Mystics of the Renaissance and their relation to modern thought, including Meister Eckhart, Tauler, Paracelsus, Jacob Boehme, Giordano Bruno, and othersSteiner, Rudolf
Religion
Mystics of the Renaissance and their relation to modern thought, including Meister Eckhart, Tauler, Paracelsus, Jacob Boehme, Giordano Bruno, and others
Steiner, Rudolf
Mysticism
With these seven principles of human nature, Paracelsus aims at
expressing nothing else than the facts of inner and outer experience.
The fact remains unquestioned that, what for human experience
subdivides itself into a multiplicity of seven factors, is in higher
reality a unity. But the higher insight exists just for the very
purpose of exhibiting the unity in all that appears as multiplicity
to man, owing to his bodily and spiritual organisation. On the level
of the highest insight, Paracelsus strives to the utmost to fuse the
unitary Root-Being of the world with his own spirit. But he knows that
man can only cognise Nature in its spirituality, when he enters into
immediate intercourse with that Nature. Man does not grasp Nature by
peopling it from within himself with arbitrarily assumed entities; but
by accepting and valuing it as it is, as Nature. Paracelsus therefore
does not seek for God or for spirit in Nature; but Nature, just as it
comes before his eyes, is for him wholly, immediately divine. Must one
then first ascribe to the plant a soul after the kind of a human soul,
in order to find the spiritual?
Hence Paracelsus explains to himself the development of things, so far
as that is possible with the scientific means of his age, altogether
in such wise that he conceives this development as a sensible-natural
process. He makes all things to proceed from the root-matter, the
root-water (Yliaster). And he regards as a further natural process the
separation of the root-matter (which he also calls the great Limbus)
into the four elements: Water, Earth, Fire and Air. When he says that
the “Divine Word” called forth the multiplicity of beings from the
root-matter, one must understand this also only in such wise as perhaps
in more recent natural science one must understand the relationship
of Force to Matter. A “Spirit,” in a matter-of-fact sense, is not yet
present at this stage. This “Spirit” is no matter-of-fact basis of the
natural process, but a matter-of-fact result of that process.
This Spirit does not create Nature, but develops itself out of Nature.
Not a few statements of Paracelsus might be interpreted in the opposite
sense. Thus when he says: “There is nothing which does not possess and
carry with it also a spirit hidden in it and that lives not withal.
Also, not only has _that_ life, which stirs itself and moves, as men,
animals, the worms in the earth, the birds in the sky and the fishes in
water, but all bodily and actual things as well.”
But in such sayings Paracelsus only aims at warning us against that
superficial contemplation of Nature which fancies it can exhaust the
being of a thing with a couple of “stuck-up” concepts, according to
Goethe’s apt expression. He aims not at putting into things some
imaginary being, but at setting in motion all the powers of man to
bring out that which in actual fact lies in the thing.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account