The Mystical Element in Heidegger's Thought

John D. Caputo offers a masterful dialectic between 13th Century thinker Meister Eckhart and 20th Century dweller Martin Heidegger. This is an essential book in understanding Heidegger's concern with disenchantment, the contemporary denial of mystery, and the necessity for the poetic mystical. Caputo also (possibly unintentionally) demonstrates the imperative study of Heidegger's Der Satz vom Grund ( The Principle of Reason (Studies in Continental Thought) ) for any reader. This book explores an requisite and often neglected aspect of Martin Heidegger's thinking. This text could also be understood as a long needed stepping stone between Carl Jung's exploration in alchemy and Heidegger's thought.Matthew Giobbi, Ph.D.Author of: A Postcognitive Negation: The Sadomasochistic Dialectic of American Psychology

One of his best,

A good book on Heidegger's relationship with mystical thought, especially that of Meister Eckhart, the fourteenth century German sage.This should be read along with Katrin Froese's "Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Daoist Thought," and other works exploring Heidegger and Taoism (or Daoism). Froese is quite open to the notion that Heidegger was mystically inclined, whereas as Caputo denies it.Indeed, one can argue that this book is deliberately mistitled, since in the preface Caputo loudly downplays Heidegger's mysticism. The book turns out to be a detailed refutation of the notion that Heidegger was himself mystically inclined. A less misleading title is therefore imperative.In this regard, this is a rather wrongheaded thesis. It becomes clear that non-mystical academics will never openly proclaim Heidegger to be mystically inclined, because to admit it means the loss of millions of students and lay-readers the world over to mystical doctrines. The consequences to orthodox religion are enormous. Therefore, academics have agreed among themselves to never present Heidegger as a mystical thinker. Caputo goes only so far as to deem him "poetic." That's a pure cliche, known to even beginners. Although true, it tells us little.Caputo's elaborate attempts to refute Heidegger's mystical ideas do not succeed. His whole approach is wrongheaded and duplicitous. After all, why compare Heidegger's thought with one mystic from 600 years ago, as if that is all we need? Are we to believe that the mystical tradition itself begins and ends with one sage? Apparently we are, since Caputo makes no mention of any other mystic of importance. There is no mention of William Blake, Jacob Bohme, Nicolas Cusa, Isaac Luria, St. John of the Cross, or any later thinker such as Rudolf Steiner, Owen Barfield, Gabriel Marcel or Emerson. I could list more than a dozen other thinkers from the mystical tradition that are not dealt with here. What kind of analysis is this, one is bound to ask?Caputo's work deals only with Heidegger in connection with ONE mystical sage, Meister Eckhart. A comparison of the two men's works and ideas proves fascinating to be sure. But what of the entire mystical tradition from Eckhart's time onward? Forgive me but if you set out to prove that Heidegger's work is not mystical, you must compare and contrast it not to one man's thought, but to the ENTIRE mystical tradition. Then, and only then, is the thesis complete and definitive. Only then are educated readers convinced.Comparing Heidegger with a single mystical sage (regardless of how close their ideas are) is hardly sufficient to substantiate the claim that Heidegger himself was in no way a mystical thinker. The whole attempt is bound to fail. One must compare and contrast Heidegger’s corpus with the work of many more of the eminent and credible mystical thinkers from Meister Eckhart’s time on. This study would include the Romantics and Idealists, as well as Theosophists, Anthroposophists, and men from other esoteric schools. It is far from sufficient to merely classify Heidegger’s work as “poetic” or state that it is on the periphery of mysticism, or that he “keeps their company.” This is highly reductive, ungenerous and misleading.There is sleight-of-hand at work here. This is a very Jesuitical work, meant to deceive readers. Although Heidegger was not a Christian or a Christian mystic, his work clearly constitutes a step back out of traditional schools of metaphysics and religion into genuine mysticism. I prefer to deem his work as High Mysticism. His later work absolutely confirms that he was a Mystical Naturalist and Mystical Aesthete. The protestations to the contrary from the institutionalized ivory-tower propagandists of the Establishment must not be taken as the definitive last words on Heidegger's alleged Atheism and Secularism.Heidegger carved out a middle ground which was unknown before his time. Consequently, academics have no idea how to categorize him and dread calling him a mystic. They can't get a precise map-reading on him or assault his position no matter how they try. They really don't know what to do with his ideas, even though they can expound upon them well enough. They are fortunate that his ideas are so unpalatable to the masses of humankind. Hence, the deceptiveness continues. Heidegger is classified as an Atheist, and that is that. The ship of fools sails placidly into the sunset.*** *** ***

Really shows how Heideggers' work in later years treads the same ground as mysticism. Heideggers later work was all aboutSaying the Unsayable.