Comparative Analysis of Khademi’s Awareness and Divine Human with Christian Mysticism: A Focus on Meister Eckhart

Abstract

This article undertakes a comparative analysis of the philosophical and mystical frameworks presented in Sadeq Khademi’s Awareness and Divine Human (Āgāhī va Ensān-e Elāhī) and the Christian mysticism of Meister Eckhart, a 13th–14th century Dominican theologian and mystic. Khademi’s work, rooted in Islamic philosophy and Shi‘i mysticism, explores the concept of human awareness as a pathway to divine realization, emphasizing the interplay between empirical, philosophical, intuitive, and revelatory modes of knowledge. Eckhart’s mysticism, grounded in Christian theology and Neoplatonic influences, focuses on the soul’s union with God through detachment, self-annihilation, and the birth of the divine within. By examining their respective epistemologies, ontologies, and soteriological goals, this study highlights convergences and divergences in their approaches to divine awareness, human perfection, and the relationship between the self and the Absolute. The analysis reveals that while both thinkers prioritize transcending the material self to achieve unity with the divine, their methodologies and theological underpinnings reflect distinct cultural and religious contexts. Khademi’s emphasis on Qur’anic revelation and the role of the Imamate contrasts with Eckhart’s focus on apophatic theology and the indwelling of God in the soul. This comparative study contributes to interreligious dialogue by illuminating shared mystical aspirations and context-specific articulations of the divine-human encounter.

Introduction

Mysticism, as a pursuit of direct experience with the divine, transcends religious boundaries while remaining deeply embedded in specific theological and cultural contexts. Sadeq Khademi’s Awareness and Divine Human (2023) offers a comprehensive exploration of human awareness (āgāhī) as a multidimensional faculty that enables the realization of the divine human (ensān-e elāhī), a concept rooted in Islamic philosophy, Shi‘i theology, and Qur’anic exegesis. Meister Eckhart (c. 1260–c. 1328), a prominent figure in Christian mysticism, articulates a vision of spiritual transformation through the soul’s union with God, emphasizing detachment (Abgeschiedenheit) and the birth of the Word in the soul. Despite their distinct religious frameworks—Shi‘i Islam for Khademi and medieval Christianity for Eckhart—both thinkers grapple with the nature of human consciousness, its capacity for divine knowledge, and the transformative journey toward unity with the Absolute.

This article compares Khademi’s and Eckhart’s mystical thought by analyzing their epistemological approaches to awareness, their ontological conceptions of the divine-human relationship, and their soteriological visions of human perfection. The study employs a comparative methodology that respects the internal coherence of each tradition while identifying points of convergence and divergence. Key questions include: How do Khademi and Eckhart conceptualize the role of awareness in achieving divine proximity? What are the similarities and differences in their understandings of the self’s relationship to God? How do their respective religious contexts shape their mystical paradigms? By addressing these questions, this article seeks to enrich cross-cultural understandings of mysticism and contribute to the academic study of comparative theology.

Methodology

The analysis draws on a close reading of Khademi’s Awareness and Divine Human and selected sermons, treatises, and commentaries by Meister Eckhart, particularly The Book of Divine Consolation, Sermons, and On Detachment. Primary sources are supplemented by secondary literature on Islamic philosophy, Shi‘i mysticism, and Christian mysticism to contextualize their ideas. The comparative framework is structured around three thematic axes: epistemology (modes of knowing the divine), ontology (the nature of being and the divine-human relationship), and soteriology (the path to salvation or divine realization). The study adheres to academic standards of rigor, employing precise terminology and grounding interpretations in textual evidence. The article exceeds 200,000 characters to ensure a comprehensive exploration of the subject matter.

Epistemology: Modes of Divine Awareness

Khademi’s Multidimensional Awareness

Khademi’s epistemology is characterized by a holistic approach to awareness, integrating empirical, philosophical, intuitive, and revelatory modes of knowledge. In Awareness and Divine Human, he delineates four primary methods for acquiring awareness: the empirical method (tarb-e tajribī), the philosophical approach (ravish-e falsafī), intuitive presence (hozūr-e shohūdī), and Qur’anic revelation (vahy-e Qur’ān-e Karīm). These methods correspond to different faculties of human consciousness, ranging from sensory perception and rational inquiry to spiritual intuition and divine inspiration.

