Theo Verbeek
MELAMED,Yitzhak Y. and ROSENTHAL, Michael
A. (eds.). Spinoza’s
Theological-Political Treatise: A Critical Guide, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2010, 249 pp.
Apart from the 'geometric version'
of Descartes's Principia with an appendix containing 'Metaphysical
Thoughts' ('Cogitata metaphysica'), the Tractatus theologico-politicus
(TTP) is the only work of Spinoza published during his lifetime. Written in a
difficult and elusive style, packed with Biblical quotations, switching on
almost every page (sometimes even within a single phrase) from a theological to
a philosophical register, badly organized and -- let us admit it -- without a
clear and recognizable focus, the work constitutes a great challenge. No one
should believe those who claim that in this work Spinoza has a clear message.
Even the notion of libertas philosophandi ('freedom to philosophize'),
which, according to the full title, would be the book's central concern, is not
free from ambiguity. In any case, it is far from obvious in what way that
notion provides an organizing principle for the book as a whole. Indeed, one of
the questions could be to what extent the book is a whole, given the
fact that Spinoza presents the book as a collection of 'some treatises' (aliquot
dissertationes). As a result, a 'critical guide' is needed.
One would expect a critical guide to
the TTP to provide teachers and students with reading help. More specifically,
one would want an overall analysis and a thorough discussion of certain key
notions. Preferably there would also be an assessment of the relation to Spinoza's
other works, especially the Ethics and the Political Treatise.
Particularly one would want information on the context. It is my view indeed
that with the TTP Spinoza intervened in certain very specific political debates
concerning the relation of Holland to the other provinces, the Dutch political
system, the position of the Dutch Reformed Church as a 'public' Church, and the
future of the United Provinces, even if large parts of the book were probably
written with a different purpose. Finally, a 'critical guide' should contain a
critical review of the relevant secondary literature. I am sorry to say that,
despite the high level of scholarship displayed throughout this volume and the
absolute originality of some of the contributions, this 'critical guide' to the
TTP hardly meets those expectations.
Edwin Curley, to whom the volume is
dedicated, contributes a fine article on 'Spinoza's exchange with Albert
Burgh,' which culminates with a discussion of superstition, concluding that,
after all, Spinoza finds it desirable for the state to sponsor a religion he
himself believes to be superstitious. In Curley's view the 'universal creed'
serves as the common denominator of all religious sects (that is, basically
superstitious beliefs) and not as a philosophically purified religion. This is
a good point, although it does little to solve the problem of the relation
between superstition and 'true religion.' According to Spinoza, superstition is
based on hope and fear, and that would mean that a non-superstitious religion
must not be based on hope and fear. Accordingly, it would not be the precise
contents of a belief that makes it superstitious, but the feelings associated
with it. I believe the key concept here is devotion (as, for example, in TTP v,
III, 75, 77, 78; vi, III, 90; xii, III, 146[1]),
an emotion essentially different from hope and fear because it is based on
love.
