Nikolai Bondarko (St. Petersburg)

Meister Eckhart meets Bernard of Clairvaux: the reception of the Eckhartian doctrine of Divine Birth within

the Cistercian and Franciscan discourse of Love in late medieval manuscript tradition

(a case study)

The manifestation of essential discrepancies between theCistercian-Franciscan and Dominican traditions in the mystical anddevotional literature of late medieval Germany (13th–15th centuries)is not so trivial a question as it can seem when one thinks of thedoctrines of such eminent theologians as Bernard of Clairvaux(1090–1153), Bonaventure (1217/1221–1274) or Meister Eckhart(c. 1260 – c. 1328). On the one hand, Eckhart and his followers(the so-called Rhenish mystics), who appropriated the Thomisticsemiotic theory with its concept of analogical symbolization assynthesis of positive and negative theology, already by theirstyle oppose themselves to the foregoing tradition, orientedchiefly cataphatically and christologically. On the other hand,from the second part of the 14th century the works of “Rhinelandmasters” began to lose their particularity, being transmitted indevotional manuscript collections of very heterogeneous content.This kind of text selection usually reflects primarily the commonstriving of the lay public for individual devotional practice,whereas subtle philosophical nuances of spiritual traditionsdeveloped within different monastic orders were of secondary valuefor the readers of such collections.

So, the problem of substantial and formal interrelationshipsbetween late medieval German mystical texts of differenttheological traditions becomes especially urgent when these textsare transmitted in the same manuscripts. The basic exampleconsidered in this paper is a short text concerning love (minne)and the mystical union between God and the soul transmitted in amanuscript preserved in the Abbey library of St Gall(Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen, Cod. 955, p. 195). CodexSangallensis 955 dates from the first half of the 15th century andcontains short tractates, sermons and short extracts. It is one of This study was supported by the Programme of Basic Research of the Presidiumof the Russian Academy of Sciences “Traditions and innovations in history andculture”, subprogramme “Texts of traditional culture in the perspective ofcultural evolution” in the framework of the project “Text transformation in theoral and written tradition”. I am very grateful to Dr Svetlana Kleiner(Institute for linguistic studies of Russian Academy of Sciences, St-Petersburg)and Dr J. Sutton (University of Leeds) for careful reading of this paper.

1

numerous late medieval devotional collections, “intended for theuse of nuns” (Clark 1936: 69). According to a marginal note on p.7, the codex was not written in St Gall and “probably came fromFreiburg convent of Clarisses” (Clark 1934: 443)1. The manuscriptwas written by two scribes; the dialect of the first part isRhenisch Franconian; that of the second part is Alemannic. Thelatter contains the fragments ‘Vita’ by Heinrich Seuse (1295/97–1366) and a late copy of the treatise ‘The Book of Five Men’(‘Fünfmannenbuch’), created within the circle of the Strasbourgmystical writer Rulman Merswin (1307–1382).

Though some sermons are attributed to Franciscan preachers(first of all, four sermons of the famous Berthold von Regensburg,as well as a sermon by a certain Friar Alhart ein mynnerbruder), theFranciscan origin of the first part of the MS is hard to prove.However, a Cistercian influence on its program (which was on thewhole very strong for Franciscan devotional treatises) isundeniable. The collection starts with a few treatises ofdifferent lengh devoted to various virtues – ‘On Love’ (Inc.: Wer gotvon hertzen mynnen wyl) (pp. 7-14 of the MS) with the meditative work‘On Inferior Love’ (“Von der nyedersten mynne”) joined to it (pp. 14-19); then a number of short texts follow: ‘On Humility’, ‘On theRighteousness of Virtues’, ‘On the Inner Awareness of a Man’ etc. Overall,there are 51 texts in the first part of the manuscript:P. 7-14: Tractate ‘Von der Minne’ (Inc.: Wer got von hertzen mynnen wyl)P. 14-19: Von der nyedersten mynne.P. 19-20: Von der demoit.P. 20-21: Von den tügenden gerehtikeit.P. 21-22: Von der Jnnkeit des menschen.P. 22: Mirke diese vier dingk.P. 23: Der wise teylere der wirt sin lob eim ieglichem geben…P. 24-25: Von rechtem Jamer.P. 26: .iiij. zeichen.P. 26-27: von dem reynen hertzen.P. 27-28: von moeßigen worten.P. 28-29: wie du des morgens solt uf ston.P. 29-32: wie du zo chore solt gon.P. 32-35: Parate viam domini.P. 35-37: Von den geistlichen selen.P. 37-39: Sanctus bernhardus vragete sinen bruderen funffe…P. 39-42: Von des geistlichen menschen valle.P. 42-43: Weder die die eigens willen sigen.P. 43-44: Von hinderrede wie boeß die sin.P. 44-45: Diesse nachgeschrebene grosße schaden koment von den sunden.1 Cf. Richter 1969: 67-68; Ruh 1987: 543.

2

P. 45-46: von .vij. sachen die vns Jrrent daß wir nit vollenkomnen lob anvangen.P. 46-55: Vnser herre Ihesus Kristus / leret vns wie wir Jme nach sollen volgen.P. 55-57: Wie wir unser crütz sollen uf heben.P. 57-59: Wie du arm solt sin.P. 59: Wie got an vnse hertz clopphet.P. 60: Wie du zo Capitel solls stehen.P. 60-62: Wie du dich vnder den luten sols halten.P. 62-68: Von volkomner gehorsamy (from ‘Paradisus animae’ Pseudo-Albert’s the Great in German translation).P. 68-69: Von vnsers herren lichnam.P. 69-70: Vff den Palm tag.P. 70-104: 10 sermons ascribed to Berthold of Regensburg, Albertthe Great (Bruder Albrecht sant dominicus orden), Friars Alhart, Peter andThomas.P. 104-105: Von Swigen.P. 105-107: Von vierhand gedanken.P. 107-109: Von der luterkeit der conaenaen.P. 109-192: Wie man das Pater noster beten sol (exposition on ‘Paternoster’).P. 192-209: collection of short meditative sermons, tractates,sententiae and prayers, among them:

P. 194: a short anonymous saying (spruch) (Inc.: Ein meister wartgevraget / wilch der nehste weg zo gote were).P. 195: Meister Eckhart’s spruch Nr. 1 (Inc.: Meister Eckart

sprach…).P. 195-196: an excerpt from ‘Paradisus animae’ Pseudo-Albert theGreat’s (Inc.: Etliche sunden gelichent sich den tugenden also sere das mansy vor dugenden syt…).

The text on p. 195 is the only one in the manuscript that mentionsthe name of Meister Eckhart: it was edited by Franz Pfeiffer in1857 (Pf) as spruch (“saying”) No. 1 under the title ‘Diz ist meisterEckehart, dem got nie niht verbarc’ (‘This is Meister Eckhart from Whom God HidNothing’), Codex Sangallensis has a conventional abbreviation G8 inEckhartian manuscript tradition. In general, this text istransmitted in 16 manuscripts and 3 early prints; only three ofthem date to the 14th century2. Pfeiffer’s edition of the firstspruch doesn’t coincide with any of the versions known to me.Unfortunately Pfeiffer didn’t manage to issue a critical apparatus

2 See online-concordance by W. Klimanek: http://www.eckhart.de/index.htm?quellen.htm#WKl. One manuscript of the 14th century is omitted there: BayerischeStaatsbibliothek München, Clm 28917, fol. 99r-v. In this MS numerous tractates ofGerman Franciscan (David of Augsburg and his circle) near the first saying ofEckhart are transmitted.

