille wil und denne daz gehugnisse sich dar ane heftet, ensint diz niht allez bilde? Nû merket! Wir hân dâ vor gesprochen von einer würkender vernunft und von einer lîdender vernunft17. Diu würkende vernunft houwet diu bilde abe von den ûzern dingen und entkleidet sie von materie und von zuovalle und setzet sie in die | (586) lîdende vernunft, und diu gebirt ir geistlîchiu bilde in sie. Und sô diu lîdende vernunft von der würkenden swanger worden ist, sô behebet und bekennet si diu dinc mit helfe der würkenden vernunft. Nochdenne enmac diu lîdende vernunft diu dinc niht behalten in bekantnisse, diu | (587) würkende enmueze sie anderwerbe erliuhten. Sehet, allez daz diu würkende vernunft tuot an einem natiurlîchen menschen, daz selbe und verre mê tuot got an einem abegescheiden menschen. Er nimet im abe die würkende vernunft und setzet sich selber an ir stat wider und würket selber dâ allez daz, daz diu würkende vernunft solte würken. Eyâ, swenne sich der mensche zemâle müeziget | (588) und diu würkende vernunft an im gesîget, sô muoz sich got von nôt des werkes | (589) underwinden und muoz selber dâ werkmeister sîn und sich selber gebern in die lîdende vernunft. Und daz merket, ob ez alsô sî. Diu würkende vernunft enmac niht geben, daz si niht enhât, noch si enmac niht zwei bilde mit einander gehaben. Si hât wol einez vor und daz ander nâch. Der luft und daz lieht zeigent wol vil bilde und vil varwe mit einander, doch enmaht dû niht sehen noch bekennen dan einez | (590) nâch dem andern. Alsô tuot diu würkende vernunft, wan si ouch alsô ist. Aber sô got würket an der stat der würkenden vernunft, sô gebirt er manigiu bilde mit einander in einem puncten. Wan als got dich beweget ze einem guoten werke, zehant sô erbietent sich alle dîne krefte ze allen guoten werken: dîn gemüete gât mit der vart ûf allez guot. Waz dû guotes vermaht, daz erbildet sich und 16. The reference certainly goes beyond the present homily (n. 5: ‘sô sol und muoz sich der geist stille halten’), and could be an allusion to Hom. 9* [S 101], n. 4ff., Hom. 13* [S 102], n. 16.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

287

Now, you may say: Ah, Lord, what does it then mean to be silent, of which you speak so lengthily to us?16 To this belong many images, as every action has to be done in its own image, be it an internal or external action, be it that I teach this one or console that one, or report this or that. What quietness may I have in this? When, thus, the intellect knows and conceives and the will wants and then memory attaches itself to it, are these not all images? Now note! We have first spoken of an active intellect and of a passive intellect.17 The active intellect hews the images off the external things and undresses them of matter and accidents and places them into the passive intellect, and there births their mental image into them. And as the passive intellect has become pregnant by the active intellect, it carries and knows things with the aid of the active intellect. Accordingly the passive intellect cannot keep the things in its knowledge unless the active intellect is enlightening it from another angle. See, everything that the active intellect does with a natural human being, the same and much more God does with a detached man. He removes from him the active intellect and places Himself in its place and performs there everything that the active intellect ought to do. So, when man becomes entirely idle and his active intellect has become silent, God must by necessity undertake and become active, must Himself become a craftsman and give Himself into the passive intellect. And note, how this is. The active intellect can neither give what it does not have, nor can it have two images at once. It has first one and then another one. Air and light together show well many images and lots of colour, but you are not able to see them as one, but one after the other. So does the active intellect, as it is also that way. But when God acts on behalf of the active intellect, He gives birth to manifold images together and at once. Hence, when God moves you to one good action, then all your powers serve you for all good actions: Your mind directs itself suddenly towards all good. All good that you are capable of, is being formed and offers itself there together in one instance and at

17. See above nn. 4–5.

288

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

erbiutet sich dâ allez mit einander in einem blicke und in einem puncten. Entriuwen, daz offenbâret und bewæret, daz ez der vernunft werk niht enist, wan si enhât des adels noch der rîcheit niht, mêr: ez ist des werk und des geburt, der alliu bilde mit einander in im selber hât. Alsô sprach der edel Paulus18: ‘ich vermac alliu dinc in dem, der mich sterket’. In im vermac ich niht aleine diz oder | (591) daz, sunder alliu dinc und in im ungescheiden. Hie bî solt dû wizzen, daz disiu bilde dirre werke niht dîn ensint noch der natûre, mêr: sie sint des werkmeisters der natûre der daz werk und daz bilde darîn geleget hât. Niht ennim dich sîn ane, wan ez ist sîn und niht dîn. Aleine ez zîtlîche von dir wirt enpfangen, doch wirt ez von gote geborn und gegeben über zît und in êwicheit über alliu bilde. Nû möhtest dû vrâgen: Sît dem mâle daz sich mîn vernunft hât beroubet irs natiurlîchen werkes und daz si kein eigen bilde noch werk niht enhât, war ûf ist denne ir enthalten? Wan si muoz sich iemer ûf etwaz enthalten. Die krefte wellent sich iemer | (592) etwâ aneheften und dar inne würken, ez sî gehugnisse, vernunft und wille. Nû merket dise berihtunge. Der vernunft vürwurf und ir enthalt ist wesen und niht zuoval, sunder daz blôz lûter wesen in im selber. Swenne diu vernunft bekennet | (593) ein wârheit eines wesens, zehant sô neiget si sich dar ûf und lât sich dâ in ein ruowe, und dâ sprichet si ir wort vernünfticlîche von dem vürwurfe, den si dâ hât. Mêr: alsô lange diu vernunft des wesens wârheit eigenlîche niht envindet, noch daz si den grunt niht enrüeret, alsô daz si müge sprechen: diz ist diz und ist alsô und anders niht, alsô lange stât si alles in einem suochenne und in einem beitenne und enneiget sich niht noch enruowet niht, mêr: si arbeitet noch alles und leget abe allez suochen in einem beitenne. | (594) Und alsô ist si etwenne ein jâr oder mê in einem arbeitenne in einer natiurlîchen wârheit, swaz ez sî, jâ, si muoz noch lange arbeiten in einem abelegenne, waz ez niht ensî. Und als lange stât si âne allen enthalt und ensprichet ouch kein wort von keinen dingen, die wîle si den grunt der wârheit niht vunden enhât mit wârem bekantnisse. Dar umbe gerüeret diu vernunft niemer in disem lebene den grunt der übernatiurlîchen wârheit, diu got ist. Und dar umbe sô stât si alles in einem beitenne und in einem arbeitenne. Und daz muoz mê heizen ein unwizzen dan ein wizzen alles, daz si hie haben mac von gote. 18. Phil. 4:13: ‘Omnia possum in eo, qui me confortat’.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

289

once. In truth, this reveals and proves that it is not the intellect’s action, for it has not such nobility or riches; instead, it is the action and the birth of the One who has all images together in Himself. As the noble Paul said: ‘I am capable of all things by the one who empowers me.’18 In Him I am capable not only of this or that, but of all things and inseparably of Him. By this you should know, that these images of these actions are neither yours nor those of your nature; instead, they belong to the craftman of nature who has placed action and image into it. Do not take yourself for Him, as He belongs to Himself and not to you. Though it is conceived by you in time, it is actually born by God and given beyond time and in eternity beyond all images. Now you may ask: Since the time that my intellect has deprived itself of its natural action, so that it has neither its own image nor its action, on what does it rest? For it must lean on something. The powers always want to adhere to something and act in it, be it memory, intellect or will. Now note this thought. Being is the object of the intellect and its content, not accident, but the bare, naked being in itself. When the intellect knows the truth of a being, suddenly it inclines towards it and comes there to rest, and there it speaks its word intellectually about the object which it there has. Moreover, as long as the intellect does not properly find the truth of being, and does not touch the ground, so that it may say: This is this and it is thus and not otherwise, so long does it continue looking for all, expecting it, and does neither lean, nor rest, rather it works on everything to get rid of all searching in expectation. And so it is for about a year or more working at a natural truth, whatever it is; indeed, it has to work for a long time to get rid of what it is not. And all along it stays without all support and cannot say any word about anything, because it has not found the ground of truth in true knowledge yet. That is the reason why the intellect in this life never reaches the ground of the supernatural truth which is God. And, therefore, it stays in expectation and work. And this has to be called more an unknowing than a knowing of everything that it may have here by God.

290

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Got offenbâret sich niemer sô sêre in disem lebene, ez ensî nochdenne ein niht gegen dem, daz er ist. Wie daz diu wârheit sî in dem grunde, si ist aber bedecket | (595) und verborgen der vernunft. Und alle die wîle sô daz ist, sô enwirt diu vernunft niht enthalten, daz si niht ruowe enhabe als in einem unwandellîchen vürwurfe. Si enruowet noch niht, mêr: si beitet und bereitet sich noch ze einem, daz noch bekant sol werden und noch verborgen ist. Alsô enmac der mensche zemâle niht wizzen, waz got ist, mêr: etwaz weiz er wol, waz got niht enist. Und daz selbe scheidet der vernünftic mensche allez abe. Die wîle enwirt diu vernunft niht enthalten in keinem wesenlîchen vürwurfe, mêr: si beitet alles als diu materie der forme. Wan als diu materie niht enruowet, si enwerde denne ervüllet mit allen formen, alsô enruowet diu | (596) vernunft niht dan aleine in der wesentlîchen wârheit, diu alliu dinc in ir beslozzen hât. Des wesens benüeget sie aleine. Und daz ziuhet ir got vürbaz und vürbaz, umbe daz er irn vlîz erwecke, und reizet sie, ie vürbaz ze gânne und mê ze ervolgenne und ze begrîfenne daz gewâre gruntlôse guot, und daz si ir niht enlâze benüegen mit keinen dingen, mer: alles queln und jâmern nâch dem allerhœhsten.| Nû möhtest dû sprechen: ach, herre, ir hât uns gar vil gesagt, daz alle krefte suln | (597) swîgen, und alliu dinc setzet ir nû in ein queln und in ein begern hie in dirre stille. Daz wære ein michel geruofe und ein grôz gespræche, daz alsô ein queln und ein harren wære ûf etwaz, daz man niht enhæte. Daz benæme dise ruowe und dise stille, ez wære begerunge oder meinunge oder loben oder danken, oder swaz sich dar inne erzeigete oder erbildete, daz enwære noch enhiez niht lûter ruowe noch ganziu stille. Des nemet ein underscheit! Swenne dû dich alzemâle entblœzet hâst von dir selber und von allen dingen und von aller eigenschaft in aller wîse | (598) und dû dich gote ûfgetragen und geeigenet und gelâzen hâst mit aller triuwe und in ganzer minne, swaz denne in dir geborn wirt und dich begrîfet, ich spriche: ez sî joch ûzerlich oder innerlich, ez sî liep oder leit, sûr oder süeze, daz enist alzemâle niht dîn, mêr: ez ist alzemâle dînes gotes, dem dû dich gelâzen hâst. Sage mir: weder ist daz wort, daz dâ gesprochen wirt, des, der ez sprichet, oder des, der ez hœret? Aleine ez vellet in den, der ez hœret, ez ist doch eigenlîche des, der ez sprichet oder gebirt. (599)

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

291

God reveals Himself in this life never so much as in that which is nothing compared to that which He is. As much as this truth be in the ground, it is covered and hidden from the intellect. And as this is so, the intellect will not be sustained to find rest except in an immutable object. It does not rest, rather it expects and stretches itself towards something which is supposed to become known, but is still hidden. Hence, man cannot entirely know what God is; rather he somehow knows what God is not. And he detaches himself from precisely this. In doing this, the intellect is not sustained by an essential object; rather it expects all as matter does of form. As matter does not rest until it is filled by all forms, so the intellect does not rest, until it is in the essential truth which contains all things in itself. It is only satisfied by being. And to this God draws it bit by bit, in order to arouse its eagerness and to stimulate it, to go step by step, to follow more, to grasp the truly groundless good, and that it does not become satisfied with anything, rather that it be all tormented and mourning towards the Almighty.

Now you may say: ah, sir, you have said at length that all powers should become silent, and now all things you set in a torment and in a desire here in this silence. It would be a great noise and a big discussion that one would have a torment and a desire for something that one does not have. It would do away with this rest and this silence; it would be desire or intent, praise or thanks, or whatever would come up or form there, this would neither be nor be called pure rest or total silence. Accept a differentiation! When you have detached yourself entirely from yourself, from all things and from all properties in any way, and have loaded yourself onto God, have made yourself His, and have surrendered to Him in all trust and in all love all that is then to be born in you and take hold of you, I say, be it external or internal, be it pleasurable or painful, sour or sweet, it is entirely not yours; instead, it is entirely your God’s to whom you have surrendered yourself. Tell me, the word that is spoken there, does it belong to the one who speaks it, or who hears it? It falls solely into the one who hears, while it belongs properly to the one who speaks and gives birth to it.

