Comparative Mysticism and the Problem of Interpretation: Rumi and Meister Eckhart

Modern comparative studies of mysticism have taken two opposing approaches: essentialist or phenomenologist, which highlights commonalities across mystical traditions, and constructivist, which emphasizes distinctions shaped by different backgrounds. This article proposes an alternative methodology that uses comparison as a tool for clarification rather than imposition, focusing on the specific characters, central themes, and focal points of each tradition. Applying this method to the practical mysticism of Jalal al-Din Rumi and Meister Eckhart demonstrates how comparison can serve as a "mirror" that reveals each tradition's unique features, rather than as a "mold" that forces them into preconceived categories.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Since the second half of the nineteenth century, modern comparative studies of mysticism have generally adopted one of two divergent approaches. One group, generally labeled as essentialist or phenomenologist, has used comparative methodology in order to highlight the commonalities between different mystics or mystical traditions, hence establishing universal structures and essential meanings from what seem to be overlapping aspects. The other group has been termed, inter alia, constructivist, particularly since the last third of the twentieth century, and it has used comparison as a tool for accentuating the distinctions between mystical systems and demonstrating how dissimilar backgrounds lead to the construction of differing mystical constructs. Avoiding overemphasis on either affinities or distinctions, this article suggests an alternative methodology, which utilizes comparison in highlighting the specific characters, central themes and focal points of its object of study. Applying this method to the practical mysticism of Jalal al-Din Rumi vis-à-vis that of Meister Eckhart demonstrates how comparison can be appropriately used as an apparatus of clarification and comprehension rather than as a device for imposition or reduction – as a “mirror” rather than as a “mold.”