44035346

7/28/2019 44035346

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/44035346 1/5

Book Reviews / ARIES . () –

Wouter J. Hanegraaff, Swedenborg, Oetinger, Kant: Tree Perspectives on the

Secrets of Heaven, Westchester: Te Swedenborg Foundation . p.

ISBN ----.

Tis excellent monograph is essentially an introduction to Emanuel Sweden-

borg’s Secrets of Heaven ( Arcana Coelestia ) and its early reception. Hanegraaff

begins by rejecting approaches that attempt to situate authors in terms of sim-plistic dichotomies (e.g., “religion vs. reason” or “the Enlightenment vs. the

occult”), in favor of an approach that involves ‘clarification by means of com-

plexification’. Swedenborg is a complex and multifaceted figure who does not

easily fit into ready-made categories.

Te book moves from the complexities of Secrets of Heaven, to a differentsort of complexity: the complicated history of Oetinger’s response to Sweden-

borg. Tis story is essentially one of a man who was drawn to Swedenborg,

struggled with him, and eventually rejected him. Te complexity involved in

Kant’s reception of Swedenborg, with which the book ends, is of an entirely

different order. Kant too struggled with Swedenborg, and like Oetinger wasattracted and repulsed by him. Kant’s Dreams of a Spirit-Seer documents this

ambivalence. But Hanegraaff’s account of the work leaves the reader with the

strong impression that, beneath a great deal of often vulgar ridicule, Kant istelling us that he sees something valuable in Swedenborg, and that he is infact open to the possibility of “spirit seeing”. In short, Hanegraaff offers us

complexities within complexities, but his approach is highly illuminating.

Te first “perspective” on Secrets of Heaven is provided by Swedenborg him-

self, with the assistance of Hanegraaff. In or Swedenborg wrote

a short work entitled A Hieroglyphic Key to Natural and Spiritual Arcana by

way of Representations and Correspondences . Tis work, as Hanegraaff points

out, is in fact a key to understanding Secrets of Heaven. It sets up three “levels

of meaning”: the natural, the human, and the divine (this is, in reality, not somuch a hermeneutic distinction as it is an ontological one). Swedenborg argues

that fundamental concepts pertaining to the natural world have a conceptual(or categorical) analogue in the human world, and another in the divine. For

example, in the natural world the concept of conatus (motion) is analogous

to human will (action), and to divine providence (divine operation). Sweden-

borg develops twenty further examples to illustrate this analogical relationshipbetween the three “realms”.

Each realm is distinct and irreducible to the others. Further, Swedenborg—

in keeping with his strict dualism—argues that knowledge of the natural realmteaches us nothing about the human soul or about God. However, knowledge

7/28/2019 44035346



of the human realm can provide us with a kind of “second best” knowledge

of the divine. Swedenborg believes that there are in fact two ways to know the

divine: by direct, mystical contact with the divine itself, and through the inter-pretation of the Bible, God’s word as expressed to humanity. Needless to say,

the former kind of knowledge is the privilege of a small elect. Terefore the sec-

ond route is the one most accessible to human beings, if they have the patience

for it. Swedenborg believes that through the discovery of the inner meaning of each scriptural verse we can achieve through human language an indirect

knowledge of the divine. He rejects the Enlightenment approach of reading

scripture as allegory. Instead, Swedenborg regards the Bible as a kind of divine

“code” in which every word or phrase has a symbolic significance that may be

wholly different from its mundane meaning. Te bulk of Secrets of Heaven isoccupied with this exegesis, which constitutes Swedenborg’s exploration of the

second or “human” realm, and indirect exploration of the divine (the natural

realm having been thoroughly canvassed by Swedenborg the scientist in his

younger days). His direct exploration of the divine realm is represented by the

sections of Secrets of Heaven entitled “Accounts of Memorable Occurrences”, in which Swedenborg details the “mystical visions” or unmediated acquaintance

with the divine for which he is famous. Hanegraaff points out, correctly, that

the real source of Swedenborg’s appeal is these visions, not his extraordinarily detailed Biblical exegesis. Approximately half of Hanegraaff’s book is devoted to an account of Secrets

of Heaven, using the Hieroglyphic Key as a framework. Tis portion of the book

is self-contained and makes an excellent brief introduction to Secrets of Heaven.

Enter Friedrich Christoph Oetinger. A Boehmean and Christian Kabbal-

ist, Oetinger was partly attracted to Swedenborg because he saw in him a fellow opponent of the allegorical school of Biblical exegesis advocated by

Leibniz and Wolff. No doubt Oetinger, like many others, was also intrigued

by Swedenborg’s visions. However, from the beginning Oetinger’s relationshipto Swedenborg was ambivalent, and Hanegraaff’s text explores the twists and

turns of their relationship—and the toll it took on Oetinger’s life and repu-tation. o begin with, Oetinger could not accept Swedenborg’s dualism: his

strict separation of the natural and spiritual realms. Oetinger, like Boehme,

was a panentheist who believed that nature is a moment of the being of God.