3

to his edition of Meister Eckhart’s works; my own comparison ofthe manuscripts, however, led me to the conclusion that the editortook the text of Berlinian MS B23, the oldest manuscript known tohim, as a basis which he emendated with MS Co4 from the 15th

century, transmitting another version of the saying. From this MS(Co, fol. 79r) Pfeiffer took his title which is not found in anyother copy of the text.

The genre of the Eckhartian saying Nr. 1 is rather specific.In the strict sense, it is a sequence of didactic utterances puttogether in the form of a dialogue between Meister Eckhart and anunknown audience. The text renders a talk between the teacher andhis disciples, citing a few brief extracts. Nevertheless, thespruch preserves its coherence and seems compositionally complete,without falling apart into independent utterances. A reference toa sermon (Meister Eckehart sprach in einer bredie – Pf 597,4) which ispreserved in most MS copies of the saying is however missing inSt. Gall MS.5

In this short text, several key theological subjects ofMeister Eckhart’s theology are concentrated:

1) the necessity of the entire soul purification of the soulin order to clear the space for the action of the divine creation;

2) God bearing Himself in the human soul as an action that inits significance surpasses the creation of the world;

3) the soul is of paramount importance to God over all othercreations and represents a potentially ideal empty shape able toattract God and to become His imprint;

4) the birth of God in the soul as a new manifestation of theloving God and a simultaneous act of experiencing God: “birth” islikely to denote an active action performed by God and directedonto God Himself who is born in a human soul, according to MeisterEckhart’s concept;

5) this act of experiencing God does not imply blessing. It isonly the first stage on the way to the unity with God when the

3 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Ms. germ. oct. 65, fol. 12r-

v. The manuscript was written in Low Alemannic in the Dominican nunnery St.Nikolaus in undis, Strasbourg. For the description of the MS with the entireliterature on the transmitted texts see: Schiewer/Mertens [2004]: 510-514;Predigt im Kontext (PiK). Forschungsprojekt der Katholischen UniversitätEichstätt-Ingolstadt: Handschriften [online: http://pik.ku-eichstaett.de/109].4 Colmar, Bibliothèque de la ville, Ms. 269 (catalog number: 203), fol. 79r-v;the manuscript is written in Alemannic (Alsatian) dialect and originates fromthe Dominican convent Unterlinden in Colmar (Elsass) (catalog description:Schmitt 1969: 89-90).5 See Appendix.

4

soul is to reject its own desires and get entirely “attached” toGod.

The main subject of the text is the issue of delight andblessedness. It has a two-fold structure: what is acceptablebefore God and what makes a person blessed? It is from this pointof view that the central problem of the birth of God in the humansoul is considered. The vocabulary denoting blessedness andblessing forms the dominating semantic field. The lexemesreferring to God and the human being are different. For example,God experiences desire and satisfaction (lust and genüchte), Hisperception of certain events is described with the adverb lustlich,in comparative degree as well lustlicher, lieber, whereas the soul isblessed (selick) and experiences blessedness (der selen selickeit).

The idea typical of Meister Eckhart is that the soul is anideal shape to attract God being born into it entirely, with itsultimate Divine nature (grunt sins gotlichen wesens). This flow (the verb“in gegieszen”, in other MSs “geflœzen” is equal to the birth of God.The birth of God signifies Divine revelation and acquisition ofnew knowledge (wanne er in ir geboren wirt / mit eime nüwen bekentnisze). Inresponse, the soul gets to know itself by being born into Him(geboren ist). The expression “da in [in daz] sy geboren ist” in the finalpart of the text (doch enlyt der selen groste selickeit nit dar ane / wanne er in irgeboren wirt / mit eime nüwen bekentnisze das en machet sy nit vollenkomelichenselick / sonder es machet das sy mit mynnen vnd mit lobe vulget dem bekennen da in sygeboren ist) should imply that alongside with God entering the soul,the latter mutually penetrates into Him and is being born insidelike his Son. Here we come across some features typical ofEckhart, namely the inversion of asymmetric logical dependenciestraditionally established with reference to God and the soul,along with rhetorical figures of paradox and antithesis that serveas a “technical device”. The soul does not experience absoluteblessedness just because God is being born inside it, contrary towhat one might expect considering everything mentioned above, i.e.not because of passive contemplation of God and the soul beingpart of the love sacrament within the Holy Trinity. Nothing wouldastonish us in this argument, for Eckhart had followed here thetraditional theology of Augustine. But absolute blessedness isattained in complete assimilation of the soul with God the Fatherand God the Son in the reciprocal act of spiritual self-revival ofthe soul. In the version of MS B2, this sense finds a moreexplicit expression: Noch denne ist d sele sliger von den werchen da si sich wider in .ingebirt . Wan swenne got in si geborn wirt . das machet si nit vollen salig (fol. 12r; Pf597,23-25). As the result of her birth the soul becomes equal to

5

God. The last step to attain absolute grace is the union betweenGod and the soul in their common primary essence.

Nevertheless, some radical statements characteristic ofEckhart’s description of unio mystica are absent in a number ofGerman sermons, e. g. in the famous sermon Q 52 or the treatise‘Von abegescheidenheit’ (‘On Detachment’), attributed to him. As iswell-known, there are at least two types of evidence provided byEckhart concerning the phenomenon unio mystica. Interpretations ofthe first type (e.g. in the sermon ‘The Nobleman’) present uniomystica as a collaboration of two active personalities and theirfree wills. Interpretations of the second type, on the other hand,require that a person should be exceptionally passive so as toresemble a writing pad ready to cast the image of God on it6. Anyaction including love is deemed faulty. Such interpretation of themystical unity with God is elaborated in the sermon Q 52 and inthe treatise ‘Von abegescheidenheit’.

At first sight, the second interpretation seems to prevail inthe analyzed spruch. It is indicated by the description of the soulas “pure” (luter) and its comparison to a mold that acquires theimprint (indruck) of God. Besides, at the last stage of unio mysticain the common origine with God, the soul grasps what belongs toHim, thus abandoning everything it possesses (sich halten uf das sin / vndabgonde der eren).

Nevertheless, it does not go as far as Eckhart’s famousrequirement of absolute spiritual poverty (to desire, know, andpossess nothing). The text of the saying allows us to thrust on itthe motifs that are clearly expressed in other works of Eckhart7.Taking into consideration, however, the charges of heresy withregard to some of the formulae used by Meister, as well as thefunction and the contents of the texts included in St Gallmanuscript, it is more important to pay attention to what is saidhic et nunc. Almost all of Eckhart’s ideas display an extremelycareful wording – his neo-platonic statements look quitetraditional, for the soul abandoning everything in its unity withGod preserves its ability to perceive blessedness and cannottherefore attain absolute spiritual poverty.

What is more, the St Gall manuscript manifests a whole numberof discrepancies of B2 which seem to reveal the aim of the6 See: Реутин 2011: 80-89.7 Cf. e. g. sermon Q 43: Diu sêle, diu got hât, diu ist alle zît berhaft. Von nôt muoz got würken alliusîniu werk. Got ist alle zît würkende in einem nû êwicheit, und sîn würken ist: sînen sun gebern; den gebirt eralle zît. In der geburt sint alliu dinc her ûz komen, und er hât sô grôzen lust in dirre geburt, daz er alle sînemaht in ir verzert. Sô man mê al bekennet, sô daz bekantnisse ie volkomener ist; sô gelæzet ez, als ez nihtensî. Wan got gebirt sich ûz im selben in sich selben und gebirt sich wider in sich. Ie volkomener diugeburt ist, ie mê si gebirt (ME I: 458,31 – 460,9).