292

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

| Nim ein glîchnisse! Diu sunne wirfet irn schîn in den luft und der luft enpfæhet daz lieht und gibet ez dem ertrîche und gibet uns in dem selben, daz wir bekennen underscheit aller varwen. Swie nû daz lieht sî formelîche in dem luft, sô ist ez doch wesenlîche in der sunnen. Der schîn gât eigenlîche ûz der sunnen und entspringet in der sunnen und niht in dem luft, mêr: ez wirt von dem luft enpfangen und von dem luft vürbaz geboten allem dem, daz liehtes enpfenclich ist. Rehte alsô ist ez in der sêle: got gebirt in der sêle sîn geburt und sîn wort, und diu sêle enpfæhet ez und gibet ez vürbaz den kreften in maniger wîse: nû in einer begerunge, nû in guoter meinunge, nû in minnewerken19, | (600) nû in dankbærkeit, oder swie ez dich rüeret. Ez ist allez sîn und niht dîn mit nihte. Swaz got dâ würket, daz nim allez als daz sîn und niht als daz dîn, als geschriben ist20: ‘der heilic geist heischet in ungestüeme unzellîche siuften’. Er betet in uns, und niht wir. Sant Paulus sprichet21: ‘nieman enmac gesprechen herre Jêsû Kriste wan in dem heiligen geiste’. Dir ist nôt vor allen dingen, daz dû dich nihtes anenemest, sunder lâz dich alzemâle und lâz got mit dir würken und in dir, swaz er wil. Diz werk ist sîn, diz wort ist sîn, disiu geburt ist sîn und allez, daz dû bist alzemâle. Wan dû hâst | (601) dich gelâzen und bist ûzgegangen dînen kreften und ir werke und dînes wesens eigenschaft, dar umbe muoz got alzemâle îngân in wesen und in krefte – umbe daz, wan dû dich aller eigenschaft hâst beroubet und verwüestet, als geschriben stât22: ‘diu stimme ruofet in der wüeste’. Lâz dise êwige stimme in dir ruofen, als ez ir behaget, und habe dû dich dir selber und aller dinge wüeste. (602) | Nû möhtest dû sprechen: ach, herre, wie sol sich der mensche halten, der sîn selbes und aller dinge zemâle sol ledic und wüeste werden: weder sol der mensche alzît in einem wartenne sîn des werken gotes und niht würken, oder sol er etwenne selber etwaz würken als beten und lesen und anderiu tugentlîchiu werk würken, ez sî predige hœren oder die geschrift üeben? Sît daz dirre menschen niht nemen ensol von ûzwendicheit, mêr: allez von inwendicheit von sînem gote, und ob dirre mensche diu werk niht entuot, versûmet er denne iht? (603)

19. On charity in Eckhart see R.K. Weigand, ‘Proclaiming Caritas: The Propagation of a Way of Life in Sermons’ (2011). 20. Rom. 8:26: ‘Sed ipse Spiritus postulat pro nobis gemitibus inenarrabilibus’.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

293

Take an example. The sun shines through the air and the air receives the light and gives it to the earth and gives of it to us, so that we distinguish all different colours. As now the light is formally in the air, it is essentially in the sun. The sunshine goes properly out of the sun, derives from the sun, but not from the air, rather it is being received by the air and entirely provided by the air to all that is receptive of light. Just so is it in the soul: God births in the soul His birth and His Word, and the soul receives it and gives it ultimately to the powers in manifold ways, now in a desire, now in good intent, now in works of charity,19 now in thankfulness, or in whichever way it touches you. It is all His, and not the least yours. What God does there, take all as His and not as yours, as it is written: ‘The Holy Spirit asks in wild innumerable sighs.’20 He prays in us, but not we ourselves. Saint Paul says: ‘Nobody can say Lord Jesus Christ, unless in the Holy Spirit.’21 Primarily it is necessary for you that you do not care for things, but that you detach yourself and let God act with you and in you, whatever He wishes. This is His action, this word is His, this birth is His, and absolutely everything that is you. For you have detached yourself and have left your powers and their actions and the propriety of your being, thus God must entirely enter your being and your powers, because you have deprived yourself and depleted yourself of all your properties, as it is written: ‘The voice of one calling in the desert.’22 Let His eternal voice call in you, as it pleases, and have yourself as a desert of yourself and of all things. Now you may say: ah, sir, how shall a man behave himself, who should become entirely free and deserted of himself and of all things: Should a man on the one hand be in a state of waiting for God’s actions and non–actions, or should he perhaps himself do something, such as praying, reading or other virtuous actions, be it listening to preaching or practicing Scriptures? Since this man should not take in external things, but rather everything internally from his God, and if this man does not do these activities, does he not miss something?

21. I Cor. 12:3: ‘Et nemo potest dicere, Dominus Iesus, nisi in Spiritu Sancto’. 22. Is. 40:3: ‘vox clamantis in deserto’.

294

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

| Daz merke! Alliu ûzwendigiu werk sint dar umbe gesetzet und geordent, daz der ûzer mensche dâ mite werde in got gerihtet und geordent und ze geistlîchem lebene und ze guoten dingen, daz er im selber niht entgê ze keiner unglîcheit, daz er hie mite gezemet werde, daz er im selber iht entloufe in vremdiu dinc swenne got sîniu werk welle würken, daz er den menschen bereit vinde und in niht von verren und von groben dingen endürfe wider ziehen. Wan sô der gelust ze ûzern dingen ie grœzer wære, sô daz vonkêren ie swærer wære, wan sô ie grœzer liep, ie grœzer leit, sô ez an ein scheiden gât. Sehet, dar umbe ist allez würken vunden umbe üebunge der tugende: beten, lesen, singen, vasten, wachen und swaz tugentlîcher üebunge ist, daz der mensche dâ mite werde gevangen und enthalten von vremden und ungötlîchen dingen. Dar umbe wan der mensche gewar | (604) wirt, daz der geist gotes in im niht enwürket und daz der inner mensche von gote gelâzen ist, sô ist ez gar nôt, daz sich der ûzer mensche in allen tugenden üebe und sunderlîche an den, die im aller mügelîchest sint und aller nützest und nôtdürftigest, und niht in keiner eigenschaft im selber, mêr: der wârheit ze einer êre, umbe daz daz er niht gezogen noch verleitet enwerde von groben dingen, mêr: daz er alsô gote anehafte, daz in got nâhe vinde, swenne er wider komen wil und sîn werk würken in der sêle, daz er sie denne niht verre endürfe suochen. Swenne sich aber der mensche vindet wol geordent ze wârer innerkeit, sô lâz küenlîche abe alle ûzwendicheit, und wæren ez joch solche üebunge, ze den dû dich mit gelübede verbunden hætest, diu dir | (605) weder bâbest noch bischof abenemen enmöhten. Wan diu gelübede, diu ein mensche gote tuot, diu enmac im nieman abenemen, mêr: man wandelt sie wol in ein anderz, wan ein ieglich gelübede ist ein verbinden sich ze gote. Hæte nû ein mensche vil gelobet – beten, vasten, pilgrînverte –, vert er dar nâch in einen orden, sô ist er der gelübede aller ledic worden, wan in dem orden wirt er aller tugende und gote zuogebunden. | (606) Rehte alsô spriche ich ouch hie: swie vil sich ein mensche verbunden hæte ze manigen dingen, kumet er rehte in die wâren innerkeit, er ist ir aller ledic. Alle die wîle diu innerkeit weret, und wære, daz ez werte eine woche, einen mânôt, ein jâr alle die wîle versûmet weder münich noch nunne niemer enkein zît, wan got, von dem sie gevangen sint und îngenomen, der muoz vür sie gelten.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

295

Note this. All external actions are placed and ordered for the external man to be directed towards and placed into God, to spiritual life and to good things so that he does not escape from himself, that he is tamed with it, that he does not run off into strange things when God wishes to do His work, that He finds the man prepared and that He does not need to pull him away from distant and coarse things. Because the bigger the desire is for external things, the more difficult it is to turn him away from them, because the more love, the more pain, when it comes to separation. See, for that reason all actions were founded to practice virtue: praying, reading, singing, fasting, vigilance and what other virtuous exercise there is, so that man is being caught and kept away from strange and ungodly things. When, therefore, a man becomes aware that the spirit of God does not act in him and that the inner man is abandoned by God, it is necessary that the external man practice all external virtues, and particularly those which he is most able to do, which are most useful and necessary, and which are in no way properties of himself, rather in honour of truth, so that he is neither pulled nor induced to coarse things, instead that he attaches himself thus to God, so that God finds him close when He wants to return and do His work in the soul, so that He then does not need to look for her. When, however, a man finds himself well ordered towards true interiority, so let boldly go all externality, be it such exercises to which you have bound yourself by vow from which neither Pope nor Bishop can absolve. Because the vows to which a man adheres for God, they cannot be absolved by anybody; rather one transforms them well into something else, as every vow is a binding of oneself to God. Now, had a man promised a lot – praying, fasting, pilgrimage – and after that joins one of the orders, so he has got rid of all the promises, because in the order he is bound to all virtues and to God. Rightly so I say also here: As much as a man has bound himself to many things, as soon as he comes into true interiority, he is free from them all. As long as interiority lasts, and if it lasted a week, a month, a year, during this time no monk or nun would lose any time, because God, by whom they are caught and taken in, He must pay for them. Moreover, as soon as man comes to himself again, he

296

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Mêr: sô der mensche wider ze im selber kumet, sô verbringet er diu gelübede von der zît, in dem er sich nû vindet. Aber von dem vergangen zît, waz dar inne versûmet sî, des dich dünket, dem endarft dû niemer nâch gedenken, daz dû ez ervüllest, wan got ervüllet ez, die wîle er dich unmüezic machte. Noch dû ensoltest niht wellen, daz ez mit aller crêatûren werk ervüllet waere, wan | (607) daz allerminste von gote getân, ist bezzer dan aller crêatûren werk. Diz ist gesaget gelêrten und erliuhteten liuten, die von gote und von der geschrift gelêret und erliuhtet sint. Waz sol ez aber sîn von einem lûtern leien, der niht enweiz noch enverstât dan von lîplîcher üebunge, und er doch etwaz gelübede getân hât und ûf sich genomen hât, ez sî gebet oder ander dinc? Ich spriche alsô: vindet er in im, daz ez in hindert und daz in daz næher in got setzet, daz er ledic sî, sô sî küenlîche ledic, wan ein ieglîchez daz dich næher ze gote bringet und dich næher ze gote setzet, daz ist daz aller beste. | (608) Und daz meinte sant Paulus, dô er sprach23: ‘swenne daz kumet, daz dâ vol ist, sô vergât, daz dâ halbes ist’. Ez ist verre und unglîch einander: diu gelübede, diu man tuot in eines priesters hant und diu man gote selber tuot in einer einvalticheit. Sô einer gote alsô iht gelobet, daz ist ein guotiu meinunge, daz er sich alsô ze gote verbinden wil und hât daz die wîle vür daz beste. Ist aber, daz dem menschen ein bezzerz bekant wirt, daz er weiz und bevindet, daz ez bezzer ist, sô sî des êrsten zemâle ledic und ze vriden. Diz ist gar lîhte ze bewærenne, wan man sol mê anesehen die vruht und die innern wârheit dan | (609) daz ûzer werk. Alsô sprichet sant Paulus24: ‘diu geschrift tœtet’, daz ist alliu ûzerlîchiu üebunge, ‘aber der geist machet lebendic’, daz ist ein innerlich bevinden der wârheit. Des solt dû vil listiclîche war nemen, und waz dich aller næhest dâr zuo vüege, dem solt dû volgen vor allen dingen. Dû solt haben ein ûferhaben gemüete, niht ein niderhangendez, mêr: ein brinnendez, und daz in einer lîdender swîgender stilheit. Dû endarft gote niht sagen, wes dû begerest oder bedarft, er weiz ez allez vor, als unser herre sprach ze sînen jüngern25: ‘sô ir betet, sô ensult ir niht vil wort haben | (610) in iuwerm gebete als die pharisêi, die wænent erhœret werden in irm vilsprechenne’. 23. I Cor. 13:10: ‘Cum autem venerit quod perfectum est, evacuabitur quod ex parte est’. 24. II Cor. 3:6: ‘littera enim occidit, Spiritus autem vivificat’.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

297

fulfils the vows of time in which he now finds himself. But what you think you have missed in the time before, you need not hope to fulfil, because God fulfils it while He makes you idle. Nor should you wish that it is fulfilled with the action of all creatures, because the smallest action of God is better than the activity of all creatures.

This is said to learned and enlightened people who are taught and enlightened by God and the Scriptures. But what about a pure lay person who neither knows nor understands anything but bodily exercises, yet has made and taken on himself a vow, be it prayer or anything else? I say as follows: If he finds in it that it hinders him, and that being free sets him closer into God so he should be daringly free, because anything that brings you closer to God and places you closer to God is the very best. And this is meant by Paul, when he said: ‘When wholeness comes, what is half will disappear.’23 There is a big difference between the vows which one makes in the hands of a priest and the ones which one makes to God Himself in unity. When one vows something to God, it is a good intention of wishing to be bound to God, and one considers this for the time being as the best. But if man gets to know something better, that he knows and feels that it is better, then he should be completely freed of the first and at peace. This is particularly easy to prove, because one should rather look at the fruit and the inner truth than at the external action. Thus, Saint Paul says: ‘The letter kills’,24 that is all external practice, ‘but the Spirit makes alive’, that is the inner sense of truth. You have to learn this very cleverly, and what fits you most closely, this you have to follow above all. You must have a high mind, not a mind that is bent down; instead, an ardent mind, and this in a patient, silent stillness. You do not need to say to God what you desire or need, He knows it already, as our Lord said to His disciples: ‘When you pray do not make use of many words as the Pharisees who want to be heard in their endless speeches.’25

25. Matth. 6:7: ‘Orantes autem, nolite multum loqui, sicut ethnici, putant enim quod in multiloquio suo exaudiantur’.

298

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Daz wir hie dirre ruowe und disem inwendigen swîgenne alsô volgen, daz daz êwic wort in uns gesprochen werde und verstanden, daz wir einez werden mit im, des helfe uns der vater und daz selbe wort und ir beider geist. Âmen.

H OMILY 16* [S 104]

299

That, we may here then seek this rest and this internal silence, that the eternal Word be spoken in us and we know that we become one with Him, may the Father and the same Word and the Spirit of both, help us. Amen.

Homily 17* [S 91] Dominica in Septuagesima ‘Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem suam’ Introduction

T

he text of Matth. 20:8 is taken from the Gospel reading for the First Sunday after Easter (Dominica in Septuagesima). The theme refers to the parable of the labourers in the vineyard, and more specifically to the time when the master instructs his foreman: ‘Call the workmen and pay them their wages’ (Matth. 20:8). The full text has been handed down by the two codices of the Paradisus animae intelligentis (n. 16, mss. H2, O) and also by Lo4; a fourth codex, Me2, offers only an abbreviated version; in addition there are four fragments extant.