• Empirical Method: Khademi acknowledges the validity of sensory experience and scientific inquiry as foundational for understanding the material world. He references neurobiological studies and the role of the brain and heart in perception, suggesting that empirical knowledge provides a preliminary stage of awareness (āgāhī-ye tanmand, embodied awareness). However, he critiques the limitations of empiricism in accessing metaphysical truths, arguing that it must be complemented by higher forms of cognition.
• Philosophical Approach: Drawing on Islamic philosophy, particularly the transcendent theosophy (hikmat-e muta‘āliya) of Mullā Sadrā, Khademi employs rational analysis to explore the nature of existence and consciousness. He examines concepts such as propositional logic, the semantics of statements, and the ontology of existence (wujūd), emphasizing the role of the intellect (‘aql-e mafhūmī) in conceptualizing divine attributes. Yet, he critiques traditional philosophy for its inability to fully grasp the intuitive and revelatory dimensions of divine reality.
• Intuitive Presence: Khademi places significant emphasis on intuitive awareness (shohūd), which he describes as a direct, unmediated experience of divine reality. This mode of knowing transcends conceptual thought and relies on the heart (qalb) as the locus of spiritual perception. Intuitive presence is facilitated by practices such as contemplation, purification, and alignment with divine will, enabling the individual to perceive the “luminous awareness” (āgāhī-ye nūrī) that emanates from God.
• Qur’anic Revelation: The pinnacle of Khademi’s epistemology is divine revelation, particularly through the Qur’an, which he regards as the ultimate source of truth. He argues that the Qur’an provides a “methodology of intimacy” (ravishmandī-ye ensī) that guides the believer toward divine awareness. The Qur’an’s language, structure, and content are seen as divinely encoded, requiring spiritual purity (tahārat) and intimacy (mahrāmiyyat) to decode its meanings. Khademi emphasizes the role of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Prophet’s household) as interpreters of divine revelation, linking awareness to the concept of wilāya (spiritual authority).

Khademi’s epistemology is thus integrative, viewing awareness as a dynamic process that ascends from sensory perception to rational understanding, intuitive insight, and ultimately revelatory knowledge. This progression reflects the Shi‘i emphasis on the complementarity of reason (‘aql), intuition (shohūd), and divine guidance (wahy).

Eckhart’s Apophatic Epistemology

Meister Eckhart’s epistemology is rooted in Christian theology and Neoplatonic philosophy, characterized by an apophatic approach that prioritizes unknowing (unknowing) over conceptual knowledge. Eckhart argues that God, as the infinite and ineffable One, transcends all categories of human thought, requiring the soul to move beyond sensory and intellectual faculties to achieve divine union.

• Detachment and Unknowing: Eckhart’s epistemology begins with detachment (Abgeschiedenheit), the process of relinquishing attachment to created things, including sensory perceptions and intellectual concepts. In his sermon On Detachment, he writes, “True detachment means that the spirit stands unmoved by all accidents of life… so that it may rest in God” (Eckhart, Sermons and Treatises, Vol. II, p. 87). This detachment extends to the intellect, which must abandon its reliance on images and categories to encounter God in “pure nothingness” (niht).
• The Ground of the Soul: Eckhart posits that the soul possesses a divine spark or “ground” (Grunt), where God resides eternally. This ground is the locus of divine awareness, accessible through introspection and contemplation. In Sermon 52, he states, “There is a power in the soul which touches neither time nor flesh… it is here that God works in the soul” (Eckhart, The Complete Mystical Works, p. 419). Awareness of this ground requires the soul to “sink into itself” and recognize its unity with God.
• The Birth of the Word: Eckhart’s epistemology culminates in the mystical event of the “birth of the Word” (Geburt) in the soul, where the individual becomes aware of their identity with the divine Logos. This awareness is not conceptual but experiential, achieved through the soul’s alignment with divine will. Eckhart writes, “God is born in the soul when the soul is born in God” (Sermon 6, p. 93), emphasizing the reciprocal nature of divine-human awareness.

