Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and Eckhart

PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE AND ECKHART

Elisa Rubino

Introduction

Ever since the famous article on Augustinian and Dionysian Neoplatonism by Josef Koch,1 the importance of the influence of the Corpus areopagiticum on the thought of Meister Eckhart has been common knowledge among commentators.2 Some contemporary scholars have noted the schematic aspect of Koch’s interpretation.3 But the conviction in the existence of a strong link between Dionysius and Eckhart, based on the Theologumena of the superiority of negative theology and the mystic union with God, is widespread. It has recently received an important confirmation from the authority of Kurt Ruh, who has even attempted to construct and docu- ment a “Dionysian phase” in the evolution of the thought of the Domini- can preacher and philosopher.4 The recent compilation of a cumulative index of the sources cited in the critical edition of Eckhart invites us to carry out a systematic examination of the passages and doctrines of the Areopagite used in the Latin and

1 J. Koch, Augustinischer und dionysischer Neuplatonismus und das Mittelalter, in Kleine Schriften 1, (Storia e Letteratura) 127, (Rome: 1973), 3–25. 2 É.-H. Wéber, “Mystique parce que théologien: Maître Eckhart,” La vie spirituelle 652, 136 (1982), 730–49. É-H. Wéber, Eckhart et l’ontothéologisme: histoire et conditions d’une rup- ture, in Maître Eckhart à Paris. Une critique médiévale de l’ontothéologie, (BEPHE. Sciences religieuses) 86 (Paris: 1984), 13–83. É.-H. Wéber, “Maître Eckhart et la grande tradition théologique”, in Eckhardus Theutonicus homo doctus et sanctus. Nachweise und Berichte zum Prozess gegen Meister Eckhart, ed. H. Stirnimann and R. Imbach, Dokimion 11 (Fri- bourg: 1992), 97–125. J. Koch, “Über die Lichtsymbolik im Bereich der Philosophie und der Mystik des Mittelalters”, in Kleine Schriften, 1, 27–67. A. de Libera, La Mystique Rhénane. D’Albert le Grand à Maître Eckhart (Paris: 1984), 53–58, 231–316. 3 K. Flasch, Die Metaphysik des Einen bei Nikolaus von Kues. Problemgeschichtliche Stel- lung und systematische Bedeutung, (Studien zur Proglemgeschichte der antiken und mit- telalterlichen Philosophie) 7 (Leiden: 1973), 236, note 3. 4 K. Ruh, Meister Eckhart. Theologe, Prediger, Mystiker (Munich: 1985), 47–59. K. Ruh, “Dionysius Areopagita im deutschen Predigtwerk Meister Eckharts,” Perspektiven der Phi- losophie. Neues Jahrbuch 13 (1987), 207–23. K. Ruh, “Die ‘Mystica Theologia’ des Dionysius Pseudo-Areopagita im Lichte mittelalterlicher Kommentatoren,” Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 122, (1993), 119–45. K. Ruh, Geschichte der abendländischen Mystik, vol. 3 (Munich: 1996), 220–353. 300 elisa rubino

German works. The present chapter contains the results of a first analysis of this material.

1. The Quantitative Data

From the examination of the comprehensive index of the Latin and Ger- man works by Eckhart, the total number of Dionysian citations amount to 62. Thirty-six of these are present in the Latin works and 26 in the Ger- man works. More precisely, the De divinis nominibus is cited 36 times, the De caelesti hierarchia 12 times, while themes pertaining to the De mystica theologia are cited only five times; there are, in addition, four isolated citations from the De ecclesiastica hierarchia and two from the first Epistula. Lastly, three additional citations have not been identified.5 As for the translations from which the Latin citations are taken, we can safely conclude that the reference work is the translatio nova by John the Saracen (c. 12th century); though at times Eckhart mentions the translation by Eriugena, he never refers to the translation by Robert Grosseteste. Three further citations have Thomas Aquinas as their intermediary. More precisely, as far as the De divinis nominibus is concerned, two citations come from Aquinas, the third follows the translation of Eriugena, a fourth is formulated in accordance with both translations, and seven of them comply with John the Saracen’s version; as to the De caelesti hierarchia, one citation derives again from Aquinas, three from Eriugena’s translation and one from the Saracen’s; in the De ecclesiastica hierarchia, the source is always Eriugena’s translation, while for the De mystica theologia and the Epistulae, it is John the Saracen’s translation. Indeed, the citations are uniformly distributed over all of Eckhart’s works, in particular: Latin works: One citation in Prologus in opus propositionum; two in Expositio libri Genesis; one in Sermones et Lectiones super Ecclesiastici; five in Expositio libri Sapientiae; four in Expositio libri Exodi; ten in Expositio s. Evangelii sec. Iohannem; three in Liber parabolarum Genesis; nine in Sermones XL, 2, XXVII, 3 (two citations), VI, 1, XXXIV, 1, including here the Sermo die b. Augustini Parisius habitus (2 citations) and the Sermo Paschalis of 1924 (2 citations); one in Processus contra mag. Echardum n. 48 (Proc. Col. II n. 91–99).

5 For the complete list of the citations, see E. Rubino, “Dâ von sprichet der liehte Dio- nysius, Eckhart e Dionigi Areopagita,” in Studi sulle fonti di Meister Eckhart, ed. L. Sturlese (Fribourg: 2008), 113–33.