The content of the homily Eckhart relates the ‘lord who invites the workmen’ directly with ‘our Lord’ (n. 2) and sees this relation in a threefold way, with reference to: A) the creation (nn. 3–10), B) death (nn. 11–12) and C) the day of judgement (n. 13–15). And, indeed, in the following text, Eckhart follows this basic divide. A) He begins his reasoning by introducing and criticizing the author of the then standard handbook of theological teaching, Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae II, d. 1, c. 4, n. 6. He adds that he ‘would like, however, to place it [creation] even more closely to Him’. Creation, for Eckhart, is not a mediated act, but a self–creation of God, ‘Himself for Himself ’, and more daringly, a creation of man for God, but also a creation of God for man (n. 4). The result is the utter intimacy between God and man,

302

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

a topic to which Eckhart will return (see below Homily 64 [Q 85]). The creatures are created in order to draw man to God, a kind of love trap to catch the noble soul or a spur to the ‘ignoble man’ who needs to be prompted by God (n. 5). Two examples of the latter are Paul and Augustine. While Paul was on his way to battle against Christians God knocked him down, while Augustine was not ‘satisfied by the lust into which God had trapped the soul to convert her’ (n. 5). God has divided Himself into the creatures, leaving a trail (n. 6). Creatures draw man to God because he cannot find satisfaction and rest (nn. 7–10). Eckhart gives three reasons why this is so. The first is division (n. 7), the second corporeality and their falling into corruption (n. 8), the third that God’s gift needs to come not only from God, but from the very origin, whence the soul came (n. 9–10). The added master’s saying, not clearly identified, does not easily link up with the argument. But perhaps Eckhart wants to say that God does, indeed, pour His gifts out of Himself, just as the teacher says that ‘the Father has a Son and a Holy Spirit and through both he inclines towards man’. In a way, it leads (not without apparent gaps in the argument) to the statement that the numerous angels were also meant to reveal God ‘most closely’ (n. 11). Yet, Eckhart insists, one should not take God’s sign for God Himself, but trust that God goes all His way to man, as if He had forgotten His sovereignty, concerned only to fall in love with man (n. 11). B) With a clear marker, ‘This much about the first reason when God invited through the creation of the creatures. Second ...’ (nn. 11–2), Eckhart moves to his next topic: death, which, for good people, ‘is very sweet and joyful’. Death is nothing but a ‘transition from death to life’ (n. 12). With the ‘reward’, Eckhart begins to talk about his third topic, the ‘day of judgement’. C) The ‘reward’ is interpreted as the wage of the Gospel, but, as Eckhart says, we do not seem to be told by God what the wage is. And yet, it is nothing but God’s entire power, He Himself (n. 13). In order to get the reward, the soul must be elevated above itself, but the question is: ‘Is she capable of this?’ (n. 14); and there is a second hindrance, the eternal character of the wage. The answer is that God refashions Himself and brings eternity into time and time into eternity (n. 15).

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

303

Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 72–98. Previous English translation The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 161–4.

304

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (84)‘Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem suam.’ ‘Ruof den werkliuten und gip in ir lôn’1. Bî disem herren, der die werkliute ladet in sînen wîngarten, ist bezeichent unser herre, der alle liute ze im hât geladen zweierleie wîs. Ze dem êrsten mit dem geschepfnisse aller crêatûren, die er sô schœne und sô edel hât gemachet. Ze dem andern mâle mit dem tôde und an dem jüngesten tage. Ein meister sprichet2, daz got die werlt und alliu dinc hât gemachet durch den menschen und den menschen durch sich3. Ich wil ez im aber næher legen4, daz er sich hât gemachet durch sich, und den menschen durch sich, und sich durch den menschen. Und diu liebe diu hât got | (85) sô sêre verblendet und ertrenket, die er ze der sêle hât, daz er alle crêatûren geschaffen hât durch daz, daz er der sêle offenbâre sîne êre. Und ist alsô sêre dar ûf verstarret, wie er die sêle ze sich geziehe und gelocke ze sîner minne, als ob er alles des vergezzen habe, daz in himelrîche und in ertrîche ist, und des aleine warte, in welhem wege er eine ieglîche sêle aller beste ze sich geziehen müge. Dar umbe hât er manigerleie crêatûre gemachet, daz manigerleie wîs geoffenbâret werde sîn êre. Und enhât doch keine crêatûre sô volkomenlich gemachet, er enhabe pîn dar ane | (86) geleget oder glîchnisse. Wan alle crêatûren sint ein bote oder ein winken ze gote, wan sie kündigent alle die êre gotes und winkent den menschen ze gote. Zwei dinc hât got geleget an die crêatûren: daz ist wollust und gemach, daz er dâ mite locke den menschen, der edel ist, daz der bekennet, daz diu wollust und daz gemach volkomen ist an gote. Wan der guote mensche wirt gelocket mit wollust und mit gemache. Und den unedeln menschen 1. Matth. 20:8. Liturgical context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 438ra–b: ‘Dominica in Septuagesima. Secundum Mattheum [20, 1–16]. In illo tempore dixit Ihesus discipulis suis parabolam hanc: [In … hanc > Vg.] Simile est regnum celorum homini patrifamilias, qui exiit primo mane conducere operarios in vineam suam. Conventione autem facta cum operariis ex denario diurno, misit eos in vineam suam. Et egressus circa horam tertiam, vidit alios stantes in foro otiosos, et illis dixit: Ite et vos in vineam meam, et quod iustum fuerit dabo vobis. Illi autem abierunt. Iterum autem exiit circa sextam et nonam horam: et fecit similiter. Circa undecimam vero exiit, et invenit alios stantes, et dicit illis: Quid hic statis tota die otiosi? Dicunt ei: Quia nemo nos conduxit. Dicit illis: Ite et vos in vineam meam. Cum sero autem factum esset, dicit dominus vinee procuratori suo: Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem incipiens a novissimis usque ad primos. Cum venissent ergo qui circa undecimam horam venerant, acceperunt singulos denarios. Venientes autem et primi, arbitrati sunt quod

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

305

‘Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem suam.’ ‘Call the workmen and pay them their wage.’1 By this lord who invites the workmen into his vinyard our Lord is meant in two ways: First with the creation of all creatures whom He has made so beautiful and so noble. Second with death and the day of judgement. A master says2 that God has fashioned the world and all things for man and man for Himself.3 I would like, however, to place it even more closely to Him4: that He has fashioned Himself for Himself and man for Himself and Himself for man. Love that He has for the soul has blinded God and made Him drunk so much that He fashioned all creatures by revealing to the soul His own honour. And He is so totally fixated as to how to draw and lure the soul to His love as if He had forgotten everything that is in the kingdom of heaven and on earth, and He awaits solely by which means He can best draw every soul to Him. For this reason He has fashioned manifold creatures, so that His honour is being revealed in many ways. And yet He has not made any creature as perfect as not to have placed in it pain and likeness. Because all creatures are a messenger and a sign towards God, as they all announce the honour of God and signal God to man. Two things God has placed with creatures, lust and well–being, in order to lure a man who is noble so that he knows that lust and well–being are perfect in God. For the good man is being lured by lust and well–being. While the ignoble man he prompts with pain. That is why pain is placed into plus essent accepturi: acceperunt autem [+ et Vg.] ipsi singulos denarios. Et accipientes murmurabant adversus patremfamilias, dicentes: Hi novissimi una hora fecerunt, et pares illos nobis fecisti, qui portavimus pondus diei, et estus. At ille respondens uni eorum, dixit: Amice non facio tibi iniuriam: nonne ex denario convenisti mecum? Tolle quod tuum est, et vade: volo autem et huic novissimo dare sicut et tibi. Aut non licet michi, quod volo, facere? an oculus tuus nequam est, quia ego bonus sum? Sic erunt novissimi primi, et primi novissimi. Multi enim sunt vocati, pauci vero electi’. 2. Petrus Lombardus, Sententiae II, d. 1, c. 4, n. 6 (Grottaferrata, 1971), 333,13–4: ‘sicut factus est homo propter Deum, id est ut ei serviret, ita mundus factus est propter hominem, scilicet ut ei serviret’. 3. ‘durch sich’: meaning ‘by God’. 4. ‘næher legen’: in the sense of ‘more closely to Him’, see also n. 6, ‘allernæhste gelegen’.

306

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

schürget er mit pîne nâch. Dar umbe ist pîn geleget an die crêatûren, ob er der êre und der wollust gotes niht enahte, | (87) daz er mit der pîne werde geslagen und nâchgeschürget. Als wunderlich als diu gemüete sint der liute, als wunderlich ist der wec ze gote. Den einen mac man locken mit wollust, den andern den muoz man slâhen mit sühte und mit ungemache. Als sant Paulus wunderlîche bekêret wart, dô er ûf dem wege was und kristenliute anevehten wolte, dô sluoc in got dar nider und umbevienc in mit sînem liehte5. Und sant Augustînus6 dô er bekêret wart, an dem tage dô enkunde er niht gesetiget werden von der wollust, die er hâte von der wunderlîchen lâge, die got der sêle leget, daz er sie bekêre. Und ein lêrer sprichet7, daz got alsô gelæzige, als ob er aller crêatûre vergezzen habe, und sinnet mit allem vlîze dar nâch, in welhem wege er die sêle ze sich geziehen müge, und | (88) wie er der sêle geoffenbâret und liep gehabet werde; und gelæzige, als ob im sînes lebens und sîner natûre zergân solte, wan sîn leben und sîn natûre ist daz, daz er geoffenbâret und liep gehabet werde. Dar umbe hât sich got geteilet, der einvaltic ist, an alle crêatûren, daz diu sêle an keinem wege sich kêren enmac von gote an die crêatûren, si envinde gotes glîchnisse dar ane. Ez | (89) enmöhte niemer kein sünder wollust gehaben an den sünden, gotes glîchnisse enwære etlîche wîs dar ane, alsô êre und gemach und wollust ist. Dar umbe ist daz, daz manic mensche verzîhet vriunde und guotes, und der êre enmac er niht verzîhen: diu ist im allernæhste gelegen, und dar ane volget er gote aller glîchest. Wan got sprichet8: ‘ich enwil mîn êre niemanne geben’. Ein glôse sprichet9 hie ûf den psalter: nieman ist, der sîn êre durch sînes vriundes êre welle geben. (90) Driu dinc sint, dar umbe diu sêle keine genüegede gehaben mac an der crêatûren. Daz eine ist, daz si teilunge habe. Wan diu genüegede des trankes enist niht genüegede der spîse noch der kleider: ir einiu wîset von im 5. See Act. 9:1–4. 6. Augustinus, Confessiones IX, c. 6, n. 14, ed. Verheijen, 141, 21–3: ‘Nec satiabar illis diebus dulcedine mirabili, considerare altitudinem consilii tui super salutem generis humani’. 7. Hugo de Sancto Victore, Soliloquium de arrha animae, ed. Müller, 23, 15–24: ‘… ita totum ad custodiam mei occupatum video, quasi omnium oblitus sit et mihi soli vacare velit’.

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

307

creatures, for if he is not attentive to honour and lust for God, he is struck and prompted by pain. As extraordinary as people’s minds are, so extraordinary is the way to God. The one person one may lure with lust, the other one has to strike with obsessions and discomforts.

When Saint Paul was converted in an extraordinary way, being on the way to battle against Christians, God knocked him down and surrounded him with His light.5 And when Saint Augustine6 was converted, that day he could not be satisfied by the lust into which God had trapped his soul to convert her. And a teacher says7 that God behaves as if He had forgotten all creatures and is preoccupied with which way He can pull the soul to Him, and how He can be revealed to and be loved by the soul; and He behaves as if His life and His nature would dissolve, because His life and His nature are for Him to be revealed and to be loved. For this reason, God who is simple has divided Himself into all creatures, so that the soul in no way should turn away from God and to the creatures, unless she finds in them God’s similitudes. No sinner could enjoy lust in sins, if they were not in many ways similitudes of God, such as honour, well–being and lust. This is why numerous people forgive friends and forgo goods, but they cannot forgive (loss of) honour. This is too close to him and in this he follows God most closely. Because God says:8 ‘I do not want to give my honour to anybody.’ A gloss on the Psalter says this:9 there is nobody who wants to give away his honour for the honour of his friend. There are three reasons the soul does not find satisfaction with the creatures. The first is that they are divided. Because the satisfaction from drinking does not satisfy the need for food or clothes, the one points

8. Is. 42:8: ‘gloriam meam alteri non dabo’. 9. Glossa ordinaria ad Ps. 1:1: ‘cathedra pestilentiae recte dicitur, quia non est fere quisquam qui careat amore dominandi et humanam non appetat gloriam’ (cit. in Serm. XXXVIII, n. 379, [LW IV 325, 8–10]).

308

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

ûf daz ander und welzet ie vürbaz ze gote. Dar umbe enist dâ keiniu genüegede ane. Daz ander: daz die crêatûren lîphaftic sint und vallent ûf ein verderbnisse und verdrozzenheit, dar umbe enist dâ kein zuonemen ane. Ie ich lenger ûf ein wîz tuoch sehe oder in daz lieht | (91) der sunnen, ie mir daz ouge stumpfer und vinsterer wirt. Ez enwart nie crêatûre sô schœne noch sô edel, man enmöhte sie sô lange anesehen, si enwürde verdrôzlich. Aber geistlich bekantnisse hât ein zuonemen âne ende. Ie ich geistlîchiu dinc baz bekenne, ie mîn sin lüterer und gevüeger wirt vürbaz ze bekennenne. Daz dritte: daz diu gâbe gotes der sêle niht geschenket enwirt ûz dem vazze, dâ si ûzgevlozzen ist. Wan allez, daz got gegeben möhte, wollust und gâbe, si enwürde geschenket der sêle ûz dem vazze, daz got ist, ez enmöhte der sêle niemer gesmecken noch wollust gegeben. (91) | Got enist niht wan ein lûter wesen und diu crêatûre ist von nihte und hât ouch ein wesen von demselben wesene, und ensmecket doch der sêle niht an der crêatûre, darumbe daz si ein ander vaz ist. Wie lûter und edel ein trank ist, giuzet man in in ein snœde vaz, er wirt deste unedeler. Dar umbe ist, daz alle die gâbe und êre, die got gegeben mac, sie enwerden ir geschenket ûz im selber, sô enist ez nihtes wert. Ein lêrer10 sprichet, daz der vater hât einen sun und einen heiligen geist, und durch die beide hât er sich geneiget dem menschen. (93) | Ouch suln wir prüeven, daz der himel unmæzlîche grœzer ist dan daz ertrîche, und alsô vil ist der engel mê in dem himelrîche dan aller menschen ûf ertrîche. Wan die meister11 wellent, daz die engel got allernæhste offenbâren. Dar umbe muoz ir allermeist sîn. Daniel sach12, daz ‘zehen tûsent gote dieneten und zehenstunt hundert tûsent wâren bî im’. Und tuot got rehte als er aller dirre hêrschaft vergezzen habe und kêre sich ze einem menschen alzemâle und lâge sîner liebe. Dar umbe sprichet got13: ‘wê dem menschen, der mîn winken liep hât vür mich’. 10. Not specified by J. Quint, perhaps a reference to Augustinus, Sermo de Symbolo 3, n. 6, (PL 40, col. 630:): ‘Ille Deus tantus aequalis Patri, natus est de Spiritu Sancto et virgine Maria humilis, unde sanaret superbos. Exaltavit se homo, et cecidit: humiliavit se Deus, et erexit. Humilitas Christi quid est? Manum Deus homini iacenti porrexit. Nos cecidimus, ille descendit; nos iacebamus, ille se inclinavit’. 11. ‘die meister’: perhaps a reference to Ps.-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 4 § 22 (PG 3, 724B), Dionysiaca 269, 3: ‘angelus manifestatio occulti luminis’, on this, note Albertus, Super

