John Scotus Eriugena: The Division of Nature, the Human Microcosm, and God as Nothing

🕑 16 min read

The Irish Scholar at the Frankish Court

John Scotus Eriugena arrived at the court of Charles the Bald, King of the Franks, around 845 CE. "Scotus" in ninth-century Latin meant Irish, and "Eriugena" means something like "born in Ireland." Almost nothing is known about his life before he appeared at court, but his intellectual formation must have been exceptional. He could read Greek with a fluency that was virtually unique among ninth-century Latin scholars. He knew the full range of Greek patristic theology, including authors whose works had never been translated into Latin. He was, as Bertrand Russell later observed, "the most astonishing person of the ninth century."

The Carolingian court at which Eriugena worked was the most intellectually ambitious in the post-Roman Latin West. Charles the Bald was a serious patron of learning who surrounded himself with scholars, poets, and theologians. He gave Eriugena a position at the Palace School and, critically, commissioned him to translate Pseudo-Dionysius from Greek into Latin, a task that would have enormous consequences for the subsequent history of Western mystical theology.

What is known about Eriugena's death is largely legendary. One account, recorded centuries later, claims that his students stabbed him to death with their writing pens because he insisted on teaching them to think for themselves. This is almost certainly apocryphal, and the circumstances of his actual death around 877 CE are unknown. The legend is interesting precisely because it captures something true about his teaching style: he was a philosopher who pushed his students to think, not just to memorise, in an age that tended to prefer the latter.

The Translations: Dionysius, Maximus, and Gregory

Eriugena's translation of the Corpus Dionysiacum in 858 CE was the single most important act of cultural transmission of the ninth century. The works of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, the four treatises and ten letters that defined apophatic theology and described the nine angelic orders, had existed in Greek since around 500 CE. A previous translation by Hilduin (around 838) was unusable for serious philosophical purposes. Eriugena's translation was accurate, philosophically engaged, and opened the Dionysian world to the entire Latin West.

He also translated the Ambigua and the Quaestiones ad Thalassium of Maximus the Confessor (580-662 CE), the greatest Eastern theologian since Origen, who had developed the concepts of cosmic recapitulation and the human being as microcosm. And he translated the De hominis opificio (On the Making of Man) of Gregory of Nyssa, the Cappadocian mystic whose account of the soul's infinite ascent toward God (epektasis) Eriugena found deeply congenial.

These translations were not passive. Eriugena engaged actively with what he was translating, and the Periphyseon, written a few years after completing the translations, shows how thoroughly he had digested and transformed his sources. The four-fold division of nature is not found in Dionysius or Maximus; it is Eriugena's own synthesis, built from those materials but genuinely original.

The Periphyseon: All of Reality in Four Divisions

The Periphyseon (its Greek title, meaning something like "about nature" or "on natures") was written around 862-866 CE. Formally, it is a dialogue between a Teacher (Nutritor) and a Pupil (Alumnus), spanning five books. The Teacher is clearly Eriugena himself. The Pupil asks questions that allow the Teacher to develop the argument in detail.

The work begins with a bold definition: "nature" (natura) means the totality of all things, everything that is and, crucially, everything that is not. This immediately raises the question: what are the things that are not? Eriugena's answer opens the philosophical depth of the work. Things can "not be" in several ways: they can be beyond the capacity of sense or intellect to grasp, they can be in a potential state not yet actualised, they can be the privation of their opposite, or they can exceed all finite categories to the point where they can only be approached through negation.

God belongs to this last class. God is not a thing among things. God is the source of all things, which means God exceeds the category of "thing" entirely. In this strict sense, God is among "the things that are not." But this is not a limitation on God. It is a recognition of God's absolute transcendence.

The four divisions are not four separate things. They are four aspects of a single, unitary process: the procession of all reality from God and its return to God. The first and fourth divisions are both God, but God as beginning and God as end. The symmetry is deliberate: the process is circular, and the circle is God's own self-expression and self-return.

God as Nothing: The Most Radical Apophasis

Eriugena's most memorable and most frequently misunderstood theological claim is that God is "nothing" (nihilum). He does not mean that God does not exist. He means something far more precise and philosophically demanding.

The argument runs like this: to say that something "is" in the ordinary sense is to assign it to the category of existing things. But God is not a member of any category, including the category of existing things, because categories are finite divisions and God is absolutely infinite. God does not have being as a property; God is the source from which being flows into all things. This means that God is "above being" in exactly the sense that Pseudo-Dionysius had argued: not deficiently below being but superabundantly above it.

Procession and Return: The Cosmic Arc

Eriugena's cosmology follows the Neoplatonic pattern of procession and return, but gives it a distinctively Christian shape. The procession (processio) begins in the first division: God as source. God's self-knowledge creates the Primordial Causes in the divine Word (second division). These Primordial Causes are the eternal patterns or archetypes from which all finite things are derived: the Ideas of all the species, all the qualities, all the numbers, all the structures of the created world.

From the Primordial Causes proceed the finite creatures of the third division: the world of sense, time, and space as we know it. This is not a degradation or a fall. It is a free self-communication of divine generosity. God creates not from necessity or lack but from the overflow of divine goodness, which by its nature gives itself.