6

medieval editor to eliminate suspicious fragments and to avoidambiguous interpretations. In particular, the extract saying thatthe soul attains blessedness of what belongs to God only but notto the soul itself (vnd da von ist sy nit selich von dem yren / sy ist selick von demsynen) is followed by the comment about imitation of Jesus, namelythat one should observe the human nature of in order eventually tounderstand the nature of the divine (want man sol nach volgen dermonscheit christi bisz man die gotheit begrift / Her zo helff vns got Amen). Theconcluding statement is absent in earlier manuscript copies of thetext and boldly testifies to the attempt to adjust Eckhart’s ideasto the usual devotional practices of the clergy. Man’s conformingunto God in his reciprocal birth “into God” can be interpretedthrough Thomistic attributive analogy (identity of objects basedon their partial similarity). Eckhart’s reception in the textunder consideration would not allow for the wording that recalled,for example, the twenty-second article in the list of Dominican’scondemned statements in the bull ‘In Agro Dominico’ issued by PopeJohn XXII on March, 27 1329: “The Father gives birth to me his Sonand the same Son. Everything that God performs is one; thereforehe gives me, his Son, birth without any distinction”8.

Some other discrepancies in St. Gallen MS are also quiteremarkable in this respect:

G8 (Cod. Sang. 955), p. 195 B2 (Mgo 65), fol. 12r

8 Pater generat me suum filium et eundem filium. Quicquid deus operatur, hoc est unum, propter hocgenerat ipse me suum filium sine omni distinctione) (LW V: 599,72 – 599,7); cf., forexample, sermon Q 6 «Iusti vivent in aeternum»: Der vater gebirt sînen sun inder êwicheit im selber glîch. >Daz wort was bî gote, und got was daz wort<: ezwas daz selbe in der selben natûre. Noch spriche ich mêr: er hât in geborn inmîner sêle. Niht aleine ist si bî im noch er bî ir glîch, sunder er ist in ir,und gebirt der vater sînen sun in der sêle in der selben wîse, als er in in derêwicheit gebirt, und niht anders. Er muoz ez tuon, ez sî im liep oder leit. Dervater gebirt sînen sun âne underlâz, und ich spriche mêr: er gebirt mich sînensun und den selben sun. Ich spriche mêr: er gebirt mich niht aleine sînen sun,mêr: er gebirt mich sich und sich mich und mich sîn wesen und sîne natûre. Indem innersten quelle dâ quille ich ûz in dem heiligen geiste, dâ ist éin lebenund éin wesen und éin werk. Allez, waz got würket, daz ist ein; dar umbe gebirter mich sînen sun âne allen underscheit (ME I: 82,21 – 84,2). The words ofEckhart were obviously misunderstood by his contemporaries, although the conceptof the eternal birth of God in the soul goes back to the theological traditionof Eastern Fathers of the Church – Origen, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite andMaximus the Confessor. Presumably, suspicions were raised by the fact that thesimilarity (even if limited) between God and man was transferred by Eckhart fromthe ethical into the ontological sphere. See for details the commentary of N.Largier: ME I: 814-819; cf. Kertz 1959; Steer 1998: 270-288 (on the cycle ofsermons S 101-104 on the eternal birth of the Word in the ground of the soul);McGinn 2001: 53-70; Langer 2004: 345-350; Guerizoli 2006: 1-181 (with actualliterature for this field); Реутин 2011: 133-140.

7

¶ Meister Eckart sprach das werck das got wirket in einer got mynnender selen die er also luter funde / Das er sich geistlichen insy müchte geberen das werck ist gote lieber vnd lustlicher dan alle die werck die er gewirket hoit an allen creaturen / vnd wereouch vyl edeler / dan do er alle ding von nichten schoif /

Meister Eghart sprach in einer bredie . Das werch dc got wrket in einer gotlichen minnender sele . die er luter blos vnde abgescheiden vindet . Das er sich geistliche in si mag geberen . Daswre gotte lustlicher denne ll div werch D er ie gewrhte an allen creaturen . Vnde wre verre edeler denne do er all ding von niht geschf.

The divine or deified loving soul (in einer gotlichen minnender sele) inBerlin MS (and in Pfeiffer’s edition) corresponds to theunambiguous wording in einer got mynnender selen. Also, allusions toEckhart’s texts about the detachment of the soul, and its absoluteexposure are eliminated: God has to find the soul in purity (luter)– instead of luter blos vnde abgescheiden.

The very fact that a number of Eckhart’s ideas presented inthe first saying also appear in the previous mystical tradition,not necessarily scholastic by the way, is manifest in another textincluded in the St. Gall Codex. It is the treatise on Love (minne),that has not been published yet9. Kurt Ruh supposes the treatise tobe of Franciscan origin10 which is quite in line both with itsexplicitly didactic interpretation of love and with the generalfocus on the stylistic manner of St. Bernard of Clairvaux who wasoften imitated by such outstanding German Franciscan authors asDavid von Augsburg11.

The treatise is devoted to the glorification of “high love”(hohe minne) and describes its role in the pursuit of unio mystica.Contrary to the text of Eckhart’s tradition, the didactic,practical, and ascetic aspects are in the foreground. A lot ofattention is paid not only to the spiritually useful qualities ofhigh love, but also to what exactly it can teach the clergy. Asignificant part of the treatise contrasts high love with low love(die niderste minne). The latter plots seven obstacles on the way tohigh love (werren), i.e. seven types of harmful influence thatcorrupt the human soul.

9 Extracts from this tractate in the version of G8 are cited in my paper: Бондарко 2010: 169-170.10 Ruh 1987: 543.11 For the influence of Bernard of Clairvaux on German works of David of Augsburgsee Steer 1994; for the reception of Bernard’s works in the medieval Germandevotional and theological literature see for instance: Frühwald 1962; Höver1978; Heinzle 1994: 176-179; Müller 2005: 40, 117-119; Bondarko 2009.

8

The passage with the comment on the Song of Songs’ verse 2,4:introduxit me in cellam vinariam ordinavit in me caritatem (“He brought me intothe cellar of wine, he set in order charity in me”) recallsBernard of Clairvaux. The motif of “ordered love” (caritas ordinata)that is important for St. Bernhard plays a significant role here,although a text that might have served as the direct source of theGerman treatise is still unknown. Sermons 49 and 50 related to theSong of Songs in which this verse is commented are not the case,anyway. The interpretation of the «order of love» in the treatiserecalls some classifications by Bernard, though does not representa direct loan: Der orden der mynne geet also Du solt gott ubir all ding mynnen / Darnach dine selbs sele / Dar nach dins nechsten sele / Dar nach dinen lib / dar nach dinsnechsten lib (“The order of love has the following structure: you mustlove God above everything else; then your own soul; then the soulof your neighbour; then your own body; then the body of yourneighbour”).

Some fragments of the treatise on Love contain statements thatare ultimately close to the ones found in Eckhart’s tradition. Allof them are united with the common idea that for the perfect lovefor God your heart must be free from any other affections, thusloving God above everything else. I quote only one of them:

(p. 7) Wer got von hertzen mynnen wyl der sol . Sin hertz ledigen vonfalscher mynnen . won die wile der sack vol ströes ist . so en mag des weises darin nit Es ist vmb die sele die got hh mynnen wil.

(“The one who wants to love God with all his heart mustfree his heart of false love for if the bag is full ofstraw there is no room for a precious stone in it. This issaid about a soul that desires to love God with highlove.”)