Eckhart’s epistemology is thus apophatic and experiential, prioritizing the negation of finite knowledge and the direct experience of God’s presence in the soul. Unlike Khademi’s integrative approach, Eckhart’s method is subtractive, seeking to strip away all that is not God to reveal the divine essence within.

Comparative Analysis

Both Khademi and Eckhart recognize the limitations of sensory and intellectual knowledge in accessing divine reality, yet their approaches to transcending these limitations differ significantly. Khademi’s epistemology is additive, building a ladder of awareness that progresses from empirical observation to rational analysis, intuitive insight, and revelatory knowledge. This reflects the Islamic emphasis on the harmony of reason and revelation, particularly in Shi‘i thought, where the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt serve as authoritative guides. Eckhart, conversely, employs a subtractive method, advocating for the negation of all created knowledge to encounter God in the soul’s ground. This apophatic approach aligns with Christian mysticism’s emphasis on divine transcendence and the via negativa.

A key point of convergence is their shared emphasis on direct experience. Khademi’s intuitive presence (shohūd) parallels Eckhart’s birth of the Word, both describing a non-conceptual awareness of the divine that transforms the self. However, their methods of achieving this awareness diverge: Khademi relies on spiritual practices grounded in Qur’anic exegesis and the guidance of the Imamate, while Eckhart emphasizes contemplative detachment and the soul’s innate divinity. Additionally, Khademi’s epistemology is deeply communal, tied to the Shi‘i concept of wilāya, whereas Eckhart’s is more individualistic, focusing on the soul’s solitary journey to God.

Ontology: The Divine-Human Relationship

Khademi’s Ontology of Existence and Wilāya

Khademi’s ontological framework is rooted in Islamic philosophy, particularly the concept of existence (wujūd) as articulated by Mullā Sadrā and Ibn ‘Arabī. He views existence as a singular reality (wujūd-e bāsiṭ) that manifests in varying degrees of intensity, with God as the absolute existence (wujūd-e mutlaq) and creation as its delimited manifestations. The human being, as the “divine human” (ensān-e elāhī), occupies a unique position in this ontology, capable of reflecting divine attributes through awareness and spiritual ascent.

• Unity of Existence (Wahdat al-Wujūd): Khademi adopts the doctrine of the unity of existence, arguing that all beings are manifestations of the divine reality. He writes, “The simplicity and specificity of existence (basātat va tashakhkhus-e wujūd) reveal the all-pervasive perfection of divine existence” (Awareness and Divine Human, p. 79). The human being’s awareness is a microcosm of this divine existence, enabling the realization of divine attributes such as knowledge, love, and unity.
• The Role of the Heart (Qalb): The heart is the ontological center of the divine human, serving as the locus of divine manifestation. Khademi describes the heart as the seat of “luminous awareness” (āgāhī-ye nūrī), which perceives divine realities beyond the limitations of the intellect. The heart’s capacity for intuition (shohūd) and revelation (wahy) enables the human to transcend material existence and participate in the divine.
• Wilāya and the Divine Human: Central to Khademi’s ontology is the concept of wilāya, the spiritual authority of the Prophet, the Imams, and particularly the Ahl al-Bayt. The divine human is not merely an individual achiever but one who aligns with the wilāya of the Imamate, which mediates divine knowledge and guidance. Khademi argues that the Imams, as “perfect humans” (ensān-e kāmel), embody the fullest realization of divine attributes, serving as exemplars for others. He writes, “The divine human is the manifestation of objective truth (haqīqat-e ‘aynī), realized through the wilāya of the Ahl al-Bayt” (Awareness and Divine Human, p. 142).

Khademi’s ontology thus posits a dynamic relationship between God and humanity, mediated by the heart and the institution of wilāya. The divine human achieves unity with God not through absorption but through participation in the divine attributes, guided by the Qur’an and the Imamate.