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

309

away to the other and always carries over to God. Hence, there is never any satisfaction. The second: the creatures are corporeal and fall into corruption and frustration, so there is no progress. The longer I stare at a white cloth or into the light of the sun, the less sharp and the darker it gets. No creature was ever so beautiful and noble that one would look at it for long without becoming frustrating. By contrast, spiritual knowledge increases without end. The more spiritually I know something, the purer and more refined my knowledge becomes. The third: that the gift of God for the soul is not poured out of the barrel from which it flowed. Even if all lust and gifts that God could give were poured into the soul from the barrel which is God, they would neither be tasty for the soul nor provide lust for her. God is nothing but a pure being, while the creature is of nothing and also has a being of such nature, hence the soul does not find creatures tasty, as they are another barrel. However pure and noble a drink is, when one pours it into a neglected barrel, it turns ignoble. For this reason, all gifts and honour that God can give but that are not poured into the soul out of Himself are worth nothing. A teacher10 says that the Father has a Son and a Holy Spirit and through both He inclines towards man. We also ought to reflect that heaven is incomparably bigger than the earth, and so there are many more angels in the kingdom of heaven than all people on earth. Indeed, the masters11 would have it that the angels reveal God most closely, that is why they have to be most numerous. Daniel saw12 that ‘ten thousand served God and ten times a hundred thousand were with Him’. And God does just as if He had forgotten all of this lordship and turns Himself entirely to one man and falls in love with him. That is why God says: ‘Woe to the man who takes my sign for me.’13 Dionysii De divinis nominibus, c. 4, n. 182, ed. Simon, 268, 1–4: ‘… illud Alexandri in libro De motu cordis, quod angelus est substantia illuminationum, quae sunt a primo, prima relatione receptiva; inducit enim hoc per auctoritatem Dionysii Ariopagitae’; (= Alfredus de Sareshel, De motu cordis, prol., n. 1, ed. Baeumker, 2,7–3,1). 12. Dan. 7:10: ‘milia milium ministrabant ei, et decies milies centena milia adsistebant ei’. 13. See Augustinus, De libero arbitrio II, c. 43, n. 168, ed. Green, 266, 54–5: ‘Vae, … qui nutus tuos pro te amant’.

310

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Diz ist von dem êrsten, als got ladet mit dem geschepfnisse der crêatûren. Ze dem andern mâle ladet er an dem tôde, der dâ bitterlîche und swærlîche vellet ûf der sünder herze. Dar umbe sprichet diu schrift14: ‘ô wê tôt, wie bitter ist dîn gedæchtnisse allen den, die sich gebreitet hânt ûf dise werlt mit aller liebe’. Aber guoten liuten ist ez vil süeze und vrœlich. | (94) Wan er enist niht mê dan ein übervart von dem tôde ze dem lebene. Und tuot einen sæligen kouf, wan der guote mensche gibet an dem tôde pîn und jâmer umbe die êwige vröude. Weste ieman ein krût, daz man gehaben möhte, wer ez bî im hæte, daz er niemer alt noch siech enwürde, daz krût möhte man tiure koufen: daz ist der tôt. Swer den hât an sînem gedæhtnisse, der enwirt niemer alt an den sünden. Wan diu schrift sprichet15: ‘an allen dînen werken sich ane dîn ende, sô entuost dû keine sünde’. Ze dem dritten mâle suln wir prüeven daz lôn, dâ er spri16 chet : ‘lade die werkliute und gip in ir lôn’. Hie vor ensol sich nieman erværen, daz er sprichet, daz man den werkliuten ir lôn sol geben. Ob er alt oder krank ist, daz er lîphaftiger werke niht vermac, sô halte er sich an diu inwendigen geistlîchen werk, diu edeler und grœzer sint vor gote dan ûzwendigiu werk, daz ist guot wille und liebe ze gote. Dar ane beheltet er daz lôn. | (95) Unser herre got hât uns gelocket mit dem lône als daz schâf mit dem rîse: swenne man ez anderswâ hinne haben wil, sô wîset man im ein grüene rîs. Got hât uns gewîset, daz ein lôn ist. Er enhât aber niht gesprochen, waz daz lôn sî. Wan solte got sprechen, waz daz lôn wære, er müeste alle sîne maht dâ zuo tuon. Wære iht an gote, daz dâ swige und niht enschrîete daz lôn, sô blibe ez ungesprochen. Wan allez, daz got ist und vermac, daz ist daz lôn. Alsô müeste alle sîn wesen und maht sprechen daz lôn. Und ob alliu diu kraft, diu an allen sêlen ist, geleget wære an eine sêle, si enmöhte daz minste lôn niht enpfâhen, daz von dem minsten werke komet, daz got geboten hât in der êwigen liebe, diu sêle müeste zerglîten und sterben.

14. Eccli. 31:1: ‘O mors, quam amara est memoria tua homini pacem habenti in substantiis suis’. 15. Eccli. 7:40: ‘In omnibus operibus tuis memorare novissima tua, et in aeternum non peccabis’.

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

311

This much about the first reason according to which God invited through the creation of the creatures. Second, he invites through death, which falls bitterly and heavily on the heart of the sinner. Therefore, Scripture says: ‘O, death, how bitter is your memory for all those who were eager to make themselves a broad home on this earth.’14 Yet, for good people it is very sweet and joyful. Because it is nothing more than a transition from death to life. And one makes a blessed bargain, as the good man gives in death pain and sorrow for eternal joy. If somebody knew of a herb that one could get hold of which would allow him not to age or fall ill, and he had it with him, this herb would achieve an enormous price: this is death. Whoever keeps death in mind will never grow old with sin. As the Scripture says: ‘In all your actions look to the end, and you will not commit a sin.’15 Third, we have to think about the wage, when He says: ‘Call the workmen and pay them their wage.’16 Nobody should dismiss that He says, one should pay the wage to the workmen. If somebody is old or ill so that he cannot work using his body, he should stick to inner, spiritual activities which are more noble and greater in the eyes of God than external activities, namely stick to a good will and love of God. For this he receives the wage. Our Lord God has lured us by the wage like the sheep by the twig: when one wants to get it to somewhere else, one shows it a green twig. God has shown us that there is a wage. Though He did not say what the wage would be. Because if God were to mention what the wage is, He would have to add all His power. If God is somehow silent and does not tell the wage, it remains unmentioned. Yet, all that God is and can do is the wage. Hence, all His being and power voice the wage. And if the entire power that is present in all souls were placed into one soul, she would not be able to receive the smallest wage that derives from the smallest activity which God has ordered in eternal love; this soul would disintegrate and die.

16. Matth. 20:8: ‘Voca operarios, et redde illis mercedem suam’.

312

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Ich setze mîne sêle ze pfande an dem jüngesten tage ze der helle ze gebenne, daz diz wâr sî, daz ich nû sprechen wil: ob alliu diu kraft aller sêlen und aller engel und aller crêatûren zemâle geahtet wære ûf eine sêle, si enmöhte daz minste lôn eines guoten gedanken niht enpfâhen, der in der êwigen liebe gedâht wirt, si müeste zerglîten und zervliezen und sterben. | (96) Welh rât gehœret denne dar zuo, ob si alles daz lôn enpfâhen süle, daz got ist, wan daz diu sêle erhaben muoz werden über sich selber und über alle crêatûre und muoz gesast werden in götlich wesen und in daz glîchnisse götlîcher natûre? Vermac si ez? Ouch möhte daz lôn verdrôzlich werden von dem andern, daz ez êwic ist. Dar zuo hât got einen heimlichen rât vunden und hât sich selber verniuwet dâ mite, daz er die êwicheit hât brâht in die zît und mit sich hât brâht die zît in die êwicheit. Daz ist geschehen an dem sune, wan dô sich der sun entgôz in die êwicheit, dô wurden alle crêatûren mite entgozzen. Dar | (97) umbe ist der sun êwiclîche geborn âne underlâz und alzemâle, daz aller crêatûren wollust und volkomenheit ist gesament zemâle an im, und wirt alsô der sêle geschenket âne underlâz und niuwe. Dar umbe ist sîn geburt hiute alsô niuwe, als dô ez sich êrste begunde, daz der sêle lôn | (98) alsô geschenket werde ûz dem niuwen vazze und vrisch und volkomen, und ir lôn alsô lustic und unverdrôzlich blîbe âne ende. Hie von enmac ich niht mê gesprechen, got enmac ouch niht mê gesprechen, wan daz uns diz volkomen lôn werde. Des helfe uns got. Âmen.

H OMILY 17* [S 91]

313

I will offer my soul as a wager, to be given up to hell on the day of judgement if what I say here is false; that is, that if the entire power of all souls and all angels and all creatures were totally concentrated into one soul, she would not be capable to receive the smallest wage of a good thought that has been conceived in eternal love, but she would disintegrate, dissolve and die. What suggestion would be appropriate for her to receive the entire wage that is God, other than that the soul be lifted beyond herself and beyond all creatures and be placed into God’s being and into the similitude of divine nature? Is she capable of this? The wage might also become troublesome from the other fact, i.e. that it is eternal. For this God found a secret suggestion refashioning Himself by bringing eternity into time and with Himself taking time into eternity. This has happened with the Son, as when the Son poured Himself into eternity He poured all creatures with Him. For that reason the Son is constantly and entirely born, so that all lust and perfection of all creatures is entirely gathered in Him and is constantly poured into the soul anew. That is why His birth today is as new as if it happened for the first time, so that the wage is poured out to the soul from a new, fresh and perfect barrel and her wage remains pleasurable and not troublesome without end. Of this I cannot say more, even God cannot say more, until we get this perfect wage. For this, help us God. Amen.

Homily 18* [Q 1] Feria III post dominicam I in Quadragesima ‘Intravit Iesus in templum et ejiciebat vendentes et ementes.’ Matthaei. Introduction

T

he theme is taken from the Gospel reading for the Tuesday after the First Sunday of Lent (‘nach Zinstag Inuocauit’ BT), and builds on the opening sentence of the episode of the expulsion of the merchants from the temple: Jesus ‘went into the temple and threw out those who were there buying and selling’. The Gospel text derives from Matth. 21:10–7 with the reading (according to Vg.) ‘ejiciebat’, while the passage appears in the Synoptics: Mark 11:15: ‘coepit eicere’; Luke 19:45: ‘coepit eicere’. It is missing in the passage handed down by John 2:16: ‘et his qui columbas vendebant dixit: Auferte ista hinc’, which, however, is taken into consideration in Eckhart’s exegesis (n. 8). Thirteen manuscripts give us the sermon in its entirety (B4, B9, B11, Br2, Bra2, Bra3, M2, Mai1, St2, St5, Str3, Tr, Wi), to which we have to add some fragments, BT and KT. The content of the homily

According to the liturgical place of the homilies, Eckhart wanted to answer the question of how to fast as people wanted to know what would be the best way for one to purify oneself and become worthy of God.1 These ‘good’ and good willing people are the target audience of Eckhart’s homily here. Yet he is going to make them reflect upon their expectation and lead them from ‘doing’ to ‘being’. Eckhart structures the 1. See on this and what follows A. Beccarisi, ‘Predigt 1’ (2003), 12.

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

315

homily according to the following four parts of the verses Matth. 21:12, to which he adds John 2:16; however, he begins with the second element of Matth. 21:12, the throwing out of buyers and sellers, followed by John 2:16, before he moves back to the opening verse on Jesus entering the temple: After presenting his thesis that God wants to have his temple bare and empty (nn. 1–3), Eckhart asks who these people are: A) The buyers and sellers were good people (nn. 4–6) B) The merchants (n. 7) C) The doves or, how to explain the phrase ‘place these here and remove these’? (nn. 8–9) D) By ‘temple’ the soul is meant (nn. 10–5)2 Eckhart first clarifies that God ‘wishes to reign powerfully’ in this temple, which is identified as the soul, but that it first needs to be cleared of elements that have filled it up (n. 3). A) Having said this, it is very important that the exhortation to clear out the temple is not directed towards crooks or bad people; rather, as Eckhart points out, he is talking about ‘good people’, people who are ‘fasting, keeping vigils, praying and what else there is of good actions’, yet their intent should be criticized, as they ‘act for our Lord to reimburse them’ (n. 4). Instead, they have to learn and acknowledge that all they have and are is freely given by God (n. 5). Eckhart finds harsh words for these good people: they are ‘hard–nosed’ and ‘stupid’ (harte tôrehte), but they also stand for ‘our ignorance’ (ûz unbekantnisse). In contrast to these people God does not act for Himself, but for those whom He loves, as does the person who ‘stands bare and free in all his actions’ (n. 6). B) More radically, one has to give up any concept of exchange to avoid being merchants (n. 7). C) All the good things people do are, indeed, ‘nothing bad’, but they are a ‘hindrance’ (n. 8); once these are discarded, a new form of exchange can take place. Now, that the ‘temple’, i.e. the soul, is bare and naked, it looks just like God Himself and there is nothing there, no created thing (n. 9). 2. We think there is no need to separate this part D into two parts, pace A. Beccarisi, ‘Predigt 1’ (2003), 13.

316

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

D) Jesus confirms that He alone is there (n. 10). Hence, like Jesus, so also the soul has to be alone. Yet this solitude is not like the solitude of created beings, which experience it as an exclusive state of being; on the contrary, God’s solitude is commonality; when ‘He speaks the Word, He speaks Himself and everything in another person and gives him the same nature that He Himself has’. Hence, His solitude creates a like–minded ‘you’. Such shining out is God’s expression of His ‘paternal lordship’ for the Son and in the Spirit (n. 12), a shining out that is limitless, as God does not and even cannot set Himself limits of self–giving (n. 13). As a result, God’s wisdom becomes so united with the soul that ‘all error and all darkness’ are gone and there remains no distinction between God and the soul, but only ‘essential beingness’. As with the Son’s flowing into the soul, so does the soul flow ‘into herself, out of herself and beyond herself and over everything back into the first beginning’; thus she shares the communal self–emptying of God and, in this motion, shares His dynamic rest (n. 14). A core statement of this homily aroused the criticism of the Inquisition, as they read it as a claim that already in this life (in hac vita) human beings are able to achieve the state of perfection: ‘Then the outer man is obedient to his inner man until his death and is then in constant peace, always in service for God.’3 Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW I 3–20; N. Largier, I 742–58; A. Beccarisi, LE II 1–27; ead., ‘Libertà e intelletto. Una lettura di Eckhart, Predica 1 (Quint)’, Giornale Critico della Filosofia Italiana 83 (2003), 383–401.