Besides the above-mentioned examples, the treatise contains afragment where love is joined with knowledge as two categoriesthat describe the mystical unity of God and soul. The idea is thatof the already mentioned mystical and allegoric interpretation ofthe verse Cant 2:4: introduxit me in cellam vinariam ordinavit in me caritatem.The King takes the soul to the wine-cellar corresponding toMeister Eckhart’s vrsprung, principium and it is in this very mysticalspace that the soul gets to know and to love God:

Der dan mynnen wil . der mirke wie die brvt in der mynnen büche sprichet . Der kůng hait michin die wyn celle gevœrt vnd hait die mynne in mir geordent / Do ist vns an gewissaget dasnieman zo der hohen mynne komen mag / er en werd denn mit gotis gewalt dar zo bracht Der

9

wyn betütt zwei ding . er hitzget . vnd scherphet die synne / Da ist ane bezeichent / der in diewincelle komen ist / der in die bekentnysz vnd in der mynne komen ist… (p. 7-8)

(“So, the one who desires to love, note what the Bride saysin the Book of Love: “The King brought me to the vineyardand ordered love inside me”. Here it is announced to usthat nobody can attain high love unless brought to it byDivine powers. Wine denotes two things: it warms and evokesthe senses. Here the one who came into the vineyard hasacquired knowledge and love.”)

The fact that in the mystical unity of God and soul love andknowledge are inseparable was of deepest concern to Bernard ofClairvaux who followed Gregory the Great in this respect (“amoripse notitia est”, De div. 29,112). This, as well as the idea thatthe soul must abandon everything that is not divine and love Godfor the sake of Himself and dissolve in God is acknowledged bothby Bernard and Eckhart. In spite of the fact that the reception ofCistercians’ theological views in Eckhart’s works remains aproblem, Bernard McGinn, in his comparative study of St. Bernardand Meister Eckhart’s theological views, quotes a sufficientnumber of examples proving that Eckhart had a good command ofBernhard’s works and cited his treatises and sermons more thanonce. In particular, the idea of soul deification and itsdissolution in God, provided its substance remains untouched,expressed by Bernard in his treatise ‘On Loving God’ (‘De diligendoDeo’, ch. 28, book X) was later borrowed and developed by Eckhartin his sermon Q 82 and in ‘The Book of Divine Consolation’ (‘LiberBenedictus’)13. By comparing the description of mystical ecstasy inthe treatise ‘Von abgeschiedenheit’ and the sermon Q 83 with those ofBernard, McGinn notices that Eckhart’s “transcendentaldisinterested love” was “by no means developed from or evenindirectly dependant upon Bernard’s thoughts; but it is certainlynot incompatible with the abbot’s fourth degree” (McGinn 1980:381) – the fourth degree of love in the treatise ‘De diligendo Deo’.In his analysis McGinn emphasizes a number of common featurestypical for theology of love in the works of the Cistercian abbotand the Dominican Meister that may seem not that obvious becauseof the evident differences in their rhetoric and style. Among themMcGinn mentions the ones that are relevant for comparativeanalysis regarding the reception of the two traditions in the latemedieval manuscripts. Namely, the already mentioned insistence“that in loving God above all things with our whole heart and mind12 See McGinn 1980: 374.13 See the list of references in: McGinn 1980: 378.

10

and soul we really come to love ourselves and all things in theproper way”; as well as the concept of “disinterested character ofthe highest stage of love”, when “God is the reason for lovingGod” (McGinn 1980: 382-383)14.

Thus, in the texts of St. Gall MS love for God has twodifferent meanings: 1) love as a virtue, as justice, patience,humility – this meaning is absent in Eckhart’s spruch; 2) love as ameans of deification and achievement of unio mystica together withknowledge – this meaning is typical of both Eckhart’s andBernhard’s tradition.

Nevertheless, prior to drawing any conclusions regarding thestrategy of choosing and editing texts included in CodexSangallensis, it is necessary to consider the other MS where thesecond earlier copy of the treatise about love is preserved. Imean MS 879 in the collection of Giessen University Library,written in the second half of the 14th century in the Bavariandialect (Gi1)15.

The Giessen collection of ecclesiastical prose writing isremarkable for the fact that the majority of pieces are devoted tohuman love for God, alongside several texts on humility, patience,expiation, and pardon of sins. Whereas the St. Gall Codex,alongside texts on various virtues and every-day temptations andadvice in overcoming them, included several sermons of variedorigin and contents, the compiler of the Giessen MS focused hisattention on unio mystica as the major subject. In this connectionthe prevailing number of texts containing Cistercian andFranciscan interpretations of human love for God is obvious.

The initial part of the collection contains several shorttreatises that date back to no later than the beginning of the 14th

century and represent a revised version of an anonymous treatise:Pseudo-Bonaventura’s ‘Arbor amoris’ (‘The Tree of Love’) (fol. 1r-4v),‘The Mirror of Spiritual Life’ or ‘The Mirror of Perfection’ (fol. 4v-8v), thetreatise on the mystic prayer that evokes divine contemplation(fol. 8v-11r), and the sermon on 9 stages of love for God (fol.11r-16v). Each of these texts implements one of the gradualisticmodels of the soul acquired by God where minne plays an exceptionalpart.

All these texts are united by one more feature, namely thatthey are found in a Franciscan manuscript Cgm 132 preserved in theState Library of Bavaria almost in the same sequence. The MS dates

14 See the sermon on the Song of Songs 69 for the motif of divine love as an impetusfor love being born in the soul; about the soul’s attaining the likeness of Godsee Bernard in SCC 83; cf. McGinn 1994: 310-312.15 Here I’m referring to the unpublished description by Seelbach 2006.

11

back to the beginning of the 14th century as ascertained by thenumber of paleographic and dialectal features, and it originatesfrom Regensburg or the neighbouring area16. Together with the textsmentioned above, it includes an entire corpus of mystical anddidactical treatises by the Franciscan novice master David ofAugsburg († 1272). David’s Latin and German works consider thesame subjects in a similar way, close to the above-mentionedtreatises about love. For David, the influence of Bernard ofClairvaux’s ideas, as well as the ideas of another Cistercian,William of Saint Thierry, was of fundamental importance17.

In Gi1 the treatise on the ten stages of love leading to Godis followed by two texts that belong to Eckhart’s tradition and,similarly to the first spruch, are not proved authentic. These arethe sermon Pfeiffer Nr. 57 (fol.16v-21r) and ‘The sermon read in theaftermath’ (‘Nachtragspredigt’) (fol. 21v-23v). Right afterwards, thetreatise about love follows (fol. 23v-27v), and it presents anearlier copy of the text that in the present research was citedafter the St. Gall MS. The initial part of the treatise with thedefinition of high love is absent from the Giessen MS. The nexttext ‘The Three Signs of Perfect Love’ (fol. 28r-32v) describes the stagesof bodily fading as explicit symptoms of perfect love. These textsare followed by the last one in this MS that belongs to MeisterEckhart’s tradition, i.e. the famous spruch 70 ‘Meister Eckhart’s TableTalk’ (‘Meister Eckharts Wirtschaft’) (fol. 32v-36v).