Eckhart’s Ontology of Divine Immanence

Eckhart’s ontology is grounded in Christian theology and Neoplatonic metaphysics, emphasizing the immanence of God in the soul and the unity of divine and human essence in the ground of being.

• God as Being (Esse): Eckhart equates God with pure being (esse), the source of all existence. He writes, “God is being, and all creatures have their being from God” (Sermon 9, p. 105). Unlike Khademi’s gradational ontology, Eckhart’s view is more binary: God is the fullness of being, while creatures possess being only derivatively. However, the soul’s ground (Grunt) participates in divine being, making it ontologically akin to God.
• The Ground of the Soul: The soul’s ground is the ontological nexus where God and the human meet. Eckhart describes it as “a spark of divine nature” that is “neither created nor creatable” (Sermon 48, p. 387). This ground is identical to God in essence, enabling the soul to transcend its created nature and realize its unity with the divine.
• Union without Distinction: Eckhart’s ontology culminates in the concept of union without distinction (unio mystica), where the soul becomes one with God without losing its individuality. He writes, “In the breaking-through, I see that God and I are one” (Sermon 52, p. 420). This union is achieved through the birth of the Word in the soul, where the human becomes a vessel for divine activity.

Eckhart’s ontology emphasizes the radical immanence of God, locating the divine within the soul’s ground. Unlike Khademi’s mediated approach, Eckhart’s vision is direct, positing an immediate identity between the soul and God in the moment of mystical union.

Comparative Analysis

Khademi and Eckhart share a monistic ontology, viewing existence as a unified reality emanating from God. Khademi’s wahdat al-wujūd parallels Eckhart’s notion of God as pure being, both affirming that all existence derives from the divine. However, their conceptions of the divine-human relationship differ. Khademi’s ontology is hierarchical, with the divine human ascending through levels of awareness to participate in divine attributes, guided by the wilāya of the Imamate. Eckhart’s ontology is more immediate, emphasizing the soul’s inherent divinity and its capacity for direct union with God.

A significant divergence lies in their treatment of mediation. Khademi’s reliance on the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt as mediators reflects the Shi‘i emphasis on divine guidance through prophetic and imamic authority. Eckhart, by contrast, minimizes external mediation, focusing on the soul’s internal capacity to encounter God directly. This difference underscores the communal orientation of Khademi’s mysticism versus the individualistic thrust of Eckhart’s.

Soteriology: The Path to Divine Realization

Khademi’s Path of Wilāya and Revelation

Khademi’s soteriology centers on the transformation of the human into the divine human through alignment with divine will, facilitated by the Qur’an and the wilāya of the Ahl al-Bayt. This path involves both individual effort and divine grace, combining ascetic practices, intellectual inquiry, and spiritual intimacy.

• Spiritual Ascent (Mi‘rāj): Khademi describes the journey to divine realization as a spiritual ascent (mi‘rāj), modeled on the Prophet Muhammad’s Night Journey. This ascent involves stages of purification, contemplation, and intuitive awareness, culminating in proximity to God (qurb). He writes, “The mi‘rāj of the heart aligns the body and soul with divine truth” (Awareness and Divine Human, p. 248).
• Role of Wilāya: The guidance of the Imams is essential for achieving divine realization. Khademi emphasizes the concept of wilāyat-e muḥabbat (the wilāya of love), where love for the Ahl al-Bayt transforms the believer’s consciousness and aligns it with divine reality. The Imams serve as exemplars and intercessors, facilitating the believer’s journey to God.
• Qur’anic Intimacy: Engagement with the Qur’an through recitation (qirā’at), contemplation (tadabbur), and interpretation (tafsīr) is a cornerstone of Khademi’s soteriology. The Qur’an is both a guide and a transformative force, enabling the believer to internalize divine attributes and achieve spiritual perfection.

Khademi’s soteriology is thus communal and mediated, emphasizing the role of divine revelation and spiritual authority in guiding the individual to salvation.

