sign in sign up
<<
Home , Identity (philosophy), Immanuel Kant

Thejournal of jewish and , Vol. 4, pp. 203-225 © 1995 Reprints available directly from the publisher. Photocopying permitted by license only

Spinoza's Paradox: Judaism and the Construction of Liberal in the Theologico-Political Treatise

Steven B. Smith Yale University

Spinoza's Paradox

I begin with an apparent paradox. Spinoza's Theologico-Political Treatise pre- sents itself as one of the great works of enlightenment .1 The aim of the work as a whole is to liberate the individual from bondage to super- stition and ecclesiastical . Spinoza's is the free or autonomous individual who uses to conquer fear and achieve power over the pas- sions. His work could just have easily used Kant's definition of enlighten- ment as its epigraph, namely, -"have courage to use your own ."2 As if this were not enough, the work culminates in an ex- hilarating vision of republican where citizens live in a state of and toleration despite their religious differences. At the same the Treatise makes its case for enlightened and republican government by means of a scathing and unsolicited attack upon historical Judaism.3 Indeed, this attack is all the more invidious be- cause it is made by a learned Jew steeped in biblical and talmudic sources who uses these sources against Judaism itself. Spinoza consistently employs a double standard when he contrasts Judaism and , a contrast which plays directly into the hands of anti-Jewish bigotry. The question is why this most humane and enlightened of men who claimed to write sine ira

1 I have used Benedict de Spinoza. Theologico-Political Treatise, trans. R.H.M. Elwes (New York: Dover, 1951) (henceforth cited as TPTwith reference to chapter and page numbers) and Carl Geb- hardt's edition of Spinoza Opera 4 vols. (Heidelberg: C. Winters, 1925) (henceforth cited as SO followed by reference to volume, page, and line numbers in parentheses). 2 , "What is Enlightenment?" Political Writings, trans. H.B. Nisbet (Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1970), p. 54. 3 Emile Fackenheim, To Mend the - Foundations of Future Jewish Thought (New York: Schocken, 1982), pp. 38-58; see also Isaac Franck, "Spinoza's Onslaught on Judaism" and "Was Spinoza a Jew- ish' ?" Judaism 28 (1979): 177-93, 345-52; Emmanuel Levinas, "Le Cas Spinoza," DiJlicile Liberte (paris: A. Michel, 1976), pp. 142-47.

203 204 StevenB. Smith et studio used his to the apparent detriment of his own people. Let us call this Spinoza's paradox. The history of the reception of Spinoza's philosophy represents a mani- fest failure to come to terms with the two sides of this dilemma.4 For some of the more orthodox, Spinoza's blasphemies against Judaism were more than sufficient to warrant the edict of excommunication which, incidentally, has not been lifted even to this day.5 For others more sympathetically in- clined, Spinoza is seen, like , as one in a long line of martyrs to the cause of of thought and opinion. The image of Spinoza handed down by the philosophical tradition is that of a man of reason, of sweetness and peace, hunted down and persecuted by the forces of ignorance and reli- gious intolerance.6 Whether Spinoza was a blasphemer or a secular saint re- mains even today a of lively debate. What, then, can account for the evident contradiction between Spinoza's professed wish to view himself and the world sub specie aeternitatis and his passionate ire with respect to his coreligionists? In the words of Emile Fackenheim: "Why does the author of the , who claims to rise above all bias and prejudice to nothing less than eternity, resort in his Theologico- Political Treatise to the grossest distortion of the minority which he has left and above all when he compares it to the majority religion which he yet refuses to embrace?"7 To answer this question, three hypotheses have been offered. The first is that Spinoza's paradox arises out of Jewish self-hatred. In a still powerful essay attributed Spinoza's of Judaism

4 The reception of Spinoza in various national contexts is well documented in , Spinoza in Germanyfrom 1670 to theAge of Goethe (London: Institute of Germanic Studies, 1984); Paul Verniere, Spinoza et la pensee francaise avant la 2 vols. (paris: Presses Universitaires de , 1954); Rosalie L. Colie, Light and Enlightenment: A Stu4J of the Cambridge Platonists and the Dutch Arminians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957). 5 The documents surrounding Spinoza's excommunication have been gathered by 1.S. Revah, Spinoza et Ie Dr. Juan de Prado (paris: Mouton, 1959); the complicated history of the legal proceedings against Spinoza, as well as his contemporary Juan de Prado, has been treated extensively by Yosef Kaplan, From Christianity toJudaism: The Story of Isaac Orobio de Castro, trans. Raphael Loewe (Oxford: , 1989), pp. 123, 130-46, 263-69.

6 For the saintly image of Spinoza see the work of his fIrst biographer Johannes Colerus, "The Life of Benedict de Spinoza;' in Frederick Pollock, Spinoza: His Life and Philosophy (London: Duck- worth, 1899), pp. 394--95 who comments on the sweetness and easiness of his conversation and the frugality of his way of living; this view was also accepted by , "Spinoza and the ," Lectures and Essays in , vol. III, ed. R.H. Super (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1962), p. 158 who speaks of "a life of unbroken diligence, kindliness, and purity" and later on p. 182 Arnold compares Spinoza to Saint Augustine and Fra Angelico for the inspiration of his "beatifIc vision." This view has by no means been the monopoly of gentile interpreters of Spinoza. See Alfred Gottschalk, "Spinoza-A Three Hundred Year Perspective," Spinoza: A TercentenaryPerspec- tive, ed. Barry S. Kogan (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, 1979), p. 4 who speaks of Spinoza's "utter sublimity," his "divine serenity," and the "incorruptible purity" of his thought to be compared only to Socrates; for the "divine Spinoza" see Isaac Bashevis Singer, "The Spinoza of Market Street," An Isaac Bashevis SingerReader (New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, 1971), pp. 71-92 at 92. 7 Fackenheim, To Mend the JPorfd,p. 38.