The rest of the texts do not touch upon the subject of lovedirectly. In the middle of the MS, there is a short mystical textabout the encounter between the Soul and God (fol. 67v-69v) whichis followed by ‘Von dreier lai chvzzvng der sel’ (‘On the Tree Kinds of SoulKisses’) (fol. 69v-74v), a somewhat revised German version of thesermon by Bernard of Clairvaux from the cycle ‘Sermones de diversis’(Nr. 87). Following a whole number of ecclesiastical texts ofvarious contents, some of which are attributed to Bernard ofClairvaux, the collection is concluded by two texts aboutdifferent types of love: ‘Von dreier hand minn’ (‘On Threefold Love’)(fol. 117r-118r) and ‘Drev dinch sind gt zeminnen’ (‘Three Things are Good toBe Loved’) (fol. 118r-119v). The penultimate short text is of earlyorigin. It is also known in a different version as one of thechapters of the mystic and devotional collection ‘The Garden ofspiritual Hearts’ (‘Geistlicher Herzen Baungart’) that was written bydisciples of David von Augsburg and Berthold von Regensburg in the16 For the dating and localisation of the manuscript see the recent work of K. Schneider: Schneider 2009: 18-20, 23-24.17 For the influence of the Cistercian tradition on David’s most importanttreatise ‘De exterioris et interioris hominis compositione secundum triplicem statum incipientium,proficientium et perfectorum, libri tres’ see: Bohl 2000: 132-136.

12

last decades of the 13th century (No. 24 ‘So wir erzvrnet werden’, BgH:211).

It is not the goal of this paper to examine the similaritiesin the contents of texts that belong to Eckhart’s and Cistercianand Franciscan traditions and are included in the Giessen codex.In terms of their contents, at least Pfeiffer’s sermon 57 and‘Meister Eckharts Wirtschaft’ are in line with the general contents ofthe collection. In sermon 57, the same motif of God’s birth in thehuman soul, and the union between God and the soul, play animportant role. As is typical of Eckhart, both functions of thesoul acquired after the divine birth, i.e. the soul as a locus andas an object of divine birth, are united here. God gives birth toHis Son, that is Himself, into the soul and simultaneously givesbirth to the soul itself as if to His Son, for the soul shares itshuman nature with Jesus. What really distinguishes this sermonfrom other authentic texts of Eckhart are long passages thatdisclose the topos of memoria Dei, i.e. the recollection of Jesus’earthly sufferings and the call to follow Jesus and to imitateHim. It would be enough to cite the end of this text:

Er pevtet vns ein tranch daz er vor getrvnchen hat. er gepeutet vns niht er hab ez êvor getan. Dar vmb schuell wir grozz minn zeleiden han. Wan got nie anders getet.die weil er auf ertreich waz. daz wir also vnser menschleich natur. vnd all vnserchrancheit in goetleicher natur verpergen vnd verainen daz an vns niht fvnden wertden lavter got dez helf vns got. Amen. (Gi1, fol. 21r).

(“He offers us the cup that he had drained before. He wouldnot offer it to us if he had not been through that himselfbefore. Therefore we must suffer great love. For God never didotherwise when he was among us on earth, so that we concealedand united our human nature and weakness with the divinenature, so that there would be nothing to find in us but forGod. God help us in that. Amen.”).

In the German prose of the 13th century, it was the Franciscanswho were known for the idea of imitation of Jesus’ earthly lifeand the voluntary experience of suffering. By the end of the 14th

century, however, this became common for ecclesiastical prose ingeneral.

The described similarities between the partially adapted textsof Eckhart’s tradition and texts typical of Cistercian andFranciscan spirituality do not rule out the problem ofdifferences. For me, these differences lie in the field of formal

13

organization and surface contents, rather than in deep theologicalinterpretations. Let me mention a couple of examples.

The analyzed spruch from the St. Gallen MS is preceded by thefollowing short statement that demonstrates that stylistics oftexts surrounding Eckhart’s spruch had a lot in common: “One masterwas asked…” – and so on.

Ein meister wart gevraget / wilch der nehste weg zo gote were / er sprach / das istverzigunge aller vergenglicher dinge vnd gantze stede begerunge niemer weder zogewinnen vnd senken in des meres abegrunt / vnd niemer weder vsz zo komen / (G8, p.194).

(“One master was asked, what would be the closest way to God.He said: this is the refusal of all transient things and aquite firm wish never more to get them; [it is] also to sinkinto the sea abyss and never more to come back from it.”).

The common stylistic and rhetorical feature for the texts isthe staged dialogue between the meister and his disciples. Theaction is set in the past. Meister’s statements are full ofparadoxes. The vocabulary is sometimes typical of neo-platonicmystical discourse.

German texts of Cistercian and Franciscan origin are usuallyremarkable for their practical orientation because they serve asinstructions on how to achieve a certain result in spiritualperfection. Various kinds of divisiones are often used here, while onthe whole their linguistic cohesive devices are quite stereotyped.The following example is taken from the treatise on Love, includedin the St. Gall collection:

Die volkomene mynne gottis sol fünff ding haben Zom ersten Sy ist Reyne want sy komet von dem reinen gotte zo geistlichen luten Sy ist einfaltig wan sy luterlich got durch sine gute mynnet . Sy ist getrw . wan nicht versumet vnd alles dinges achte leret Als s[anc]tus Johannes spricht Die gute vnsers herren lernet all ding Sy ist auch stete <…> (G8, p. 9)

(“Perfect love of God shall possess five features. Firstly, She shall be pure for it is emanated by God Himselfupon spiritual people. She is simple for She loves God purely because of Hisgoodness.

14

She is true for She does not deviate and teaches respect forevery object. As St. John says, “The goodness of our God putsevery creature on the right track”. She is also continuous <…>”).

The entire passage is based on a single formula with one commonbasis (“this love teaches us”) and minor variations:

Diese mynne leret vns ouch . das Diese mynne leret ouch das Sy leret ob…

There is, however, an example of formal adaptation ofEckhart’s texts to the general pattern of Cistercian andFranciscan devotional prose. In the Giessen manuscript, the above-mentioned text ‘The Three Signs of Perfect Love’ follows the treatise onLove and precedes the ‘Meister Eckharts Wirtschaft’. However, in themystic, ascetic, and scholastic texts collection compiled in themiddle of the 14th century in the South of Germany and known as ‘TheBook of Perfection’ (‘Das Buch der Vollkommenheit’) by Pseudo-Engelhart vonEbrach (BdV), a different version of ‘The Three Signs’ (No. 146)follows the Pseudo-Eckhart’s spruch No. 19 (text No. 145) which is,in its turn, preceded by extracts from Eckhart’s sermons 5b. Thespruch includes one division only; yet, such text structuredeprived of any framework is not typical of Eckhart himself.Rather, it recalls ‘The Signs of Love’. Nevertheless, the preservationof introductory structures typical of Eckhart’s spruch andstructural grammatical differences among the clauses of thedivision allow us to insist on the stylistic peculiarity of bothtraditions.

145. [Spruch No. 19]Meister Eckart wart gefraget, waz daz groste gvot were, daz im got hete ie getan. er

sprach: der sin drú.Daz erste: mir sin benumen und abgesniten allú fleschlichú begerunge und geluste.Daz ander, daz mir daz gotlich lieht luhtet und schinet in allen minen werken.Daz dritte, daz ich teigelichen zvonime und wirde ernuwet mit tugenden, gnaden

und seilikeit. (BdV: 65, 1-6).

(“Meister Eckhart was asked, what is the greatest goodnessmade by God for him? He answered: There are three of them.

The first: all carnal wishes and pleasures are taken away andcut from me.

The second is that the divine light shines on me, and itshines in all my deeds.

15

The third is that I’m growing and being renovated by virtues,grace and blessedness.”).