3. ‘Denne ist der ûzer mensche gehôrsam sînem innern menschen unz an sînen tôt und ist denne in stætem vride in dem dienste gotes alle zît’, see Proc. Col. I, n. 63 (LW V 221, 7–11): ‘quod homo potest pervenire ad hoc quod exterior homo oboediens sit interiori usque ad mortem et tunc manet in pace in servitio dei omni tempore’; v. anche Proc. Col. II, n. 123 (LW V 348, 5–9): ‘in sermone qui incipit ‘Intravit Iesus in templum dei et eiciebat omnes vendentes’ sic habet de quadam perfectione, ad quam anima vel homo in hac vita potest attingere: Et tunc est exterior homo oboediens interiori homini usque ad mortem suam et tunc est in stabili pace in servitio dei omni tempore’.

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

317

Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 28–31; Meister Eckhart: A modern Translation, by R.B. Blakney (1941), 156–60; J.M. Clark, Meister Eckhart (1957), 127–32; R. Schürmann, Meister Eckhart (1978), 3–8; M. Fox, Breakthrough (1980), 450–5; Meister Eckhart, Teacher and Preacher (1987), 239–43; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 66–71; Meister Eckhart, Selected Writings, ed. and trans. O. Davies (1994), 152–8.

318

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (4)‘Intravit Iesus in templum et ejiciebat4 vendentes et ementes.’ Matthaei. Wir lesen in dem heiligen êwangeliô, daz unser herre ‘gienc in den tempel und warff ausz5, die dâ kouften und verkouften’6, ‘und sprach ze den andern, die dâ hâten tûben und sôgetâniu dinc veile: tuot diz hin, tuot diz | (5) enwec!’7 War umbe was Jêsus ûzwerfende, die dâ kouften und verkouften und hiez die hin tuon, die dâ hâten tûben? Er enmeinte anders niht, wan daz er den tempel wolte ledic hân, rehte als ob er spræche: ich hân reht ze disem tempel und wil aleine dar inne sîn und hêrschaft dar inne hân. Waz ist daz gesprochen? Dirre tempel, dâ got inne hêrschen wil gewalticlîche nâch sînem willen, daz ist des menschen sêle, die er sô rehte glîch nâch im selber gebildet und geschaffen hât, als wir lesen, daz unser herre sprach8: ‘machen wir den menschen nâch unserm bilde und ze unser glîchnisse’. Und daz hât er ouch getân. Als glîch hât er des menschen sêle gemachet im selber, daz in himelrîche noch in ertrîche von allen hêrlîchen crêatûren, diu got sô wünniclich | (6) geschaffen hât, keiniu ist, diu im als glîch ist als des menschen sêle aleine. Her umbe wil got disen tempel ledic hân, daz ouch niht mê dar inne sî dan er aleine. Daz ist dar umbe, daz im dirre tempel sô wol gevellet, wan er im alsô rehte glîch ist und im selber alsô wol behaget in disem tempel, swenne er aleine dar inne ist. Eyâ, nû merket! Wer wâren die liute, die dâ kouften und verkouften, und wer sint sie noch? Nû merket mich vil rehte! Ich wil nû zemâle niht predigen dan von guoten liuten. Nochdenne wil ich ze 4. J. Quint and A. Beccarisi retain ‘coepit eicere’ and later ‘was ... ûzwerfende’ with the broader tradition of full manuscripts, but BT and KT could be correct too, as the Synoptic harmonized reading might be a correction taken from n. 3 (‘was Jêsus ûzwerfende’). The Latin works of Eckhart do not help, as both versions are present, the Vulgate reading in his Commentary on Exodus (LW II 79,1) and the Synoptic reading in his Sermo 24,2 (LW IV 228,4). As Eckhart more often than not follows the Vulgate tradition, here we have chosen this reading, without excluding the other. 5. See note 1. 6. Matth. 21:12: ‘Intravit Iesus in templum et coepit eicere vendentes et ementes’. See also Matth. 21:12: ‘Et intravit Iesus in templum Dei, et eiciebat omnes vendentes et ementes’, Marc. 11:15: ‘Et cum introisset in templum, coepit eicere vendentes et ementes in templo’; Luc. 19:45: ‘Et ingressus in templum, coepit eicere vendentes in illo et ementes’; Ioh. 2:14–5: ‘et invenit in templo vendentes boves et oves et columbas et nummularios sedentes, et cum fecisset quasi flagellum de funiculis omnes eiecit de templo, oves quoque et boves et nummulariorum effudit aes et mensas subvertit’. Liturgical

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

319

‘Intravit Iesus in templum et ejiciebat4 vendentes et ementes.’ Matthaei. We read in the holy Gospel that our Lord ‘went into the temple and threw out5 those who were there buying and selling’,6 ‘and He said to the others who had doves there and offered similar things, take these hence and remove these!’7 Why did Jesus throw out the ones who were there buying and selling and ask those who had doves, to take them hence? He had no other intent than wishing to have the temple bare, just as if He had said: I own this temple and wish to be in there and reign in there alone. What does this mean? This temple in which God wishes to reign powerfully according to His will is the human soul, which He has created and made exactly according to Himself, as we read when our Lord said: ‘Let us make man according to our image and likeness.’8 And this He has also done. He has made the soul of man so similar to Himself so that of all beautiful creatures either in the kingdom of heaven or on earth which God has created with such delight, there is none that is as similar to Him as the soul of man alone. For this reason God wishes this temple to be bare, so that there is none other than He Himself. This is so, because He has such delight in this temple, because it is so similar to Him and He feels Himself very much at home in this temple, when He alone is in there. Ah, now note! Who were these people who were there buying and selling, and who are they still? Now, listen carefully to me! I do not want to preach about anybody else at all except about good people. context: Evangelistar., Arch. f. 438vb: ‘Feria IIIa. Secundum Mattheum [21, 10–17]. In illo tempore cum intrasset Ihesus [In … Ihesus: Et cum intrasset Vg.] Ierosolimam, commota est universa civitas, dicens: Quis est hic? Populi autem dicebant: Hic est Ihesus propheta a Nazareth Galylee. Et intravit Ihesus in templum Dei, et eiciebat omnes vendentes, et ementes in templo, et mensas nummulariorum, et cathedras vendentium columbas evertit: et dicit eis: Scriptum est: Domus mea domus orationis vocabitur: vos autem fecistis illam speluncam latronum. Et accesserunt ad eum ceci, et claudi in templo: et sanavit eos. Videntes autem principes sacerdotum, et scribe mirabilia, que fecit, et pueros clamantes in templo, et dicentes: Osanna filio David: indignati sunt, et dixerunt ei: Audis quid isti dicunt? Ihesus autem dixit eis: Utique. Numquam legistis: Quia ex ore infantium, et lactantium perfecisti laudem? Et relictis illis, abiis foras extra civitatem in Bethanian: ibique docebat eos de regno Dei [docebat … Dei: mansit Vg.]’. 7. Ioh. 2:16: ‘et his qui columbas vendebant dixit: auferte ista hinc!’ 8. Gen. 1:26.

320

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

disem mâle bewîsen, welhez die koufliute dâ wâren und noch sint, die alsô kouften und verkouften und noch tuont, die unser herre ûzsluoc und ûztreip. Und daz tuot er noch allen den, die dâ koufent und verkoufent in disem tempel: der enwil er einen einigen | (7) dar inne niht lâzen. Sehet, diz sint allez koufliute, die sich hüetent vor groben sünden und wæren gerne guote liute und tuont ir guoten werk gote ze êren, als vasten, wachen, beten und swaz des ist, aller hande guotiu werk, und tuont sie doch dar umbe, daz in unser herre etwaz dar umbe gebe, oder daz in got iht dar umbe tuo, daz in liep sî: diz sint allez koufliute. Daz ist grop ze verstânne, wan sie wellent daz eine umbe daz ander geben und wellent alsô koufen mit unserm herren. An disem koufe sint sie betrogen. Wan allez, daz sie hânt und allez, daz sie vermügen ze würkenne, gæben sie daz allez durch got, daz sie hânt, und würhten sich zemâle ûz durch got, dar umbe enwære in got nihtes niht schuldic ze gebenne noch ze tuonne, er enwolte ez denne gerne vergebene tuon. Wan daz sie sint, daz sint sie von gote, und daz sie hânt, | (8) daz hânt sie von gote und niht von in selber. Dar umbe enist in got umbe iriu werk und umbe ir geben nihtes niht schuldic, er enwellez denne gerne tuon von sîner gnâde und niht umbe iriu werk noch umbe ir gâbe, wan sie engebent von dem irn niht, sie enwürkent ouch von in selber niht, als Kristus selber sprichet9: ‘âne mich müget ir niht getuon’. Diz sint harte tôrehte liute, die alsô koufen wellent mit unserm herren; sie bekennent der wârheit kleine oder niht. Dar umbe sluoc sie unser herre ûz dem tempel und treip sie ûz. Ez enmac niht bî einander gestân daz lieht und diu vinsternisse. Got der ist diu wârheit und ein lieht in im selber. Swenne denne got kumet in disen tempel, sô vertrîbet er ûz unbekantnisse, daz ist vinsternisse, und offenbâret | (9) sich selber mit liehte und mit wârheit. Denne sint die koufliute enwec, als diu wârheit wirt bekant, und diu wârheit begert dekeiner koufmanschaft. Got ensuochet des sînen niht; in allen sînen werken ist er ledic und vrî und würket sie ûz rehter minne. Alsô tuot ouch dirre mensche, der mit gote vereinet ist; der stât ouch ledic und vrî in allen sînen werken und würket sie aleine gote ze êren und ensuochet des sînen niht, und got der würket ez in im. 9. Ioh. 15:5: ‘quia sine me nihil potestis facere’.

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

321

Accordingly I would like to prove first what sort of merchants there were and still are, who thus were and still are buying and selling and who had been thrown out and pushed away by our Lord. And He still does so with those who were there buying and selling in this temple: of these people He does not want to let a single one stay in there. See, these are all merchants who keep away from gross sins and would love to be good people and act well so as to honour God, for example, by fasting, keeping vigils, praying and whatever else there is of good actions, yet they act for our Lord to reimburse them, or for God to do them a favour: these are all merchants. This is hard to understand, because they want a mutual deal and want to do commerce with our Lord. But in this commerce they are cheated. Because if all things that they have and that they are able to do, if they gave for God all that they have, and if they acted entirely for God, God would still not owe them anything either as gift or action unless He wished to do something for free. Because what they are, this they are by God, and what they have, this they have by God and not by themselves. That is why God does not owe them anything for their action and for their gifts, unless He wishes to do it with pleasure out of His grace and not because of their action or their gift, as they do not offer anything of themselves and they do nothing out of themselves, as Christ Himself says: ‘Without me you cannot do anything.’9 These are very foolish people who thus want to go bargain with our Lord, they know little of truth or none at all. That is why the Lord threw them out of the temple and pushed them away. Light and darkness cannot stand together. God is the truth and a light in Himself. When then God comes into this temple, He pushes out our ignorance, i.e. darkness, and reveals Himself as light and truth. Because as soon as the merchants have gone, then truth becomes known and truth does not wish for a guild of merchants. God does not search for what is His; in all His actions He is bare and free and acts out of true love. And so does this man who is united with God; this one stands bare and free in all his actions and acts solely for the honour of God, but does not search for what is his own, but God works it in him.

322

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Ich spriche noch mê: alle die wîle der mensche ihtes iht suochet in allen sînen werken von allem dem, daz got gegeben mac oder geben wil, sô ist er disen koufliuten glîch. Wiltû koufmanschaft zemâle ledic sîn, alsô daz dich got in disem tempel lâze, sô soltû allez, daz dû vermaht in allen dînen werken, daz soltû lûterlîche tuon gote ze einem lobe und solt des alsô ledic stân, als daz niht ledic ist, daz noch hie noch dâ enist. Dû ensolt nihtes niht dar umbe | (10) begern. Swenne dû alsô würkest, sô sint dîniu werk geistlich und götlich, und denne sint die koufliute ûz dem tempel getriben alzemâle, und got der ist aleine dar inne, wan der mensche niht wan got meinet. Sehet, alsus ist dirre tempel ledic von allen koufliuten. Sehet, der mensche, der sich noch niht enmeinet dan aleine got und die êre gotes, der ist gewærlîche vrî und ledic aller koufmanschaft in allen sînen werken und ensuochet des sînen niht, als got ledic ist in allen sînen werken und vrî und ensuochet des sînen niht. Ich hân ouch mê gesprochen10, daz unser herre sprach ze den liuten, die dâ tûben veile hâten: ‘tuot diz enwec, tuot diz hin!’ Die liute entreip er niht ûz | (11) noch enstrâfte sie niht sêre; sunder er sprach gar güetlîche: ‘tuot diz enwec’ als ob er sprechen wolte: diz enist niht bœse, und doch bringet ez hindernisse in der lûtern wârheit. Dise liute daz sint alle guote liute, die iriu werk tuont lûterlîche durch got und ensuochent des irn niht dar an und tuont sie doch mit eigenschaft, mit zît und mit zal, mit vor und mit nâch. In disen werken sint sie gehindert der aller besten wârheit, daz sie solten vrî und ledic sîn, als unser herre Jêsus Kristus vrî und ledic ist und enpfæhet sich alle zît niuwe âne underlâz und âne zît von sînem himelischen vater und ist sich in dem selben nû âne underlâz wider îngebernde volkomenlîche mit dankbærem lobe in die veterlîche hôcheit in einer glîcher wirdicheit. Alsô solte der mensche stân, der der aller hœhsten wârheit wolte enpfenclich werden und dar inne | (12) lebende âne vor und âne nâch und âne hindernisse aller der werke und aller der bilde, diu er ie verstuont, ledic und vrî in disem nû niuwe enpfâhende götlîche gâbe und die wider îngebernde âne hindernisse in disem selben liehte mit dankbærem lobe in unserm herren Jêsû Kristô. Sô wæren die tûben enwec, daz ist hindernisse und eigenschaft aller der werke, diu nochdenne guot sint, dar inne der mensche des sînen 10. The reference (‘Ich hân ouch mê gesprochen’) refers to this homily here, above, nn. 2–3.

