Why Spinoza? How did I come up with the idea of
researching Spinoza?
He wasn’t my first thought, partly because I thought
there were so many illustrious scholars of Spinoza I wouldn’t have anything to
contribute. I was taught by Professor Susan James on my BA course who gave two
lectures on Spinoza for the History of Philosophy module, one in the first year
in 2010 on his Theological Political Treatise (TTP) and one in the third year
in 2012 on his Ethics, including writing a set essay for the module (see my
academia page1). On top of that I attended further
talks by her and others and dipped into sections of his works on my own out of
interest. I was also asked to join the Spinoza Research Network by Beth Lord in
2011 (at a Spinoza workshop in Ghent) so I signed up. After graduating 2013 I
set about writing PhD proposals and research ideas some, but not all, of which
are on my academia page. Then a series of family crises initially put my
philosophy research on hold for a few months until I couldn’t wait for a
period of respite any longer so resumed my research through the turmoil. Just
as well because the respite still hasn’t happened! There’s no such thing as a
good time to do research or anything else for that matter. There’s just now.
So, it was not until I resumed philosophy by going back
to attending talks that I heard Susan James’s talk for the Royal Institute of
Philosophy in 2014 entitled ‘Why Should We Read Spinoza?’2 and I thought I’d give Spinoza a go.
I still wasn’t sure if anything would strike me. While at home one day, I idly
picked up my copy of Scruton’s book on Spinoza3. It’s a very thin introductory book
so quick to read. There I learnt that Spinoza had apparently written an Apology
after his excommunication stating that he considered himself to have an orthodox
Jewish outlook4. Although this Apology is now lost,
this gave me the idea for a research question: What if Spinoza did believe and
claim that his outlook and approach was and remained in line with Orthodox
Judaism? Scruton5 goes on to suggest that Spinoza’s
claims about his commitment to orthodoxy in his lost Apology may be included in
his TTP. Thus, I asked myself: Could Spinoza’s TTP and other works be re-read
in light of this and interpreted accordingly, so making Spinoza not an atheist,
or pantheist or a thorough-going Cartesian, as some claim, but rather an
orthodox Jew? Is there textual evidence that Spinoza remained a committed Jew?
So I sat down and read the TTP in one go over a fortnight late December to
January 2014/15 and decided there were passages to support this interpretation
of Spinoza. On this view, he was not an atheist or pantheist because they are
both contrary to Judaism. However, it still allows for Spinoza somewhat
selectively drawing on Cartesian philosophy and Dutch politics and culture. For
instance, in the TTP he praises Dutch tolerance, was keen on Jan de Witt and
wrote a book teaching and assessing Descartes’ philosophy albeit stating where
he disagreed with him in the appendix.
However, I began to wonder whether, given how his
earlier, formative education was steeped in Jewish thinking, given the schools
he attended and the learning he received, was his Jewish education his biggest
influence overall? At first glance, this may seem not to cohere with Spinoza’s
secular and liberal leanings. However, I realised that this tension can be resolved when I learnt that he was primarily taught by two rabbis. One was very
orthodox and the other, Rabbi Manasseh ben Israel, was “liberal” minded, had
“secular interests” and non-Jewish friends such as Rembrandt6.
Therefore, are we making too much of Spinoza going on to have non-Jewish
friends and including secular ideas? Spinoza would hardly consider this
un-Jewish of him given a rabbi was doing the same. Indeed, I read that Scruton7 also draws similar conclusions when he
writes “It was no doubt through Manasseh’s influence that Spinoza began to
identify so strongly with the secular and enquiring culture of the
Netherlands”. So, I agree that there was a Dutch influence on him, however I
think he may have arrived at this influence through Judaism so making his
Orthodox Judaism the more fundamental of the two. In this way, what I shall
call the Contextual-Argument-Analysis interpretation of Spinoza as
introduced and outlined by Professor Susan James8 (ie. to put it simplistically, if I
read her correctly, “to interpret” his TTP by reading it in light of “the
sequence of theological and political debates to which he is contributing” and
the “milieu in which the Treatise was
written”), is an interpretation which I feel overall doesn’t run contrary to my
Orthodox Jewish interpretation of Spinoza. Instead the Contextual-Argument-Analysis interpretation is
the one that best runs concurrently alongside mine as it explores another
important aspect of his life, possible influences, historical and argumentative
contexts to his views. After all, Spinoza could have, and did have, both Dutch
and religiously Jewish identities simultaneously, without cognitive dissonance,
just as Rabbi Manasseh did, especially given Spinoza’s agreement with the Dutch
values of tolerance, religious pluralism and freedom. The same cannot be said
for being concurrently religiously Jewish yet atheist, or pantheist, or being
predominantly Cartesian.
So why Orthodox Jewish? Well, that was the only branch of
Judaism that existed in the 17th
Century so any Jew would strictly speaking be correctly categorised as orthodox
irrespective of their liberal, or not, leanings as can be seen by Rabbi
Manasseh. Originally I thought maybe, had Spinoza lived at a later time and
could choose from a variety of denominations, he would be a reform or liberal
Jew. But since writing my first paper on him, my further research and thinking
has altered my view. The more I read him, the more I think he remained a
traditional orthodox Jew at heart rather than a reform Jew. He appears more
like the latter at times perhaps as a result of his and his family’s difficult
circumstances, such as expulsion from Spain and the harsh, cruel treatment he
received at his Synagogue rather than through his natural inclinations. For
instance, there are many possible, good explanations why he stopped regularly attending
his synagogue especially since this lack of attendance may have been as a
result of a knife attack on him. So his attendance wasn’t really a fair point
to raise and use as one of the excuses to unfairly excommunicate him at the
tender age of 23. And the excommunication itself would detrimentally affect how
capable he would be of leading a traditional Jewish life so this may not be a
good indication of how deeply religious he remained.
I’m totally fascinated by this genius who so often seems
to cause unnecessary controversy and misunderstanding.
So research ideas arise, come together and develop for a
variety of reasons and from various sources.
2 Susan James: Why Should We Read Spinoza? (07/11/2014)
available at:
3 Scruton, R., (1986) Spinoza,
past masters series, Oxford University Press
4 Scruton, R., (1986) Spinoza,
past masters series, Oxford University Press p9
5 Scruton, R., (1986) Spinoza,
past masters series, Oxford University Press p9
6 Scruton, R., (1986) Spinoza,
past masters series, Oxford University Press p6
7 Scruton, R.,
(1986) Spinoza, past masters series,
Oxford University Press p6
8 James,
S., (2014) Spinoza on Philosophy,
Religion, and Politics The
Theologico-Political Treatise Oxford University Press (First published
2012) pp4; 5-6
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.