146. ‘Die Zeichen der Minne’ (‘The Signs of Love’)

Drú zeichen sin, daran du wissen maht, ob du in vollekumener minne sist.Daz erste ist, ob du von minnen siechest. Daz ander, ob du von minnen unsenig wirdest.Daz dritte ist, daz du von minnen stirbest. (BdV: 65, 1-4).

(“There are tree signs by which you can find out whether youare in the perfect love.

The first is, if you get sick of love.The second, if you get mad of love.The third is, if you die of love.”).

Properly to understand Eckhart’s reception in spiritualliterature collections, one should not focus on the differencesfrom the previous tradition of interpreting love, but startlooking for common features that would allow a bringing closer ofEckhart’s statements and the traditional discourse of love, basedon the works by Augustine and Bernard of Clairvaux. Later editorsoffered smoothed and simplified interpretations of the extremelycomplicated theological ideas of Meister Eckhart to readers whohad no special education in theology (to nuns, for example). Theytried to preserve Eckhart’s manner by using his traditionalpeculiar linguistic devices that became a stereotype within histradition. The discrepancy in contents and even contradictionsbetween the more usual Cistercian (Bernardian) and the quitesimilar Franciscan traditions, on the one hand, and the Thomistand Dominican tradition of “Rhineland mysticism” with its sharppolemics, on the other, was bridged. Stylistic differences turnout to be more important for the later reception within the lowerclergy, and they are revealed in the choice of lexical andsyntactic structures typical of each tradition.

In the preface to his edition of Meister Eckhart’s worksFranz Pfeiffer wrote: “Ich hoffe mir... die erforderliche übungund vertrautheit mit Eckharts schriften erworben zu haben, undglaube nicht befürchten zu müssen, es werde sich irgend einbedeutendes stück meiner sammlung später als uneckhardischherausstellen. Die sprüche tragen, bis auf wenige, die echtheit insich selbst, und bedürfen keiner weiteren beglaubigung” (Pf: XI-XII). There is some irony in the fact, that the self-consciousnessof an editor who pretended to create a critical edition has so

16

much in common with the habits of medieval editors as theyincluded what they thought to be of Meister Eckhart in theircollections of spiritual texts.

Bibliography

Abbreviations of manuscripts and text editions:

B2 – Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Ms. germ. oct. 65.

G8 – St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 955.Gi1 – Giessen, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. 879.

BdV – Pseudo-Engelhart von Ebrach. Das Buch derVollkommenheit. Hrsg. v. K. Schneider. (Deutsche Texte desMittelalters 86). Berlin 2006.

BgH – Unger H. Geistlicher Herzen Bavngart. Einmittelhochdeutsches Buch religiöser Unterweisung aus demAugsburger Franziskanerkreis des 13. Jahrhunderts. Untersuchungenund Text. München 1969. (Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen 24).

De div. – Bernardus Claraevallensis. Sermones de diversis. In:Bernhard von Clairvaux. Sämtliche Werke: lateinisch/deutsch. Bd.9. Innsbruck 1998. S. 167-833.

LW V – Meister Eckhart. Die lateinischen Werke. Bd. V:Responsio ad articulos sibi impositos de scriptis et dictis suis.Acta Echardiana. Hrsg. u. komm. von L. Sturlese. Stuttgart 2007.

ME I – Meister Eckhart. Werke: Vol. 1: Texte und Übersetzungenvon Josef Quint. Hrsg. u. komm. von N. Largier. (Bibliothekdeutscher Klassiker. Bibliothek des Mittelalters, Bd. 20).Frankfurt am Main 1993.

Pf – Pfeiffer F. Deutsche Mystiker des 14. Jahrhunderts. Bd. 2. Leipzig 1857.

References:

Bohl 2000 – Bohl C. Geistlicher Raum. Räumliche Sprachbilderals Träger spiritueller Erfahrung; dargestellt am Werk De compositionedes David von Augsburg. Werl 2000.

Bondarko 2009 – Bondarko, N.A. Nu fraget sant Bernhart waz got si. Zurparaphrasierenden Textübertragung und Dialogizität in den ‚St.Georgener Predigten’ und im ‚Bavmgarten geistlicher Herzen’. In:Kulturtopographie des deutschsprachigen Südwestens im späterenMittelalter. Studien und Texte. Hg. von Barbara Fleith und René

17

Wetzel (Kulturtopographie des alemannischen Raums, 1). Berlin; NewYork 2009. S. 13-39.

Бондарко 2010 – Бондарко Н.А. О божественной любви: МейстерЭкхарт и францисканская традиция в Codex Sangallensis 955. In:Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология – XIV (чтенияпамяти И. М. Тронского). Материалы Международной конференции,проходившей 21–23 июня 2010 г. Отв. редактор Н. Н. Казанский. Ч.1. Санкт-Петербург 2010. С. 161-172. [Bondarko N. A. On DivineLove: Meister Eckhart and the Franciscan Tradition in CodexSangallensis 955. In: Indo-European linguistics and classicalphilology – XIV: Readings in memory of I.M. Tronskii: Proceedingsof the International Conference held on June 21-23, 2010. Part I.Ed. by N.N. Kazanskii. St. Petersburg 2010. P. 161-172].

Clark 1934 – Clark J. M. Alhart and Alphart. In: The ModernLanguage Review, vol. 29 (1934). P. 440–443.

Clark 1936 – Clark J. M. A Sermon by a Franciscan Mystic. In:The Modern Language Review, vol. 31 (1936). P. 68–72.

Frühwald 1962 – Frühwald W. Der St. Georgener Prediger.Studien zur Wandlung des geistlichen Gehaltes. Berlin 1962.

Guerizoli 2006 – Guerizoli R. Die Verinnerlichung desGöttlichen. Eine Studie über den Gottesgeburtszyklus und dieArmutspredigt Meister Eckharts. Leiden 2006.

Heinzle 1994 – Heinzle J. Wandlungen und Neuansätze im 13.Jahrhundert. In: Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von denAnfängen bis zum Beginn der Neuzeit. Hg. von J. Heinzle. Bd. II.Vom hohen zum späten Mittelalter. Teil. 2. Tübingen 1994.

Höver 1978 – Höver W. Bernhard von Clairvaux. In: DeutschesVerfasserlexikon des Mittelalters. 2., völlig neu bearbeiteteAuflage. Bd. 1. Berlin; New York 1978. Sp. 754-762.

Kertz 1959 – Kertz K. G. Meister Eckhart's Teaching on theBirth of the Divine Word in the soul. In: Traditio, vol. 15(1959). P. 327-363.

Langer 2004 – Langer O. Christliche Mystik im Mittelalter.Mystik und Rationalisierung – Stationen eines Konflikts.Darmstadt, 2004.

McGinn 1980 – McGinn B. St. Bernard and Meister Eckhart. In:Cîteaux 31 (1980). P. 372-386.

McGinn 1994 – McGinn B. Die Mystik im Abendland. Bd. 1.Ursprünge. 2. Aufl.. Freiburg im Breisgau 1994.

McGinn 2001 – McGinn B. The Mystical Thought of MeisterEckhart: The Man from Whom God Hid Nothing. New York 2001.

Реутин 2011 – Реутин М.Ю. Мистическое богословие МайстераЭкхарта. Традиция платоновского «Парменида» в эпоху позднегоСредневековья. М., 2011. [Reutin M.Yu. The mystical theology of

18

Meister Eckhart. The tradition of Plato’s Parmenides in the LateMiddle Ages. Moskau 2011].