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

323

I say even more: as long as a man searches in all his actions for something that God could give or wishes to give, he is still like these merchants. If you want to get out of the merchant’s guild, so that God lets you into this temple, you must do everything that you are able to do in all your work purely for God’s praise and should thus stay bare, because if there is still something here, it is not bare. You must not ask for it at all. If you act accordingly, then your actions are spiritual and divine, and then the merchants are entirely driven out of the temple, and God alone is in there, when a man intends nothing but God. See, then this temple is bare of all merchants. See, a man who has no regard for himself, but solely for God and the honour of God, he is truly free and bare of all the merchant’s guild in all his actions and does not search for what is his, as bare as God is in all His actions and free and not searching for what is His. I have already said before10 that our Lord said to the people who offered doves there: ‘take these hence and remove these!’ He neither snatches things from people nor punishes them heavily, but He says rather kindly: ‘Remove these’, as if He wanted to say: this is nothing bad, yet, in pure truth, it creates a hindrance. These people are all good people who act purely for God and do not search for what is their own, and yet, they act with their own propriety, with time and numbers, with before and after. Thus acting they are hindered from the very best truth to be free and bare as our Lord is free and bare and receives Himself all the time anew, without interruption and without time from His heavenly Father, with grateful love perfectly giving Himself in the same instant again into the fatherly majesty in equal honour. Thus a man who wishes to be receptive of the highest truth and to live in it without before or after and without hindrances of any action or any of those images that he ever knew, should stay bare and free in this now, renewed and receptive of divine gifts and giving them back without hindrances in this same light with grateful praise in our Lord Jesus Christ. Thus the doves would be gone, i.e. hindrances and ownership of any action which then are good and in which man does not search for what is his. For that reason our Lord rightly said rather

324

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

niht ensuochet. Dar umbe sprach unser herre wol güetlîche11: ‘tuot diz hin, tuot diz enwec!’ als ob er sprechen wolte: ez ist guot, doch bringet ez hindernisse. Swenne dirre tempel alsus ledic wirt von allen hindernissen, daz ist eigenschaft und unbekantheit, sô blicket er alsô schône und liuhtet alsô lûter und klâr über allez, daz got geschaffen hât, und durch allez, daz got geschaffen hât, daz im nieman widerschînen mac dan der ungeschaffene got aleine. Und | (13) bî rehter wârheit, disem tempel ist ouch nieman glîch dan der ungeschaffene got aleine. Allez daz under den engeln ist, daz glîchet sich disem tempel nihtes niht. Die hœchsten engel selbe die glîchent disem tempel der edelen sêle etwie vil und doch niht alzemâle. Daz sie der sêle glîchent etlîcher mâze, daz ist an bekantnisse und an minne. Doch ist in zil gesetzet; dar über enmügen sie niht. Diu sêle mac wol vürbaz. Stüende ein sêle glîch dem obersten engel, des menschen, der noch lebete in der zît, der mensche möhte nochdenne in sînem vrîen vermügenne unzellîche hœher komen über den engel in einem ieglîchen nû niuwe âne zal, daz ist âne wîse, und über die wîse der engel und aller geschaffener vernunft. Und got der ist aleine vrî und ungeschaffen und dar | (14) umbe ist er ir aleine glîch nâch der vrîheit und niht nâch der ungeschaffenheit, wan si ist geschaffen. Swenne diu sêle kumet in daz ungemischte lieht, sô sleht si in ir nihtes niht sô verre von dem geschaffenen ihte in dem nihtes nihte, daz si mit nihte enmac wider komen von ir kraft in ir geschaffen iht. Und got der understât mit sîner ungeschaffenheit ir nihtes niht und entheltet die sêle in sînem ihtes ihte. Diu sêle hât gewâget ze nihte ze werdenne und enkan ouch von ir selber ze ir selber niht gelangen, sô verre ist si sich entgangen, und ê daz sie got hât understanden. Daz muoz von nôt sîn. Wan als ich ê sprach12: ‘Jêsus was îngegangen in den tempel und was ûzwerfende, die dâ kouften | (15) und verkouften’, ‘und begunde ze sprechenne ze den andern: tuot diz hin!’ Jâ, sehet, nû hân ich daz wörtelîn13: ‘Jêsus gienc în’ ‘und begunde ze sprechenne: tuot diz hin!’ und sie tâten ez hin. Sehet, dô was dâ nieman mê dan Jêsus aleine und begunde ze sprechenne in dem tempel. Sehet, daz wizzet vür wâr: wil ieman anders reden in dem tempel, 11. Ioh. 2:16: ‘Auferte ista hinc!’ 12. See above nn. 2–3 and n. 9.

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

325

kindly: ‘Take these hence and remove these’,11 as if he wanted to say: it is good, but it creates a hindrance. When this temple becomes bare of all hindrances, i.e. ownership and ignorance, it looks so beautiful and lights up so purely and clearly above all that God has created and for all that God has created that nobody is reflected in it but the uncreated God alone. And in right truth, this temple is not similar to anybody except to the uncreated God alone. Anything that is below the angels is not like this temple. Similarly, the highest angels are very much like this temple of the noble soul, and yet, they are not entirely like it. That they are in many ways similar to it, derives from knowledge and love. However, they are set an end, beyond which they cannot go. The soul, however, can go way beyond. Were the soul of a man who still lives in time similar to the highest angel, this man then out of his free power could come immeasurably higher above the angel in any given now without count, i.e. without any mode, and above the mode of the angels and all created intellect. As God who alone is free and uncreated and for that reason He alone is like her according to freedom and not according to uncreatedness, because she is created. When the soul enters the unmixed light, she strikes off into her nothingness, so far away from something that is created in what is nothing at all, so that out of her own power she cannot come back to what is created in her. And God with His uncreatedness supports her nothingness and contains the soul in His somethingness. The soul has dared to become nothing and cannot get by herself back to herself, so far has she turned away from herself, even before God had supported her. This is so by necessity. Indeed, as I have said: ‘Jesus went into the temple to throw out those who were there buying and selling’,12 ‘and He began to speak to the others: Take these hence’. Yes, see, now I have the phrase: ‘Jesus went into’ ‘and began to speak: Take these hence!’13 and they took them hence. See, then there was nobody else except Jesus alone and He began to speak in the temple. See and know in truth: If somebody else wishes to speak in the temple,

13. Ioh. 2:16: ‘Auferte ista hinc!’

326

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

daz ist in der sêle, dan Jêsus aleine, sô swîget Jêsus, als er dâ heime niht ensî, und er ist ouch dâ heime niht in der sêle, wan si hât vremde geste, mit den si redet. Sol aber Jêsus reden in der sêle, sô muoz si aleine sîn und muoz selber swîgen, sol si Jêsum hœren reden. Eyâ, sô gât er în und beginnet ze sprechene. Waz sprichet her Jêsus? Er sprichet, daz er ist. Waz ist er denne? Er ist ein wort des vaters. In dem selben worte sprichet der vater sich selber und alle götlîche | (16) natûre und allez, daz got ist, alsô als er ez bekennet, und er bekennet ez, als ez ist. Und wan er ist volkomen in sînem bekantnisse und in sîner vermügenheit, her umbe, sô ist er ouch volkomen in sînem sprechenne. Dâ er sprichet daz wort, dâ sprichet er sich und alliu dinc in einer andern persône und gibet im die selbe natûre, die er selber hât, und sprichet alle vernünftige geiste in dem selben worte, glîch dem selben worte nâch dem bilde, als ez inneblîbende ist; nâch dem, sô ez ûzliuhtende ist, als ein ieglich bî im selber ist, niht glîch in aller wîse dem selben worte, mê: sie hânt mügelicheit enpfangen glîcheit ze enpfâhenne von gnâden des selben wortes; und daz selbe wort, als ez in im selber ist, diz hât der vater allez gesprochen, daz wort und allez, daz in dem worte ist. (17) | Sît der vater diz gesprochen hât, waz ist denne Jêsus sprechende in der sêle? Als ich gesprochen hân: der vater sprichet daz wort und sprichet in dem worte und anders niht, und Jêsus sprichet in der sêle. Diu wîse sînes sprechennes daz ist, daz er sich selben offenbâret und allez, daz der vater in im gesprochen hât, nâch der wîse, als der geist enpfenclich ist. Er offenbâret veterlîche hêrschaft in dem geiste in einem glîchen unmæzigen gewalte. Swenne der geist disen gewalt enpfæhet in dem sune und durch den sun, sô wirt er gewaltic in einem ieglîchen vürgange, alsô daz er glîch und gewaltic wirt in allen tugenden und in aller volkomener lûterkeit, sô daz in liep noch leit noch allez, daz got in der zît geschaffen hât, daz enmac den menschen niht zerstœren, er enblîbe gewalticlîche dar inne stânde als in einer götlîchen kraft, der engegen alliu dinc sint kleine und niht vermügende. (18)| | Ze dem andern mâle offenbâret sich Jêsus in der sêle mit einer unmæzigen wîsheit, diu er selber ist, in der wîsheit sich der vater selbe bekennet mit aller sîner veterlîchen hêrschaft und daz selbe wort, daz ouch diu wîsheit selber ist, und allez daz dar inne ist, alsô als daz selbe ein ist. Swenne disiu wîsheit mit der sêle vereinet wirt, sô ist ir aller

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

327

i.e. the soul, except Jesus alone, then Jesus falls silent, because He is not at home there when she has strange guests with whom she speaks. But if Jesus is to speak in the soul, she has to be alone and must herself fall silent, if she wants to listen to Jesus speaking. Well, so He enters and He starts to speak. What does Jesus say? He says what He is. What is He? He is a Word of the Father. In the same Word the Father speaks Himself and all divine nature and everything that is God, in the way that He knows it, and He knows it as it is. And because He is perfect in His knowledge and in His power, therefore He is also perfect in His speaking. As He speaks the Word, He speaks Himself and everything in another person and gives him the same nature that He Himself has, and speaks all intellectual minds in the same Word, similar to the same Word according to the image, as it remained inside; and afterwards, when it shines out, as each is by itself, not in any way similar to the same Word, but more: they have received the potential, by grace of the same Word to receive sameness; and the same Word, as it is in Himself, all this the Father has spoken, the Word and everything that is in the Word. Since the Father has spoken this Word, what does Jesus speak in the soul? As I have said: the Father speaks the Word and speaks in the Word and nothing else, and Jesus speaks in the soul. The way that He speaks is by revealing Himself and everything that the Father has spoken in Him, according to the way the spirit can receive it. He reveals paternal lordship in the Spirit in the same unlimited power. When the Spirit receives this power in the Son and for the Son, He becomes powerful in every respect, so that He becomes the same and powerful in all powers and in every perfect purity, so that to Him neither love nor pain nor anything else that God has created in time can destroy that man, as he remained powerful in it as in a divine power, against which all things are minimal and impotent. Second, Jesus reveals Himself in the soul with an unlimited wisdom which He Himself is, wisdom in which the Father knows Himself with all His paternal lordship and the same Word which, too, is this wisdom Himself, and all that is in it, so that the same is one. When this wisdom is being united with the soul, then all doubt, all error and all

328

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

zwîvel und alliu irrunge und alliu dünsternisse alzemâle abe genomen und ist gesetzet in ein lûter klârez lieht, daz selber got ist, als der prophête sprichet14: ‘herre, in dînem liehte sol man daz lieht bekennen’. Dâ wirt got mit gote bekant in der sêle; sô bekennet si mit dirre wîsheit sich selber und alliu dinc, und die selbe wîsheit bekennet si mit im selben, und mit der selben wîsheit bekennet si die veterlîche | (19) hêrschaft in vruhtbærer berhafticheit und die weselîche isticheit15 nâch einvaltiger einicheit âne einigen underscheit. Jêsus der offenbâret sich ouch mit einer unmæzigen süezicheit und rîcheit ûz des heiligen geistes kraft ûzquellende und überquellende und învliezende mit übervlüzziger voller rîcheit und süezicheit in alliu enpfenclîchiu herzen. Swenne sich Jêsus mit dirre rîcheit und mit dirre süezicheit offenbâret und | (20) einiget mit der sêle, mit dirre rîcheit und mit dirre süezikeit sô vliuzet diu sêle in sich selber und ûz sich selber und über sich selber und über alliu dinc von gnâden mit gewalte âne mittel wider in ir êrste begin. Denne ist der ûzer mensche gehôrsam sînem innern menschen unz an sînen tôt und ist denne in stætem vride in dem dienste gotes alle zît16. Daz ouch Jêsus in uns komen müeze und ûzwerfen und hin tuon alle hindernisse und uns mache ein, als er ein ist mit dem vater und mit dem heiligen geiste ein got, daz wir alsô ein werden mit im und êwiclîchen blîben, des helfe uns got. Âmen.

14. Ps. 35:10: ‘in lumine tuo videbimus lumen’. 15. On ‘isticheit’ see A. Beccarisi, ‘Predigt 1’ (2003), 25 and Hom. 4* [Q 77], n. 7. J. Quint translates ‘das wesenhafte Ur-Sein’. 16. On the sentence ‘Denne … zît’ see Proc. Col. I, n. 63 (LW V 221, 7–11): ‘quod homo potest pervenire ad hoc quod exterior homo oboediens sit interiori usque ad mortem et tunc

H OMILY 18* [Q 1]

329

darkness is entirely taken away from her and she is set into a pure, clear light that is God Himself, as the Prophet says: ‘Lord, in Your light one should know the light.’14 There God is known by God in the soul; thus she knows herself and everything with this wisdom, and she knows together with Himself the same wisdom, and with the same wisdom she knows the paternal lordship in fruitful generating power and the essential beingness15 according to simple unity without distinction. Jesus reveals Himself also with an unlimited sweetness and richness, which wells out of the power of the Holy Spirit, wells over and with abundantly full richness and sweetness flows into all receptive hearts. When Jesus reveals and unites Himself with the soul in such richness and sweetness, the soul flows by grace with power without mediation with this richness and sweetness into herself, out of herself and beyond herself and over everything back into the first beginning. Then the outer man is obedient to his inner man until his death and is then in constant peace, always in the service of God.16 That Jesus must also come to us to throw out and do away with all hindrances and to make us one as He is one, one God, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, hence, that we become one with Him and remain eternally, may God help us. Amen.

manet in pace in servitio dei omni tempore’; see also Proc. Col. II, n. 123 (LW V 348, 5–9): ‘in sermone qui incipit “Intravit Iesus in templum dei et eiciebat omnes vendentes” sic habet de quadam perfectione, ad quam anima vel homo in hac vita potest attingere: Et tunc est exterior homo oboediens interiori homini usque ad mortem suam et tunc est in stabili pace in servitio dei omni tempore’.