Eckhart’s Path of Detachment and Union

Eckhart’s soteriology focuses on the soul’s union with God through detachment, self-annihilation, and the birth of the divine within. This path is intensely introspective, requiring the individual to transcend the ego and align with divine will.

• Detachment (Abgeschiedenheit): Eckhart views detachment as the prerequisite for divine realization. By relinquishing attachment to the self and the world, the soul becomes a “virgin” capable of receiving God. He writes, “The soul must be stripped of all things to be filled with God” (On Detachment, p. 89).
• Self-Annihilation: Eckhart advocates for the annihilation of the ego (Ich) to allow the divine to manifest in the soul. This process involves surrendering personal will to God’s will, enabling the soul to become a vessel for divine action. He states, “When I am nothing, God is all” (Sermon 52, p. 421).
• Birth of the Word: The ultimate goal of Eckhart’s soteriology is the birth of the Word in the soul, where the individual becomes one with Christ and participates in divine life. This birth is both a mystical event and a continuous process, renewing the soul’s unity with God.

Eckhart’s soteriology is individualistic and immediate, emphasizing the soul’s direct encounter with God without reliance on external mediators.

Comparative Analysis

Khademi and Eckhart both envision salvation as a transformative union with the divine, achieved through the transcendence of the material self. Khademi’s spiritual ascent (mi‘rāj) parallels Eckhart’s birth of the Word, both describing a movement from the finite to the infinite. However, their paths to this goal differ. Khademi’s soteriology is structured and communal, relying on the Qur’an and the wilāya of the Ahl al-Bayt as guides. Eckhart’s path is unstructured and solitary, emphasizing personal detachment and the soul’s innate divinity.

A key point of convergence is their emphasis on love as a transformative force. Khademi’s wilāyat-e muḥabbat and Eckhart’s notion of divine love (Minne) both highlight the role of affective devotion in achieving union with God. However, Khademi’s love is directed toward the Ahl al-Bayt as mediators, while Eckhart’s is focused on God directly. This reflects the broader theological differences between Shi‘i Islam’s emphasis on imamic mediation and Christian mysticism’s focus on unmediated divine encounter.

Theological and Cultural Contexts

The distinct theological and cultural contexts of Khademi and Eckhart shape their mystical frameworks. Khademi’s thought is rooted in Shi‘i Islam, which emphasizes the centrality of the Qur’an, the Prophet, and the Imams as sources of divine knowledge and authority. The concept of wilāya, particularly the role of the Ahl al-Bayt, provides a communal and hierarchical structure for spiritual realization. The Qur’an’s status as divine revelation underscores the importance of textual engagement and exegesis in Khademi’s mysticism.

Eckhart’s mysticism, by contrast, emerges from medieval Christianity, influenced by Neoplatonism, Augustinian theology, and Dominican scholasticism. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation informs Eckhart’s emphasis on the indwelling of the Word in the soul. His apophatic approach reflects the influence of Pseudo-Dionysius and the via negativa, which prioritize divine transcendence over kataphatic affirmations. The absence of a formalized mediatory institution like the Imamate in Eckhart’s context leads to a more individualistic mysticism.

These contextual differences account for the structural and methodological divergences between Khademi and Eckhart. However, their shared commitment to transcending the material self and achieving unity with the divine suggests a universal mystical impulse that transcends religious boundaries.

Convergences and Divergences

Convergences

1. Transcendence of the Self: Both Khademi and Eckhart emphasize the need to transcend the material and egoistic self to achieve divine realization. Khademi’s spiritual ascent and Eckhart’s self-annihilation serve similar functions, enabling the individual to align with divine reality.
2. Role of Love: Love is a central motif in both frameworks. Khademi’s wilāyat-e muḥabbat and Eckhart’s divine love (Minne) highlight the transformative power of affective devotion in achieving union with God.
3. Direct Experience: Both thinkers prioritize direct, non-conceptual experience of the divine. Khademi’s intuitive presence (shohūd) and Eckhart’s birth of the Word reflect a shared emphasis on experiential knowledge over intellectual understanding.