Richter 1969 – Richter D. Die deutsche Überlieferung derPredigten Bertholds von Regensburg. München 1969.

Ruh 1987 – Ruh K. ‘Von der Minne’ I. In: DeutschesVerfasserlexikon des Mittelalters. 2., völlig neu bearb. Auflage.Bd. 6. Berlin, 1987. Sp. 543.

Schiewer/Mertens 2004 – Schiewer, H.-J., Mertens, V.Repertorium der ungedruckten deutschsprachigen Predigten desMittelalters. Der Berliner Bestand. Erarb. v. S. Behne, J.Conzelmann, M. Costard, B.-J. Kruse, M. Mecklenburg u. H.-J.Schiewer. Philologische Datenverarbeitung W. Schneider-Lastin,Band 1, Teil 1–2: Die Handschriften aus dem StraßburgerDominikanerkloster St. Nikolaus in undis und benachbartenProvenienzen. [Unpublished typoskript; database version:26.10.2004].

Schmitt 1969 – Schmitt P. Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de Colmar (Catalogue Général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques de France 56). Paris 1969.

Seelbach 2007 – Seelbach U. Katalog der deutschsprachigenmittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Gießen.Preprint.

Steer 1994 – Steer G. Virtus und Sapientia. Der EinflußBernhards von Clairvaux auf Davids von Augsburg deutsche Traktate„Die sieben Vorregeln der Tugend“ und „Der Spiegel der Tugend“.In: Zisterziensische Spiritualität. Theologische Grundlagen,funktionale Voraussetzungen und bildhafte Ausprägungen imMittelalter. Bearb. von Cl. Casper und K. Schreiner. St. Ottilien1994. S. 171–188.

Steer 1998 – Steer G. Predigt 101: >Dum medium silentiumtenerent omnia<. In: Lectura Eckhardi. Predigten Meister Eckhartsvon Fachgelehrten gelesen und gedeutet. Hrsg. von G. Steer und L.Sturlese, koordiniert von D. Gottschall. Bd. 1. Stuttgart 1998. S.247-288.

APPENDIX

19

¶ Meister Eckart sprach18 das werck das got wirket in einergot19 mynnender selen die er also luter20 funde21 / Das er sichgeistlichen in sy müchte geberen das werck ist22 gote lieber vnd23

lustlicher dan alle die werck die er gewirket hoit24 an allencreaturen / vnd were ouch vyl25 edeler / dan do er alle ding vonnichten schoif26 /

was meynet das27 / das eme das werck also lustlich ist28 /das ist29 des schult das got kein creature enhait geschaffen dieeynen alsulchen indruck vmbgriffen habe30 Da got sine mаcht / vndden grunt sins gotlichen31 wesens alsus volkomelich32 in gegieszen33

müge als in dem werke da er sich gebirt in die sele34 / Do wart er gefraget / ob dann der selen selickeit lege an dem

werke das sich got geistlich gebirt in sy35· Do sprach der meister36 allein / das das37 woir sy das got die

groste38 lust39 vnd genüchte40 neme41 in dem werke / doch42 enlyt derselen groste selickeit nit dar ane / wanne er in ir geboren wirt /

18 sprach] sprach in einer bredie Pf 597,4.19 got] gotlîchen Pf 597,5.20 also luter] lûter blôz und abegescheiden Pf 597,5.21 funde] findet Pf 597,6.22 das werck ist] daz were Pf 597,6.23 lieber vnd] missing in Pf24 gewirket hoit] geworhte Pf 597,7.25 ouch vyl] verre Pf 597,8.26 schoif] geschuof Pf 597,9.27 was meynet das] Dô wart er gevrâget, waz daz meinde Pf 597,10.28 ist] wêre Pf 597,11.29 das ist] Dô sprach er, daz were Pf 597,11.30 enhait geschaffen die eynen alsulchen indruck vmbgriffen habe] hât, diu einenalsô wîten begrif habe alsô diu sêle Pf 597,12.31 gotlichen] missing in Pf.32 volkomelich] volleclîche Pf 597,13.33 gegiezsen] geflœzen Pf 597,13.34 Here are two replicas (a question and an answer) omitted: Dô wart er gevrâget, waz gotesgeberen wêre? Dô sprach er, gotes gebern in der sêle enwêre niht anders, dennedaz sich got der sêle offenbâret in eime niuwen bekantnüsse unde mit einerniuwer wîse (Pf 597,15-18):35 das sich got geistlich gebirt in sy] dâ er sich geistlîche in die sêle gebirtPf 597,14. 36 Do sprach der meister] Dô sprach er Pf 597,20. 37 das das] daz Pf 597,21.38 die groste] grœzer Pf 597,21.39 lust] wollust Pf 597,21.40 vnd genüchte] missing in Pf.41 habe] neme Pf 597,21.42 doch] nochdenne Pf 597,23. Before this word there is an omission: denne in allen denwerken, diu er ie gewürhte in dem himel und ûf der erde an den crêatûren Pf597,21-23.

20

mit eime nüwen bekentnisze43 das en machet sy nit vollenkomelichen44

selick / sonder45 es machet46 das sy mit mynnen47 vnd mit loue vulgetdem bekennen48 da in49 sy geboren ist weder50 in dem vrsprung yrbeider sich halten51 uf das sin / vnd abgonde52 der eren53 / vnd davon54 ist sy nit selich von dem yren55 / sy ist selick von dem synen/ want man sol nach volgen der monscheit christi bisz man die gotheit begrift / Her zohelff vns got Amen56 · (p. 195)

[This is Meister Eckhart from Whom God Hid Nothing]57

Meister Eckhart said: everything what God does in a God-lovingsoul whom He finds so pure that He would like to bear Himself inher in a spiritual way – this work is more desirable andpleasurable to God than all other works He had performed in allHis creatures, and is far nobler than if He had created all thingsout of nothing.

[Then he was asked:] What does it mean that these works are sodesirable to Him?

[Then he said:] This happens because God has not created acreature that would acquire such an imprint that God couldimplement His power and the essence of His divine nature asultimately as when He bears Himself into somebody’s soul.

[Then he was asked what does the birthing of God mean? Then he said: thebirthing of God inside one’s soul is different from God revealing Himself in new knowledgeand a new manner.]

Then he was asked whether the bliss of a soul depends on thework that God effects by spiritually bearing Himself in her?

43 enlyt der selen groste selickeit nit dar ane / wanne er in ir geboren wirt /mit eime nüwen bekentnisze] ist diu sêle sêliger von den werken, dâ si sichwider in in gebirt. Wan swenne got in sî geborn wirt Pf 597,23-24.44 vollenkomelichen] vollen Pf 597,25.45 sonder] mere Pf 597,25.46 es machet] sî machet sêlic Pf 597,25.47 mynnen] mine Pf 597,25.48 bekennen] bekantnüsse Pf 597,26.49 da in] in daz Pf 597,26.50 weder] wider Pf 597,26. The following words are omitted: in den ursprunc, ûz dem ezgeborn ist, und Pf 597,27.51 halten] haltet Pf 597,28.52 abgonde] abe gât Pf 597,28.53 der eren] dem iren Pf 597,28.54 von] missing in Pf.55 yren] in Pfeiffer’s text follows: mêre.56 want man sol nach volgen der monscheit christi bisz man die gotheit begrift /Her zo helff vns got Amen] missing in Pf 597,29.57 The title of the spruch which emphasizes Meister Eckhart’s exceptionallyintimate understanding of God is found only in Co: Dis ist meister eckehart .Dem got nie nut verbarg.

