near Gotha. One document refers to him as de (from,
of) Hochheim, but some scholars consider this a familial
rather than a geographical designation and use it to bol-
ster the claim that Eckhart was of noble origin. He most
likely entered the Order of Preachers (Dominicans) at
the priory in Erfurt at about the age of fi fteen. Possibly
he received his early training in the arts at Paris and was
witness to Bishop Stephen Tempier’s condemnation
of 219 articles of theology including several taught by
Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274), the Dominican order’s most
distinguished theologian. At any rate, Eckhart is docu-
mented in Paris lecturing on Peter Lombard’s Sentences
in 1293–1294. Prior to this he had absolved the various
stages of Dominican formation: one year novitiate, two
years studying the order’s constitutions and the divine
offi ce, about fi ve years studying philosophy, with three
additional years devoted to theology. Eckhart was no
doubt also among those chosen for further study, very
likely at the order’s studium generale (early form of
university) in Cologne, where he might have had direct
contact with Albert the Great. After lecturing in Paris
Eckhart advances rapidly within the order. He is prior
in Erfurt 1294–1298, professor in Paris 1302–1303,
provincial of the newly formed German Dominican
province of Saxony 1303–1311, and again professor
in Paris 1312–1313. There followed several years of
preaching in the vernacular, to Beguines and nuns
among others, in Strasbourg and then later in Cologne,
where he might also have had professorial duties at the
studium generale.
In 1325 the fi rst clouds appear when some of Eckhart’s
teachings are investigated as to their orthodoxy. Eckhart
is cleared, but the following year Henry of Virneburg,
archbishop of Cologne, begins inquisitorial proceedings
against him. Eckhart responds to lists of suspect theses
taken from a broad selection of his Latin and German
works and, on January 24, 1327, citing delays and the
public scandal the proceedings are causing, appeals to
the pope. On February 13 he protests his innocence
from the pulpit of the Dominican church in Cologne
and soon thereafter travels to Avignon, where a papal
commission begins an investigation. On March 27, 1329,
some time after Eckhart’s death, a papal bull, In agro
dominico, defi nitively ends the investigation. In it sev-
enteen articles are condemned as heretical, two of which
Eckhart claimed never to have taught. Eleven others are
judged to be evil sounding but capable of an orthodox
interpretation. The bull states that Eckhart, before his
death, recanted the articles and anything else that might
have caused error in the minds of his audience quoad
illum sensum. In other words, he recanted a heretical
interpretation of his words, not the words themselves.
Eckhart’s writings can be divided into Latin works
(professional theological treatises, learned commentar-
ies on scripture, and some sermons or sermon outlines)
and German works (spiritual tracts and, especially, ser-
mons). Because of Eckhart’s sad fate, his Latin works
were generally forgotten and only rediscovered in the
late nineteenth century. His German works became
mixed with those of other spiritual authors or were often
passed on with false or no attribution. As a result, the
task of creating a reliable critical edition of the German
works begun by Josef Quint in 1936 is just now nearing
completion. Disagreement still remains concerning the
authenticity of many German sermons not yet included
in the critical edition, and discussion of their chronol-
ogy has just begun. Eckhart is admired both for the
brilliance of his mystical thought and for his virtuosity
in expressing it. The fi rst admirers of Eckhart after his
rediscovery in the nineteenth century, because of their
unfamiliarity with medieval philosophy and theology,
made uninformed judgments about his originality in
thought and language. Although scholars still view him
as an original thinker, he is now recognized as being
original within the context of the already well-devel-
oped system of scholastic thought. His mysticism has
been termed speculative to indicate both its imbedded-
ness in scholastic philosophy and theology as well as
the fact that he does not talk about mystical union in
terms of personal experience. Rather, he describes the
metaphysical constitution of both the human soul and
God’s nature that makes union possible. For Eckhart
mystical union between God and the soul rests on
their metaphysical oneness. Eckhart sees creatures as
differing from God, but they differ only through the
nothingness limiting the being that they possess; and
being is God. Eckhart distinguishes between two kinds
of being in creatures: formal or limited being, which
constitutes them in existence separate from God, and
virtual being—the being of creatures in the mind of God
existing from eternity. The virtual being of creatures at
one with God’s being is their more real and vital being.
Their formal being is a mere shadow by comparison.
This distinction between formal and virtual being in
creatures provides the context for understanding most
of Eckhart’s characteristic doctrines. Thus, for example,
he urges us to become as poor in spirit as we were (in
the mind of God) before we were (formally existing).
In other words, we are to “reduce” our existence to
existence in God. So, too, in becoming the just man,
we do so by uniting completely with justice, which is
identical with God’s being. Through our oneness with
God’s being the birth of the Son takes place in us, as it
does in Bethlehem, and united with this divine action
we become both the begotten (Son) and the “begetter”
(Father). The human intellect, that faculty most essential
in establishing our likeness with God, is in its purely
spiritual activity the spark of the soul in which we most
throw off the confi nes of our creatureliness and imitate
divine activity. And through detachment, a key term inMEISTER ECKHART