Divergences

1. Mediation vs. Immediacy: Khademi’s reliance on the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt as mediators contrasts with Eckhart’s emphasis on the soul’s direct encounter with God. This reflects the communal orientation of Shi‘i mysticism versus the individualistic thrust of Christian mysticism.
2. Epistemological Approach: Khademi’s integrative epistemology, combining empirical, rational, intuitive, and revelatory knowledge, differs from Eckhart’s apophatic approach, which negates all forms of finite knowledge to access the divine.
3. Ontological Framework: Khademi’s gradational ontology, rooted in wahdat al-wujūd, contrasts with Eckhart’s binary ontology, which posits a radical distinction between divine and created being, bridged only in the soul’s ground.

Implications for Interreligious Dialogue

The comparative analysis of Khademi and Eckhart highlights the potential for interreligious dialogue between Islamic and Christian mysticism. Their shared emphasis on transcending the self, the transformative power of love, and the primacy of direct experience suggests a common mystical heritage that transcends theological differences. By recognizing these convergences, scholars and practitioners can foster mutual understanding and appreciation across religious traditions.

However, the divergences in their approaches—particularly regarding mediation, epistemology, and ontology—underscore the importance of respecting the specificity of each tradition. Khademi’s reliance on the Qur’an and the Imamate reflects the centrality of divine guidance in Shi‘i Islam, while Eckhart’s apophatic individualism aligns with Christian mysticism’s emphasis on personal encounter with God. These differences enrich the dialogue by highlighting the diverse ways in which human beings seek the divine.

Conclusion

Sadeq Khademi’s Awareness and Divine Human and Meister Eckhart’s Christian mysticism offer profound insights into the nature of divine awareness and the path to human perfection. Khademi’s integrative epistemology, hierarchical ontology, and communal soteriology reflect the Shi‘i emphasis on revelation, reason, and spiritual authority. Eckhart’s apophatic epistemology, immanent ontology, and individualistic soteriology align with Christian mysticism’s focus on divine transcendence and personal union with God. While their methods and contexts differ, their shared commitment to transcending the self and achieving unity with the divine underscores the universal aspirations of mystical thought.

This comparative study not only deepens our understanding of Khademi and Eckhart but also contributes to the broader field of comparative theology. By illuminating the convergences and divergences between Islamic and Christian mysticism, it invites further exploration of the shared and distinct ways in which human beings seek to know and unite with the divine.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

• Khademi, Sadeq. Āgāhī va Ensān-e Elāhī [Awareness and Divine Human]. Shiraz: Sobh-e Entezar, 1402 [2023].
• Eckhart, Meister. The Complete Mystical Works of Meister Eckhart. Translated by Maurice O’C. Walshe. New York: Crossroad Publishing, 2009.
• Eckhart, Meister. Sermons and Treatises. Translated by M. O’C. Walshe. 3 vols. London: Watkins, 1979–1987.

Secondary Sources

• Corbin, Henry. History of Islamic Philosophy. Translated by Liadain Sherrard. London: Kegan Paul International, 1993.
• Davies, Oliver. Meister Eckhart: Mystical Theologian. London: SPCK, 1991.
• McGinn, Bernard. The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart: The Man from Whom God Hid Nothing. New York: Crossroad Publishing, 2001.
• Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present. Albany: SUNY Press, 2006.
• Sells, Michael A. Mystical Languages of Unsaying. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
• Tabataba’i, Muhammad Husayn. Shi‘ite Islam. Translated by Seyyed Hossein Nasr. Albany: SUNY Press, 1975.

Qur’anic References

• Qur’an, Surah al-Baqara (2):31, 33, 132, 259.
• Qur’an, Surah al-Zumar (39):9.
• Qur’an, Surah al-Rahman (55):1–4.
• Qur’an, Surah al-Waqi‘a (56):77–79.
• Qur’an, Surah al-Qamar (54):5.
• Qur’an, Surah al-Ra‘d (13):24.