21

Then the master said: The only truth is that God experiencesgreat pleasure and satisfaction in this action, although thegreatest bliss of the soul is not when He is born in her with newknowledge (that does not make her blessed), but when she followsthe knowledge with love and praise in which she is born again byacquiring what belongs to Him and rejecting what is inborn in her.Therefore, such soul is blessed not by what belongs to her. She isblessed by what belongs to Him, for one is to follow the humannature of Jesus unless one has acquired the divine nature.

Let God help us in that. Amen.

РЕЗЮМЕ

Мейстер Экхарт встречает Бернарда Клервоского: рецепцияэкхартовского учения о богорождении в контексте цистерцианско-

францисканского дискурса о любви (на материале позднесредневековой рукописной традиции)

В статье рассматривается вопрос о влиянии традиционногоцистерцианско-францисканского богословия на рецепциюспекулятивного мистицизма доминиканского теолога Мейстера Экхарта(1260-1328) в немецкоязычных рукописных сборниках духовной прозы2-й пол. XIV – 1-й пол. XV вв. Речь идет прежде всего о сборникахдля монахинь, репертуар которых указывает на их происхождение изфранцисканской или цистерцианской среды.

В первой части статьи анализируется небольшой анонимныйнемецкий текст из Санкт-Галленской рукописи 1-й пол. XV в.,происходящей из монастыря кларисс во Фрайбурге в Брайзгау (G8).Этот текст, относящийся к жанру шпруха (шпрух № 1 в издании Фр.Пфайффера 1857 г.), композиционно оформлен как серия высказыванийМейстера Экхарта, отвечающего на вопросы своих слушателей послепроизнесенной проповеди. В изречениях содержится краткое изложениеучения Экхарта о беспрерывном рождении Бога в человеческой душе. Вчастности, представлено несколько ключевых для экхартовскогобогословия мотивов:

1. Необходимо полное очищение и обнажение души, чтобыприготовить место для акта божественного творения.

2. Рождение Богом самого себя в человеческой душе – этотворческий акт, превосходящий по своей значимости акт сотворениямира.

3. Душа превосходит по своей значимости для Бога все другиетворения, поскольку является в потенции идеальной пустой формой,способной вместить в себя Бога и стать Его отпечатком.

22

4. Рождение Бога в душе означает новое самораскрытие любящегоБога, в котором осуществляется акт богопознания: под «рождением»подразумевается прежде всего активное действие, производимоеБогом; в то же время, это действие направлено и на самого Бога,который рождает сам себя в человеческой душе.

5. Акт богопознания не является сам по себе причинойблаженства: это – лишь начало пути к настоящему соединению с Богомв Первоначале, где душа должна «прилепиться» к Богу, отказавшисьот собственных желаний.

Таким образом, рождение Сына имеет динамическую природу иразвивается по кругу: от Отца к душе и от души обратно в Отца. Богсоединяется с человеком, выводя его из иерархии творений и включаянепосредственно в тринитарный процесс. Эта связь между Богом идушой характеризуется отношением Сыновства и приобретаетонтологический характер.

Вместе с тем, в тексте отсутствуют некоторые радикальныеформулировки, которые Экхарт использует для описания unio mysticaв ряде немецких проповедей. Практически все экхартовские идеисформулированы очень осторожно: высказывания неоплатоническогохарактера выглядят вполне традиционно. Душа, отдавая в единении сБогом все, принадлежащее ей, сохраняет способность испытыватьблаженство – а значит, не вполне нища духом.

При сопоставлении Санкт-Галленского списка с более раннейредакцией шпруха в рукописи B2 из женского доминиканского конвентаSt. Nikolaus in undis в Страсбурге (XIV в.) обнаруживается целыйряд расхождений, которые могут свидетельствовать о стремленииредактора устранить подозрительные места и избежать амбивалентныхтолкований. В частности, определению души в В2 как «божественной»и «любящей» (in einer gotlichen minnender sele) соответствует не вызывающеелишних вопросов определение души как «любящей Бога» (in einer gotmynnender selen) в G8.

Также устранены аллюзии на тексты Экхарта об отрешенности сидеей абсолютной наготы души: Бог должен найти душу «чистой» (luter)– вместо «чистой, нагой и отрешенной» (luter blos vnde abgescheiden) в В2.Это особое чтение G8, отличающееся не только от варианта В2, но иот всех известных прочих списков.

Далее, после слов о том, что душа испытывает блаженство не от«своего», а от «Божьего», непосредственно следует пояснение, чторечь идет о подражании Христу: чтобы приблизиться к пониманиюбожественной природы, нужно следовать человеческой природеХриста. Эта концовка отсутствует в других списках. Онапредставляет собой явную попытку приспособить экхартовские идеи кпривычной девоциональной практике.

23

Во второй части статьи (псевдо-)экхартовский шпрухсопоставляется с анонимным трактатом о божественной любви («Vonder minne») францисканского происхождения, который стоит в самомначале сборника G8; более ранний список этого памятника содержитсятакже в рук. Gi1 конца XIV в. Большая часть текстов Гиссенскогосборника посвящена теме любви к Богу, в остальных говорится осмирении, терпении, покаянии и отпущении грехов. Gi1 такжесодержит несколько проповедей экхартианской традиции.

Сравнение «бернардинских» (цистерцианско-францисканскаятрадиция) и «экхартианских» (доминиканская традиция) текстов всборниках G8 и G1 показал следующее. Общим риторико-стилистическимприемом в текстах доминиканской традиции является инсценировкадиалога между учителем (meister) – в качестве которого выступает нетолько Экхарт – и учениками. Изречения учителя изобилуютпарадоксами, в них используется лексика, характерная для языкаспекулятивной мистики неоплатонического толка. Напротив, немецкимтекстам цистерцианско-францисканского происхождения свойственнапрактическая ориентированность, поскольку они выполняют преждевсего роль инструкции к достижению конкретного результата в деледуховного совершенствования. В них назидание часто принимает видперечней (divisiones) – добродетелей и их признаков, полезных ивредных вещей для духовной жизни и т. п.

Примеры формальной адаптации экхартианских текстов к типовымобразцам стандартной духовной прозы аскетологического характераобнаруживаются, в частности, в южнонемецком сборнике мистико-дидактической прозы «Книга совершенства» («Das Buch derVollkommenheit») Псевдо-Энгельхарта фон Эбраха (середина XIV в.).Если в Гиссенской рукописи небольшой текст «Три признакасовершенной любви» следует непосредственно за трактатом «О любви»и предваряет «Застольную беседу Мейстера Экхарта», то в «Книгесовершенства» «Три признака» (№ 146) помещены после псевдо-экхатовского шпруха № 19 (№ 145). Последнему предшествуют выдержкииз проповеди Экхарта Q 5b. Шпрух фактически состоит из одногоперечня благ, полученных Экхартом от Бога. Однако столь простаяформа организации текста как раз не характерна для самого Экхарта,а приближается к композиционному типу «Знаков любви». Весте с том,сохранение привычной вопросно-ответной структуры экхартовскихшпрухов позволяет объединить стилистическую специфику обеихтрадиций

Проведенный анализ показывает, что в позднесредневековыхсборниках духовной прозы существовала тенденция к упрощению идейЭкхарта или же, по крайней мере, формы их воплощения. Можносделать вывод о существовании некоторых адаптационных механизмовна уровне стиля и композиции текста, которые смягчали эпатирующие

24

черты богословской манеры рейнского Мастера и приближали еговысказывания к привычной стилистике бернардинской традиции.

25