The return (reditus) reverses the sequence. Finite things return to their Primordial Causes in the Word. The Primordial Causes return to God. At the final restoration, which Eriugena describes in thoroughly Origenist terms (he was a careful reader of Origen through Gregory of Nyssa), all material reality is resolved back into its spiritual principles, all spiritual principles return to the divine Word, and the Word is in God. Not as if creation never happened, but as if creation has been perfectly fulfilled in its return to its source.

The Human Being as Microcosm

Eriugena's anthropology is among the most exalted in the Western philosophical tradition, and it is one of the areas where his thought resonates most strongly with Anthroposophical perspectives. He develops the ancient idea of the human being as microcosm, inherited through Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor, into a systematic account of the human soul's place in the cosmic structure.

Within the human being, all levels of creation are present and active. The human body participates in the physical world. The senses and desires connect the human being to the animal world. The reason connects the human being to the angelic intellects. The highest part of the soul, which Eriugena calls the apex mentis (peak of the mind) or synderesis (the spark of the soul), participates directly in the divine light and is, in some sense, always already in God.

But the most significant claim is about the return. At the final restoration, it is through the human being that the entire created order is recapitulated and returned to God. The human soul does not simply return itself to God. It carries the whole of creation with it. The material world, which in Eriugena's cosmology is the lowest level of the third division, is not simply discarded at the return but is transfigured and taken up into the human soul's return to God. The body is resolved into the soul, the soul into its intellect, the intellect into God.

The Predestination Controversy and Condemnations

Eriugena's philosophical career was not without controversy. In 851 CE, a Frankish monk named Gottschalk of Orbais was condemned at the Council of Mainz for teaching a doctrine of "double predestination": God has predestined some to heaven and others to hell, and those predestined to hell cannot escape their fate. Hincmar, Archbishop of Reims, asked Eriugena to write a refutation.

The refutation Eriugena produced, the De praedestinatione, was so philosophically radical that it ended up being condemned alongside Gottschalk's original position. Eriugena denied double predestination in the strongest terms: because God is the Good, God can only predestine toward good. What looks like predestination to evil is not predestination at all but the soul's own choice and its natural consequences. He also argued that divine foreknowledge does not determine human choice, using a variation on the argument that Boethius had made in the Consolation of Philosophy.

The Periphyseon itself was condemned by Pope Honorius III in 1225 and ordered to be burned. The condemnation came partly because Eriugena's language of God "creating himself" and God "becoming all in all" was read as pantheism (the identification of God and creation) and partly because his universal apokatastasis (all rational beings returned to God, with no eternal punishment) contradicted the established doctrine of eternal hell.

Influence on Eckhart, Cusa, and the Mystical Tradition

Eriugena's influence on later Christian mysticism was significant but largely underground, given the condemnations of his work. It flowed through several channels.

Meister Eckhart (c.1260-1328) never cited Eriugena directly (it would have been dangerous to do so), but the structural parallels between the Periphyseon and Eckhart's mystical theology are unmistakable. Eckhart's account of the Godhead as the ground beyond the Trinity, the abyss beyond being into which the soul's spark returns, is directly parallel to Eriugena's first division of nature as God beyond being and non-being. Eckhart's concept of the "birth of the Word in the soul" resonates with Eriugena's account of God's self-knowledge creating the Primordial Causes.

Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464) knew Eriugena's work and drew on it for his concept of coincidentia oppositorum (the coincidence of opposites in God) and for his account of God as maximum and minimum simultaneously. The Periphyseon's God who is both absolutely beyond being and the ground within all being is structurally parallel to Cusa's God who is both the maximum of all greatness and the minimum of all smallness.

Through Eckhart and Cusa, Eriugenan ideas filtered into the Rhineland mystical tradition, into the devotio moderna movement, and into the broader stream of Northern European mysticism that shaped Jakob Bohme, the Rosicrucians, and ultimately the German Idealist tradition of Schelling and Hegel.

Rudolf Steiner and Eriugena's Cosmic Knowledge

Rudolf Steiner discusses Eriugena in GA 18 (Riddles of Philosophy) in the context of the transmission of genuine spiritual knowledge from the ancient mystery traditions into the medieval period through Christian Neoplatonism. Eriugena represents for Steiner the moment at which the richest tradition of Eastern Christian philosophical theology, which had preserved more of the ancient mystery knowledge in philosophical form than the Latin West had, was finally made available to the West through translation and creative synthesis.

Steiner identified several specific aspects of Eriugena's philosophy as reflecting accurate spiritual knowledge. The four-fold division of nature, while expressed in philosophical terms, captures something of the real structure of cosmic existence: the formless divine ground from which everything proceeds, the realm of archetypes or Primordial Causes (which in Anthroposophical terms corresponds to the realm of spiritual prototypes), the physical-sensible world of created existence, and the divine as the goal of return.

The account of the human being as microcosm carrying all creation within itself has a direct parallel in Steiner's cosmological anthropology. In Steiner's account of human evolution, the human being is not simply the latest product of cosmic evolution but the being in whom the entire previous evolution of Saturn, Sun, Moon, and Earth conditions is recapitulated and carried forward. The human body, soul, and spirit contain within themselves the traces of all prior cosmic development. At the goal of evolution, it is through the human being that the cosmos achieves its spiritual fulfilment. This is structurally parallel to Eriugena's claim that the cosmos achieves its return to God through the human soul's ascending movement.

Frequently Asked Questions