perfection, contain a series of theological questions posed by Elsbeth and answered by the Servant. He only permits her to ask them in the first place, because “du ordenlich dur dú rehten mitel bist gezogen [you have come in an orderly manner through the right means].”78 Once all her curiosity has been satisfied, the daughter exclaims at the conclusion of the book:
gelopt sie dú ewig warheit, daz ich von úweren wisen und leblichen worten so schon bewiset bin dez ersten beginnes eins anvahenden menschen, und der ordenlicher mitel midens und lidens und übens eins zůnemenden menschen, und mit gůtem underscheide in togenlicher wise der aller nehsten blossen warheit.79
Praised be eternal Truth, that by your wise and vivid words I have been so well instructed about the first steps of a beginner, about the orderly means of renunciation, suffering, and the exercises of a progressing person, and, with good discernment, about the most perfect and bare truth in a mysterious way.
Stagel here sums up the didactic program of the Vita, emphasizing order as necessary for the path and discernment for the goal. Achievement of mystical perfection is a gradual process with various stages on the way—beginning, progressing, and perfect. Certain kinds of ascetic or devotional practices are appropriate for some levels of mystical achievement and not for others. True progression requires orderliness for the development of discernment, without which one cannot grasp the most hidden truth.
This final point is developed further in the Little Book of Truth, where underscheit also proves a structuring theme, in Susanne Köbele’s words the “intellectual center”80 of the work. As Loris Sturlese has shown, this dialogue systematically takes up and defends the propositions that were condemned in Eckhart’s heresy trial.81 Seuse largely accomplishes this by qualifying the statements as true only according to human perception, not in essence. Susanne Köbele argues that the primary thrust of the Little Book of Truth is to limit Eckhart’s mystical-philosophical language, which operated analogically, by reintroducing difference (underscheit) and thus blocking the heretical movement toward indistinct union.82
Köbele’s argument that underscheit drives the Little Book of Truth is corroborated by two further observations. Namely, the disciple defends this very principle by differentiating between different kinds of difference and stating that the object motivating the discussion of distinction is right order. Although most of the work recounts conversations in which Seuse as the “disciple” interrogates the allegorical figure of Truth, in one chapter Seuse himself is put to the test by a sentient image (ein vernúnftiges bilde) that identifies itself as the Nameless Wild One (daz namelos wilde). The dialogue begins when the disciple asks this figure, “wa lendet din bescheidenheit? [where does your discernment lead?]” and receives the answer, “in lediger friheit [to unencumbered freedom].”83 To argue against the false freedom and misdirected bescheidenheit of this strange figure, the disciple differentiates between underscheit as good judgment or discernment, underschidunge as separation or disjuncture, and underscheidenheit as distinction between things that may be conjoined.84 Body and soul are underscheiden, since they are not the same thing, but they cannot exist in underschidunge if the person is to be alive. This distinction between the two different kinds of distinction is important, because it also describes the relationship between the three persons of the Godhead. Furthermore, and most importantly for the disciple’s argument, the difference between underscheidenheit and underschidunge justifies how a human soul can be united with God but remain distinct. The heretical Nameless Wild One thinks that it becomes God in Gelassenheit. It does not possess the underscheit to see the difference between underschidunge and underscheidenheit.
Lack of discernment is the root of all problems for the Nameless Wild One, because without underscheit there can be no order, and disorder is the root of all evil. Reversing the relationship posited by Stagel, the disciple explains that “swem underscheides gebristet, dem gebristet ordenunge, und waz ane reht ordenunge ist, daz ist böse und gebreste [whoever lacks discernment, lacks order. And whatever is without correct order is evil and defective].”85 The Nameless Wild One is not content with this and asks him how he defines order. The disciple responds, “ich heis daz ordenhaft, wenn alles daz, daz der sache zůgehörlich ist von innen ald von nút ussen underwegen blibet unangesehen in dem uswúrkenne [“orderly” is when everything that pertains to a matter, both interiorly and exteriorly, is not left out of consideration in carrying it out].”86 Order is not merely a matter of spiritual rectitude or correct devotional disposition. Order is completed in well-considered action, indeed in the performance of duty: that is, everything that pertains (zugehörlich ist) to a given circumstance. Order thus provides an important counterargument both to the charge of quietism and to the Nameless Wild One, who had argued that his unencumbered freedom (ledige friheit) authorized following his own inclination (můtwillen).
Tauler does not pair order and discernment as consistently as Seuse does, but he does define prudence as the ability to regulate, that is, order, one’s own behavior.87 In this vein, he mentions Bescheidenheit in several sermons as the crowning virtue or the highest faculty of the soul. For example, in a sermon on preparing for divine grace, Tauler wishes his audience to note “wie der heilige geist danne die obersten krefte zieret mit göttelichen tugenden, und wie dis mit der bescheidenheit sol als gericht und geordenieret werden [how the Holy Spirit decorates the highest faculties with divine virtues and how these should be regulated and ordered by prudence].”88 In several sermons Tauler expresses similar positions on the role of prudence in ordering both inner and outer works. In sermon Vetter 60h, for example, he asserts that three virtues are absolutely indispensable for spiritual perfection: humility, love, and prudence. He goes so far as to claim that anything without prudence is neither good nor pleasing to God.89 Just as the disciple explains to the Nameless Wild One that discernment orders one’s works and that disorder is evil, Tauler also exhorts his audience that prudence must order and govern virtuous practice.
Tauler takes up the issue of quietism and objections to outer works as well. In sermon Vetter 74 Tauler condemns those who believe that all outer works hinder spiritual perfection and that all inner contemplation advances it. Works of love are not inherently bad and distracting, but are only so if they become an end in themselves. Similarly, some are drawn astray by inner contemplation, because they stick to their devotional images “also der bere an dem honige [like a bear to honey].” Tauler counters that everything must be done in an orderly manner.
Nu us disen beden werken, usserlich und innerlich, ob sú mit ordenunge gewúrket sint, so wurt geborn daz edel luter gůt, die innerlich raste do man mit eime stillen swigende aller bilde und formen kummet in daz götliche vinsternisse, do man rastet und gebruchet mitime.90
Now from these two works, outer and inner, if they are done in an orderly manner, is born the pure, noble good, the inner peace where one comes through a quiet silence of all images and forms into the divine darkness where one rests and delights with him.
Tauler links this inner silence with Gelassenheit and the birth of God in the soul by referring here as well to Dum medium silencium, insisting that all works, both inner and outer, should foster this noble silence.91 Ordered practice entrains a disposition of virtue that, far from obstructing or distracting, furthers the pursuit of Gelassenheit.
In another sermon, Tauler uses the image of the Body of the Church to argue that each person is ordained to certain kinds of work, which one should not neglect in favor of contemplation. He accuses his audience of laziness in an amusing metaphor: “Nu wellent ir echt ledig sin. Es kumet sere von tragheit: ieklichs wil ein ouge sin und wellent alle schouwen und nút wúrken [So you want to be truly empty. That mostly comes from laziness: everybody wants to be an eye and to see and not to work].”92 Against the objection that duties (amt) cannot be ordained by God, because God would not impose hindrances to mystical union, Tauler