Homily 19* [S 116] Feria IV post dominicam II in Quadragesima ‘Domine rex omnipotens in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita’ Introduction

T

he topic of this homily is drawn from the reading for the Wednesday after the Second Sunday of Lent. It gives the opening of Mordecai’s prayer: ‘Domine rex omnipotens in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita’ (‘Lord, King Almighty, everything is subject to your power’ [Esth. 13:9]). In the exegetical tradition, Mordecai is the type of a doctor of the Church, particularly for St. Paul (Rabanus Maurus, Expositio in librum Esther 7 [PL 109, 654B–C, 655]), but Eckhart prescinds from this interpretation. The short sermon, handed down within the collection of the Paradisus animae intelligentis (codd. H2, O), but which also has a large parallel tradition, is listed by G. Steer as a text that needs to be checked for authenticity (G. Steer, ‘Die Schriften Meister Eckharts’ [2002], 253) and has only very recently been published in the critical edition. In DW IV 994-1056 the homily is given in two parallel versions, even though Steer sees hints for later redactions, particularly in the longer Y-version.The text here is based on the X-version, also published by Strauch in his collection of the Paradisus. Note that, in the series of that collection, the sermon appears at the end (no. 60), and is presented in the index as belonging to the cycle De sanctis. However, to give it its liturgical place in the De tempore seems credible, given its topic from the scriptural reading.

The content of the homily Eckhart picks up only two of the three elements that the reading gives as God’s properties. While the reading states that He is ‘Lord’ (dominus), ‘King’ (rex) and ‘Almighty’ (omnipotens), Eckhart focuses on the first

H OMILY 19* [S 116]

331

and the last only, unless he is amalgamating ‘dominus’ and ‘rex’ into ‘lordship’ (herschaft; her = dominus, Lord; schaft = rex; to reign, to steer), and starts with the latter, God’s power (gewalt) (n. 2). To the certain astonishment of his listeners and readers, both ‘power’ and ‘lordship’ Eckhart sees as based on ‘freedom’ and peaceful ‘ownership’. His explanation of ‘freedom’ then shows a certain tension, or rather the complex nature of the relation between the two requirements. If, as according to Aristotle, quoted here, only ‘the man is free, we say, who exists for himself and not for another’, how then can freedom go hand in hand with ‘ownership’? And, indeed, Eckhart adds that ‘nothing is free’ except ‘the first cause’. Not only is power defined by these two requirements, but so too is ‘lordship’ (n. 3). The way God ‘owns’ is precisely the expression of this paradoxical ownership, which goes beyond our common understanding. God owns as the one who is free from what He owns, hence He owns nothing by Himself or for Himself, but ‘He owns Himself in all things’, or more radically ‘God is not nothing’, as he does not hold a (no–)thing for Himself (n. 4), but is ‘all the good in all things’ (n. 3). When Eckhart adds that God ‘grasps and knows’ Himself, He does so ‘in all things’. Such knowing Himself in His creatures makes God speak His Word ‘in all things’ (n. 5). While the Word is the Father’s ‘self– knowledge’, it is at the same time the knowledge of ‘all things’ as one thing, one light, in God (n. 6). As the matter of ‘knowledge’ is key in this argument, Eckhart raises the question ‘What is knowledge?’ (n. 7). And he answers, knowledge is knowing something in its ‘pure, unmixed’ and error–free state, hence, by not looking at things in their multiplicity, but in the one God. This brings him back to God’s power, as this power is unique, and is pure simplicity, not multiple (n. 8). Oneness of knowledge, then, leads to co–knowledge of the soul and God: ‘Thus she knows with Him, thus she loves with Him, thus she understands with Him.’ Edition, commentary and notes G. Steer, DW IV 994–1056. Previous English translation The Works of Meister Eckhart Doctor Ecstaticus, vol. II, trans. C. de B. Evans (1952), 190–1.

332

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (127)‘Domine rex omnipotens in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita’1. Gewalt und herschaft lit an zwein dingin, an vriheit und an vil gudir und schonir dinge, daz man di besitze in vride2. waz ist vriheit? Philosophus3: ‘daz dinc ist vri daz an nichte hangit noch an daz nicht inhanigit’. hir umme, inist nicht vri dan di erste sache, di da ein sache ist allir sache. zu der herschaft horit auch daz man dise zwei habe, daz ist vriheit und vile gudir und schonir dinge in vride. Got ist alliz gût in allin, darumme besitzit he sich in allin. wan waz Got ist, daz ist he in allin. daz man sprichit daz he minne habe und willin und wisheit und gude, daz ist he, wan daz Got ist. hirumme inist Got nicht nicht, wan Got waz er dan nicht. Got der inhait kein fore noch kein nôch. nicht hait volgin, sin volgin ist icht.4 des nichtis fore ist Got, wan he ist er dan nicht, und des nichtis volgin ist icht. also hait Got kein foregein noch kein volgin. eia di sache allir dinge, di in ir selber swebit in eime ungesichtlichin lichte, daz he5 selber ist! Got ist ein licht in ime selbir swebinde in einir stillin stille. daz ist daz einige licht, daz einige wesin sin selbis, daz sich selbin forsteit und irkennit. daz forstentnisse des ewigin lichtis daz ist ‘licht fon deme lichte’6, daz ist di persone des sonis. 1. Esth. 13:9. Liturgical context: Epistolar., Arch. f. 425ra: ‘Feria IIIIa lectio libri Hester [13, 9–17]. In diebus illis oravit Mardocheus ad dominum dicens: Domine deus rex omnipotens, in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita et non est qui possit tue resistere voluntati. Si decreveris salvare nos, continuo liberabimur. Tu enim domine fecisti celum et terram et quicquid celi ambitu continetur. Tu es dominus omnium et non est qui resistat maiestati tue. Et nunc domine rex regum deus Abraham miserere populo tuo, quia voluit nos inimici nostri perdere et hereditatem tuam delere. Ne despicias partem tuam, quam redemisti tibi, sed exaudi deprecationem meam et propitius esto sorti et funiculo hereditatis tue. Et converte luctum nostrum in gaudium, ut viventes laudemus nomen tuum. Et ne claudas ora canentium te domine deus noster’. The text of the Epistolarium diverges from that of the Vulgate, which reads: ‘Mardochaeus autem deprecatus est Dominum, memor omnium operum eius, et dixit: Domine Domine rex omnipotens, in ditione enim tua cuncta sunt posita, et non est qui possit tuæ resistere voluntati, si decreveris salvare Israel. Tu fecisti cælum et terram, et quidquid cæli ambitu continetur. Dominus omnium es, nec est qui resistat maiestati tuae. Cuncta nosti, et scis quia non pro superbia et contumelia, et aliqua gloriæ cupiditate fecerim hoc, ut non adorarem Aman superbissimum, (Libenter enim pro salute Israel etiam vestigia pedum eius deosculari paratus essem,) sed timui ne honorem Dei mei transferrem ad hominem, et ne quemquam adorarem, excepto Deo meo. Et nunc Domine rex Deus Abraham miserere populi tui, quia volunt nos inimici nostri perdere, et hereditatem tuam delere. Ne despicias partem tuam, quam redemisti tibi de Aegypto. Exaudi

H OMILY 19* [S 116]

333

‘Domine rex omnipotens in dicione tua cuncta sunt posita’.1 Power and lordship are based on two things, on freedom and that man owns many good and beautiful things in peace.2 What is freedom? The philosopher: ‘That one is free, which exists for itself and not for another’.3 For this reason, nothing is free but the first cause, which is the one cause for all causes. To lordship one also needs the following two things: freedom, and that man owns many good and beautiful things in peace. God is all the good in all things, that is why He owns Himself in all things. Because what God is, that He is in all things. That one attributes to Him love, will, wisdom and goodness, that He is, because He is God. Therefore, God is not nothing, as otherwise he would not be God. God has neither before nor after. Nothing has effect; its effect is something.4 The before of nothing is God, as otherwise He would not be, and the effect of nothing is something. So, the cause of all things that are suspended in an invisible light is He Himself!5 God is a light suspended in Himself in a silent silence. That is the one light, the one being of itself that grasps and knows itself. The knowledge of eternal light is ‘light from light’,6 that is the person of the Son.

deprecationem meam, et propitius esto sorti et funiculo tuo, et converte luctum nostrum in gaudium, ut viventes laudemus nomen tuum Domine, et ne claudas ora te canentium’. 2. See Ps.-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, c. 12 § 2 (PG 3, 969B), Dionysiaca 527: ‘dominatio … non peiorum excessus tantum, sed et omnis et pulchrorum et bonorum perfecta et omnimoda possessio et vera et cadere non valens fortitudo’. 3. Aristotle, Metaphysica I, c. 2, 982b26: ‘homo liber, qui suimet et non alterius causa est’. 4. See Augustinus, Sermones ICCC, n. 2 (PL 38, 1368): ‘Deus et primus et novissimus, ante quem nihil et post quem nihil’. This idea of Augustine, Eckhart emphatically sharpens by drawing out the difference between God who is ‘not nothing’ (‘nicht nicht’) and ‘nothing’ that he sees as having an ‘effect’ which is ‘something’. ‘Nothing’ in this sense is any categorical cause, contrasted to the divine being which is pure being beyond such categorisation and therefore not cause that has determined effects, ‘something(s)’. In this sense, God precedes and transcends even ‘nothingness’, as he is, while not only the determined things, the here and now, are not, even their cause(s) are not, but are sheer nothingness. From such nothingness as cause, only partial things can derive as effects, whereas God is understood as a different, transcendent cause which is cause of all things. 5. ‘he’: God. 6. ‘licht fon deme lichte’ (‘lumen de lumine’) derives from the early church creed of the year 381, see Symbolum Nicaeno–Constantinopolitanum, ed. Denzinger/Schönmetzer, n. 150, p. 67.

334

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

der vader sprach ein wort, daz was sin son. an deme einigin worte sprach he alle dinc7. daz wort des vadir inist nicht anderis dan sin selbis forstentnisse. daz forstentnisse des vader inist nicht anderis dan der son und forsteit di forstentnisse, und daz daz forstentnisse forsteit, daz ist daz selbe, daz si forsteit, daz ist ‘daz licht fon deme lichte’8. Joh9: Got sprach ein wort, daz was daz ewige forstentnisse sin selbis, daz was sin son. an deme einigin forstentnisse forstunt he alle dinc und forstunt si schephinde fon nichte. daz sint si an im10 selbin. abir daz si ewicliche gewesit sint, daz was he selbir, wan in Gote inist, ez insi Got, wan Got ist on andir. also sint alle creature ein licht, wan si in deme lichte forstandin sin. darumme flizint alle dinc uz ume alse ein licht zu offinbarne daz forborgine licht. Jacobus11: ‘omne datum optimum’ etc. | hibi ist zu prufine daz alle dinc ein licht | (128) sint, wan si der vader uzgegozzin hait zu offinbarne sine forborginheit. also alse alle dinc ein licht sint geweist uz zu flizene, also sint si ouch alle ein licht wider in zu kumine di sich mit vrin willin da fon nicht inkerin. eya di da stede blibin sundir manicvaldikeit, waz lichtis und was gnadin den geoffinbarit wirt! wan daz ubirste guit ist also geordinit zu der sele daz si ez nicht inphehit sundir das mittil, alse Dyonisius sprichit12 ‘daz mittil ist licht und gnade, di irluchtin daz forstentnisse der sele’. waz ist forstentnisse? daz man forsteit ein iclich dinc alse ez ist lutir unformengit und ist gewis on irrunge. Dyonisius13: ‘muzigit uch fon allin dingin zu bekennine daz ubirste gut, daz Got ist’. waz sulle wir forstein an Gode? daz he ist ein craft. also sulle wir uns einigin daz di einige craft an uns gewirkin muge. he ist auch ein gut daz alle dinc bewegit zu irme gude, daz he selbe ist, und he blibit doch selbe unbewegit. he ist auch ein lutir einvaldikeit, und ie du einvaldigir bist, ie du di einvaldikeit baz forsteist. und wir sullin rechte einvaldic werdin, daz ist daz wir gescheidin sin fon allin dingin und fon

7. See Augustinus, De Genesi ad litteram II, c. 6, ed. Zycha, 41, 20–2: ‘et dixit Deus. unum quippe uerbum ille genuit, in quo dixit omnia, priusquam facta sunt singula’. 8. Ioh. 1:4.5.9. 9. The quote cannot be found in the book of Job. It rather seems that ‘Job’ is a misreading for Ioh. 1:1. 10. We emend ‘im’ in place of ‘un’ given by the manuscripts and the editor Strauch. 11. Iac. 1:17: ‘Every good and perfect gift’.

H OMILY 19* [S 116]

335

The Father spoke a Word which was His Son. In this unique Word He spoke all things.7 The Word of the Father is nothing but His self–knowledge. The knowledge of the Father is nothing but the Son and knows the knowledge, and that the knowledge knows is the same as that it knows, this is ‘the light from the light’.8 John:9 God spoke a Word, that was eternal self–knowledge which was His Son. In this unique knowledge He knew all things and knew that He would create them from nothing. These are in Himself.10 But that they have eternally been, it was Himself, because what is in God is God, as God is without anything else. Hence, all creatures are one light, because they are known in this light. For this reason, all things flow out of Him as one light in order to reveal the hidden light. James: ‘omne datum optimum’ etc.11 Here, we have to reflect that all things are one light, because the Father has poured them out to reveal His hiddenness. And as all things have been one light when they flowed out, so all things are also one light when they come back to Him, who do not turn away using their free will. Indeed, those who constantly remain without multiplicity, what light and what grace will be revealed to them! For the highest good is so ordered thus towards the soul that she does not receive it without mediation, as Dionysius says:12 ‘The medium is light and grace, which enlighten the knowledge of the soul.’ What is knowledge? That we know every thing as it is pure, unmixed and certain without error. Dionysius:13 ‘Detach yourself from all things, in order to know the highest good, which is God.’ What shall we know of God? That He is one power. Hence, we should be one so that the one power may act in us. He is also one good that moves all things towards their goodness which He Himself is, while He Himself remains unmoved. He is also a pure simplicity, and the more you are simple, the more you will know simplicity. And we should become rightly simple, which means that we are detached of all 12. Perhaps an interpretation of Ps.-Dionysius, De caelesti hierarchia, c. 1, § 2 (PG 3, 121B), Dionysiaca 733, 1–4. See also Eckhart, In Ioh. n. 74 (LW III 62, 5–9): ‘“Deus” autem “lux est, et tenebrae in eo non sunt ullae”, Ioh. 1. Hoc est ergo quod hic dicitur: “lux in tenebris lucet”, id est in creaturis quae habent aliquid opaci, id est nihili, adiunctum. Et hoc est quod dicit Dionysius: “impossibile est nobis aliter lucere divinum radium nisi varietate velaminum circumvelatum”’. 13. Ps.–Dionysius, De mystica theologia, c. 1, § 1 (PG 3, 997B), Dionysiaca 557–8: ‘Tu autem, amice Thimothee, circa misticas visiones forti contritione et sensus derelinque et intellectuales operationes…’

336

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

uns selbin, ime zu bekenninde unse sinne und alle di werc der crefte der sele, wan alleine di ubirste craft, daz forstentnisse: di lezit alleine Got wirkin mit Gode: so wirkit he vollincumeliche sine glicheit an ir und wirkit si an sich. so forsteit si mit ime, so minnit si mit ime, so bekennit si mit ime. bide wir.