Further, Oetinger came to believe that Swedenborg’s brand of Biblical exe-gesis, while not as vulgar as that of the rationalist allegorists, was nevertheless

fundamentally in error. One of the great merits of Hanegraaff’s book is that

it reminds us that in addition to being a theosopher Oetinger was also, oddly enough, a Protestant Biblical literalist who believed that Christ would return

7/28/2019 44035346



(bodily) in . Ultimately, Oetinger came to see that Swedenborg’s exege-

sis and that of the rationalists had something fundamental in common: they

both asserted that the Bible meant something other than what it actually said.Te last straw for Oetinger was Swedenborg’s rue Christianity (). In this

work, Swedenborg argues vehemently against the idea of a literal return of

Christ, and instead maintains that the “second coming” refers to the final rev-

elation of the true meaning of Scripture. In other words, the second coming of Christ is the publication of Secrets of Heaven! By the time he actually came

to register his rejection of Swedenborg in print, Oetinger’s wary dalliance with

the Swedish seer had cost him dearly. Oetinger’s book Swedenborg’s and

Other’s Earthly and Heavenly Philosophy had been condemned and confiscated

by the civil authorities and Oetinger banned from publishing. As always, Immanuel Kant was more careful. In , Kant was contacted

by one Charlotte von Knobloch who prevailed upon him to look into the

widely-circulated stories about Swedenborg’s clairvoyant abilities. Tis simple

request seems to have resulted in Swedenborg’s becoming, at least briefly, a

minor obsession for Kant. He went to the trouble of purchasing, at consid-erable expense, the eight volumes of Secrets of Heaven. Ten, in Kant

published Dreams of a Spirit-Seer , which consists partly in a treatment of Swe-

denborg. Kant appears to have been prompted to write this work because hisinterest in Swedenborg had become widely known, and he feared for his reputa-tion. Tis hypothesis finds some support in the fact that while Kant’s comments

about Swedenborg in Dreams are gratuitously nasty, in his correspondence and

lectures (as recorded by student notes), his treatment of Swedenborg is far more

respectful and even positive.

As Hanegraaff correctly points out, Swedenborg is in basic agreement withKant’s epistemology: both men believe that ‘it is impossible for human beings

to discover the truth about heaven by themselves, for our common human

faculties are simply inadequate’ (–). Te difference is that Swedenborg believed it was possible for some men to learn the truth about heaven, if heaven

cooperated by meeting them halfway. Tis was not Kant’s positive belief—butnothing in his philosophy precludes it, and Kant knew this. Since we cannot

know what the noumena are (merely that they are) we cannot categorically

deny the possibility that some noumenal beings might be capable of commu-

nicating with humans, and that certain gifted humans might be able to receivetheir communications in some extra-sensory fashion. And Kant did believe in

the possibility of influxes from the noumenal. Our knowledge of the moral

law must be attributed to such influxes, since it derives neither from empiricaldata nor from fantasy (if the latter, we would not feel bound by it). Further,

7/28/2019 44035346



Kant believed in the possibility of non-human intelligences, including spiri-

tual ones. When he articulates the moral law, he makes it “binding upon all

rational beings”, not “binding upon all men”. Tus it appears that Kant wasextremely intrigued by the possibility that Herr Schwedenberg (as he delib-

erately misspells his name in Dreams ) might have received far more elaborate

influxes. Ultimately, Kant seems to have concluded that he did not. But the

tone of Dreams misleads the reader—most likely deliberately—into believing that Kant is wholly dismissive of the possibility of “spirit seeing”. Tis was how

Kant escaped the fate of Oetinger (though he would run afoul of the censors

in due, ironically, to his Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone ).

Trough his treatment of the Hieroglyphic Key , and his account of the

reactions of Oetinger and Kant, Hanegraaff illuminates different aspects of Swedenborg and Secrets of Heaven. Te resulting complexity is, as he promises,

clarifying. Beyond this, it is also a fascinating story. Hanegraaff’s scholarship is

meticulous (the endnotes to this short book occupy more than twenty pages,

and are quite interesting in themselves). Te style of the book is also highly

readable and engaging. Since it appears as a volume in the Swedenborg Studiesseries it will most likely be read by Swedenborg scholars and Swedenborgians.

Kant scholars would also greatly benefit from this work, but since Kant has

succeeded so well in misleading most of them with his irony they are likely toignore it.

Glenn Alexander Magee

7/28/2019 44035346


Documents

44035346