H OMILY 19* [S 116]

337

things and of ourselves, by knowing our senses and all the actions of the powers of the soul, because the highest power alone, knowledge, lets God alone act with God: This way He works perfectly His sameness in her and works her in Himself. Thus she knows with Him, thus she loves with Him, thus she understands with Him. Let us pray.

Homily 20* [Q 50] Dominica III in Quadragesima ‘Eratis enim aliquando tenebrae’ Introduction

T

he topic is taken from the Epistle reading for the Third Sunday of Lent (Eph. 5:8: ‘Once you were darkness, but now a light in God’); it emphasizes the radical change that conversion produces in the Christian. The next sermon (Hom. 21* [Q 49]) will take its theme from the Gospel reading of the same liturgical day. The sermon is preserved by only one codex (E2), and was published without normalization of the Middle High German by J. Quint. The content of the homily The exegesis develops in three steps:

A) Without mentioning darkness, the situation is explained by the silence that befell the prophets ‘who walked in the light’, but ‘under the influence of the Holy Spirit’ were sometimes moved away from this light and fell silent, as they knew what ‘would benefit our happiness by teaching us to know God’ (n. 3). For this move, Eckhart gives three reasons (n. 3): First, the good in God ‘was so great and so hidden that they could not imagine it in their mind’; second, ‘everything’ there was equally great such that they ‘did not wish to take an image or form’ of it; third, they could not express ‘the intimacy in God’ (n. 4). It was time that made them turn around and speak. B) Picking up on time, Eckhart interprets ‘when’ (aliquando) (n. 5). Time is darkness as it keeps us away from the light (n. 5). In a very poetic and sensual way Eckhart underlines the sublimity of time. And yet he maintains that the soul has ‘nothing to do with time’, but is part of the flowing out and the reflux of the Divine Trinity (n. 6).

H OMILY 20* [Q 50]

339

C) This state of the soul he sees expressed in Paul’s statement, ‘now a light in God’. This is the light in which the soul emanates from God and the image of God is imprinted into her (n. 7). Eckhart comes back to the discussions ‘in the school’, where he gives three positions of two groups of masters and a single master (n. 8): First, ‘several masters held that God had imprinted the image into the soul as the artist who paints a picture on a wall that disappears’, hence God’s image would be etched into a transient substrate; second, ‘other masters’ who ‘disagreed’ ‘said that God had imprinted the image into the soul as something lasting just as a thought that lasts in them’, hence, God’s image itself would be of changing nature, even though they maintained that ‘God’s actions were perfect’; then third, he adds a ‘fifth’ master who ‘spoke best of all’ (n. 9). This mention of a ‘fifth’ master comes a bit as a surprise, as from what has gone before, the first two positions were put forward by an unspecified number of masters (‘several’, and ‘other’ masters), so one is left wondering why this should be the ‘fifth’ master. Moreover, is Eckhart reporting about himself (or about Dietrich of Freiberg?): ‘There is no development, rather it is one now, a development without development, a now without renewal and development in His being.’ The sermon contains a valuable reference to a discussion on the topic of God’s ‘image’ in the soul, which is presented here in terms of enactment. The reference could be to one of his stays in Paris, but might also be a reminiscence of Cologne. Editions, commentaries and notes J. Quint, DW II 452–60; N. Largier, I 1044–6. Previous English translations Meister Eckhart by Franz Pfeiffer Leipzig, 1857, trans. C. de B. Evans (1924), 236–8; Meister Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, trans. M. O’C. Walshe (1987; rev. B. McGinn 2009), 452–4; Meister Eckhart, Selected Writings, ed. and trans. O. Davies (1994), 136–8.

340

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

Text and translation (454)‘Eratis enim aliquando tenebrae.’ Sanctus Paulus spricht1: ‘etwene warent ir in finsternisse, aber nv ein liecht in gotte’. Die propheten, die da wandelten in dem liechte, die bekantten vnd funden die heinliche warheit in dem in flvsse des heilgen geistes. Si wurden bi stvnden beweget, das si sich har us solten keren vnd reden von den dingen, dv´ si bekanten ze vnserre selikeit, das si vns lerten got bekennen. So gesach in, das si verstvmeten, das si nicht enkonden gesprechen, vnd das was drier dinge schv´lt. Das erste: das gv°t, das si bekanten vnd sahen in gotte, das was so gros vnd so verborgen, das es sich nicht erbilden mochte in irme verstantnisse; want alles, das sich erbilden mochte, das was dem als vngelich, das si sahen in gotte, vnd was so valsch wider der warheit, das si swigen vnd wolten nicht liegen. Dv´ ander sache: alles, das si in gotte sachen, das was so gelich gros vnd edele, das si weder bilde noch forme mochte da von genemen ze redende. Dv´ dritte sache, war vmbe si verstumeten, das was, das si sahen in die verborgenen warheit vnd fvnden die heimlicheit in gotte, das si nicht geworten enkonden. Doch vnder ziten geschach, das si sich har vs kerten vnd da sprachen; vnd von der vngelicheit der warheit do vielen si in die groben materie vnd wolten vns leren got bekennen mit den nideren dingen der creature. (455) | Nv´ spricht paulus: aber nu´ ein liecht in gotte’. ‘Aliquando’: der das wort volgrvnden kan, so spricht es als vil als ‘wanne’2 vnd meinet zit, das vns hindert an dem liechte, want gotte dem ist enkein ding so vaste wider als dv´ zit; Nicht alleine dv´ zit, er meinet ovch ein anehaften der zit; | (456) er enmeinet ovch nicht alleine 1. Eph. 5:8. Liturgical context: Epistolar., Arch. f. 425va: ‘Dominica tertia ad ephesios [5, 1–9]. Fratres [> Vg.], estote [+ ergo Vg.] imitatores Dei, sicut filii karissimi: et ambulate in dilectione, sicut et Christus dilexit nos, et tradidit semet ipsum pro nobis oblationem, et hostiam Deo in odorem suavitatis. Fornicatio autem, et omnis immunditia, aut avaritia nec nominetur in vobis sicut decet sanctos: aut turpitudo, aut stultiloquium, aut scurrilitas, que ad rem non pertinet: sed magis gratiarum actio. Hoc autem scitote intelligentes: quod omnis fornicator, aut immundus, aut avarus,

H OMILY 20* [Q 50]

341

‘Eratis aliquando tenebrae.’ Saint Paul says: ‘Once you were darkness, but now a light in God.’1 The prophets who walked in the light, they knew and found the hidden truth under the influence of the Holy Spirit. They were sometimes moved to open up and speak of those things that they knew would benefit our happiness by teaching us to know God. Thus it happened that they fell silent, so that they could not speak. And this was caused by three things. First: the good that they knew and saw in God was so great and so hidden that they could not imagine it in their mind. Because all that they could imagine was so dissimilar to what they saw in God, and it was so wrong compared to the truth, that they fell silent and did not want to lie. The second cause: everything that they saw in God was so equally great and noble that they did not wish to take an image or form of it to speak about it. The third reason why they fell silent, was that they saw into the hidden truth and found the privacy in God which they could not express. But in time, they turned around and started speaking; and because of the dissimilarity of truth they fell into the coarse matter and wanted to teach us to know God by the low things of creatures. Now, Paul says: ‘Once you were darkness, but now a light in God.’ Aliquando: to understand the term, it means as much as ‘once’2 and indicates ‘time’, which keeps us away from the light, because nothing is so contrary to God than time. Not solely time, he also means an attachment to time; not only an attachment to time, he also means a touching quod est ydolorum servitus, non habet hereditatem in regno Christi, et Dei. Nemo vos seducat inanibus verbis: propter hec enim venit ira Dei in filios diffidentie. Nolite ergo effici participes eorum. Eratis enim aliquando tenebre: nunc autem lux in Domino. Ut filii lucis ambulate: fructus enim lucis est in omni bonitate, et iustitia, et veritate.’ 2. ‘wanne’: the conjecture by J. Quint against the manuscript reading of ‘wanne’ is perhaps not necessary.

342

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

ein anehaften der zit, er meinet och ein rv°ren der zit; Nicht alleine ein rv°ren der zit, Mer: ovch einen rovch vnd einen smak der zit, – als da ein apfel ist gelegen, da belibet ein smak; also nim es von der berv°rvnge der zit. vnser besten meister3 sprechent, das der liphafte himel vnd dv´ svnne vnd och die sternen, Das die als wenung hant ze tv°nde mit der zit, nicht want das si echt rv°rent die zit. Hie meine ich alles, das dv´ sele verre ober dem himil geschaffen ist vnd das si an irme hosten vnd lvtersten mit der zit nicht enhabe ze tv°nde. Ich han es me gesprochen4 von dem werke in gotte vnd von der gebvrt: da der vater gebirt sinen eingebornen svn, vnd von dem vs flvsse entblveget der heiliger , das der geist von inbeiden , vnd in dem vs flvsse entspringet dv´ sele vs gevlossen; vnd das bilde der gotheit ist gedruket in die sele, vnd in dem vs vliessende vnd in dem wider vlissende der drier personen wirt dv´ sele wider in gevlossen vnd wirt wider in gebildet in ir erste bilde svnder bilde. (457) | Dis meinet paulus, Da er spricht: ‘aber nv´ ein liecht in gotte’. er sprichet nu´t: ‘ir sint ein lieht’, er spricht: ‘aber nv´ ein liecht’. Er meinet, das ich ovch me | (458) gesprochen habe5: der dv´ ding erkennen sol, Der sol si erkennen in irre sache. Das sprechent die meister6: dv´ ding hangen in irre gebu´rt, das si da svn aller lvterlichest vs lv°gen in wesen. want, da der vatter den svn gebirt, da ist ein gegenwertig nv´. In der ewiger geburt, da der vatter sinen svn gebirt, Da ist dv´ sele vs gevlossen in ir wesen vnd ist das bilde der gotheit gedrv´ket in die . Es wart gesprochen in der schv°le, vnd sprachen etliche meister, Got hette das bilde gedrvket in die sele, als der ein bilde malet an der want vnd das vergat. das wart wider sprochen. Ander Meister sprachen bas vnd sprachen, got hette das bilde gedrv´ket in die sele in eime blibende, als ein in ire blibender gedanch – Also: ich haben | (459) hv´te einen willen vnd habe morne den selben gedanch vnd enthalte das bilde vf mit mime gegenwertigen inflvsse –, vnd sprachent also, das gottes 3. Augustinus, Confessiones XII, c. 9, n. 9, ed. Verheijen, 221, 3–8: ‘Nimirum enim caelum caeli, quod in principio fecisti, … excedit omnem uolubilem uicissitudinem temporum’. 4. Reference to Hom. 2* [Q 24], n. 4. According to Quint, perhaps also a reference to Hom. 76* [Q 11], n. 5, although there Eckhart only speaks more generically of the Son as source for the Holy Spirit.

H OMILY 20* [Q 50]

343

of time; not alone a touching of time, rather also a smell and taste of time, just as when an apple had been lying there, the taste still remains; in this way you have to understand the touch of time. Our best masters say3 that the corporeal heaven, the sun and also the stars have so little to do with time that they do not really touch time. Here I fully think that the soul has been created far above the heavens and that in her highest and purest she has nothing to do with time. I have spoken before4 of the action in God and of the birth: that the Father gives birth to His only begotten Son, and from this outflow the Holy Ghost blossems forth from both, and in this flowing out the soul sprung up and flowed out: and the image of the Godhead has been imprinted into the soul, and in the flowing out and in the flowing back of the three persons, the soul is flowing in again and is formed again into her first image without images. This is what Paul means when he says: ‘but now a light in God’. He does not say: ‘you are a light’, he says: ‘but now a light’. He means by this what I have also said before:5 whoever wants to know things should know them in their cause. This the masters say:6 The things depend on their birth as there they have a most pure appearance of being. Because where the Father gives birth to the Son, there is a present now. In the eternal birth where the Father gives birth to His Son, there the soul has flowed out into her being and the image of the Godhead is being imprinted into the soul. It has been discussed in the school, and several masters held that God had imprinted the image into the soul as the artist who paints a picture on a wall which disappears. Other masters disagreed and said that God had imprinted the image into the soul as something lasting, just as a thought that lasts in them. – So today I have had a certain intention and tomorrow I have the same thought and retain the image with my present input – and so, they also said, that ‘God’s actions were

5. Reference to Hom. 105* [Q 8], n. 10: ‘Waz man bekennen sol, daz muoz man bekennen in sîner ursache’. 6. ‘die meister’: unidentified reference.

344

M EISTER E CKHART , T HE G ERMAN W ORKS I

werch vollenkomen sint7. want wer der zimberman vollenkomen an sime werche, er bedorfte der materien nicht; want, als schier, als er sin gedechte, so were das hus vollebracht. Also sint dv´ werch in gotte: als schier, als er sin gedenket, so sint dv´ werch vollenbracht in eime gegenwertigen nv. Do kam der fvnfte meister und sprach aller best vnd sprach: Da enist enkein , mer: es ist ein nv´, ein gewerden svnder gewerden, ein nv´we svnder vernv´wen, vnd das gewerden ist sin wesen. In gotte ist ein kleinlicheit, das dar | (460) in enkein vernv´wen en mag. Also ist och in der sele ein kleinlicheit, dv´ ist so lvter vnd so zart, das aber dar in enkein vernv´wen en mag; want alles, das in gotte ist, das ist en gegen wertig nv´ svnder vernuwen. von vier dingen wolt ich han gesprochen: von der klein