LETTER FROM SPINOZA TO LODEWIJK MEIJER, 26 July 1663

Edited by A.K. OFFENBERG

Introduct ion

T h e f o r t y - n i n e l e t t e r s o f S p i n o z a h i t h e r t o k n o w n to u s j h a v e n o w b e e n s u p p l e m e n t e d by a f i f t i e t h , r e c e n t l y p u r c h - a s e d b y t h e L i b r a r y o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f A m s t e r d a m . H o w e v e r , o n l y t w e l v e o f t h e s e f o r t y - n i n e l e t t e r s h a v e b e e n p r e s e r v e d as o r i g i n a l s , so t h a t t h e n e w a c q u i s i t i o n c o n s t i - t u t e s t h e t h i r t e e n t h c u r r e n t l y k n o w n l e t t e r w r i t t e n in S p i n o z a ' s o w n h a n d ,

I n 1903 , t h e t w e l v e l e t t e r s t h e n a c c e s s i b l e w e r e b r i l l i a n t l y p u b l i s h e d b y W i l l e m M e i j e r in a f a c s i m i l e e d i t i o n w i t h t r a n s c r i p t i o n s , a n n o t a t i o n s a n d t r a n s l a t i o n s i n t o D u t c h , E n g l i s h a n d G e r m a n y

' Carl Gebhardt wrote in 1924 (passage translated from the German): "The search made by W. Meijer for fur ther Spinoza letters has unfortunately remained unsuccessful; my own efforts to enrich our knowledge of Spinoza's correspondence have likewise all failed." (Spinoza, Opera. Edited by Carl Gebhardt under the auspices of the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences [1925], Vol. IV, p. 3 8 1 . - Hereafter cited as Opera.) Nachbildung der im Jahre 1902 noch erhaltenen eigenhiindigen Brie[e des Benedictus Despinoza, edited by W. Meijer. The Hague, 1903. (Limited edition of 200 copies.) This edition actually reproduces facsimiles of only eleven originals. Two other letters (Ep. XI[ and LXIX) were still extant in the 19th century, but had disappeared when Meijer prepared his facsimile edition. There is, however, a lithographic reproduction of Ep. LXIX, published by H.W. Tydemau in the Utrechtsche Volks- Almanak for 1844, between pages 160 and 161. Meijer regarded this lithography as a quasi-original and included it in facsimile as the twelfth Spinoza autograph. (Cf. W. Meijer, op. cir., "Erliiuterungen zu den facsimilierten Briefen des Benedictus Despinoza; A: Allgemeine Bemerkungen," p. 1.) A communication from F. AkkermaI~, Groning- en, indicates that, of the two originals known to have been privately owned in Berlin prior to the two world wars, one (Ep. XXIII) is now preserved in the State Library for Prussian Cultural Heritage, West Berlin; the other (Ep. LXXII), auctioned in 1917, cannot be traced at this time.

A.K. OFFENBERG

T h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e n e w l e t t e r 3 is r e l a t e d to a p o r t i o n o f a c o m m u n i c a t i o n f r o m S p i n o z a to H e n r y O l d e n b u r g d a t e d 17 /27 J u l y 1663 a n d to a l e t t e r f r o m S p i n o z a to L o d e w i j k M e i j e r o f 3 A u g u s t o f t h e s a m e y e a r . 4 T h e s e l e t t e r s d e a l wi th t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f D e s c a r t e s ' Prin- cipia Philosophiae, e x p o u n d e d g e o m e t r i c a l l y by S p i n o z a a n d s u p p l e m e n t e d by t h e Cogitata Metaphysica. s U r g e d by his A m s t e r d a m f r i e n d s , S p i n o z a h a d p r e p a r e d th i s t e x t f o r p u b l i c a t i o n , a n d it was t h e o n l y w o r k to a p p e a r u n d e r his n a m e d u r i n g his l i f e t i m e . 6 T h e two k n o w n l e t t e r s p r o v i d e s o m e r a t h e r u s e f u l b a c k g r o u n d o n t h e m o t i v e s f o r th is e d i t i o n a n d t h e p r e f a c e by L o d e w i j k M e i j e r , w h i c h is i t se l f q u i t e e x c e p t i o n a l ; t h e n e w l e t t e r has s u p p l i e d us w i t h a d d i t i o n a l d a t a , e s p e c i a l l y o n t h e Cogitata Metaphysica.

T h e c o n s e n s u s o n th is p a r t i c u l a r w o r k has n o t b e e n a l t o g e t h e r f a v o u r a b l e ; it is n e v e r t h e l e s s o f p a r t i c u l a r s ign i f i - c a n c e in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e e v o l u t i o n o f S p i n o z a ' s p h i l o s o p h y . A w e l l - k n o w n c o m m e n t a t o r , D u n i n - B o r k o w s k i , f ee l s "ill a t e a s e ''7 e v e n at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e Cogitata Metaphysica: in his v iew, S p i n o z a ' s i d e a s w e r e at leas t e i g h t y y e a r s b e h i n d t h e t imes . It s h o u l d be b o r n e in m i n d , h o w e v e r , t h a t it is n o t his o w n i d e a s tha t S p i n o z a e x p o u n d s ,

The letter is in the Manuscript Department (under call number G x 18) of the Library of the University of Antsterdam. Opera, IV Ep. Xi l l (pp. 63-69) and Ep. XV (pp. 72-73). RENATI DES CARTES / PRINCIPLORUM / I 'HII,OSOPHIAE / Pars I, & If, / More Geometrico demonstratae / PER / BENEDI( 'TUM de SPINOZA Amstelodamensem. / Accesserunt E]usdem / CO(';ITATA METAPHYSICA, / in quibus difficiliores, quae lain in parte

Metaphysices generali, qu-am / speciali occurrunt, quaesti,mes breviter explicantur. / [Fig.] / AMSTEI+ODAMI, / Apud JOHANNEM RIEWERTS, in vico vulgb ditto, de Dirk / van Assensteeg, sub signo Martyrologii. 1663. 4".

'~ C. Louise Thijssen-Schoute, Lodewilk Meyer en diens verhouding tot Descartes en Spinoza. [With summary in French.] l,eiden, 1954, pp. 8-9. (Mededelingen vanwege her Spinozahuis [Bulletin of The Spinoza House Society], No. 11.)

7 Stanislaus wm Dunin-Borkowski, Spinoza. Vol. 3: Aus den Tagen Spinozas, Part 2: Das neue Leben. Mfinster, Westphalia, 1935, p. 98.

2

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

b u t t h o s e o f D e s c a r t e s , w i t h w h o m h e d i d n o t a l w a y s a g r e e ,

a s is c l e a r , inter alia, f r o m L o d e w i j k M e i j e r ' s p r e f a c e .

T h e w o r k is b a s e d o n w h a t m a y b e t e r m e d t h e " l e c t u r e

n o t e s " o f S p i n o z a ' s y o u n g s t u d e n t , J o h a n n e s C a s e a r i u s ,

w h o m S p i n o z a f e l t t o b e t o o i m m a t u r e t o u n d e r s t a n d h i s

i d e a s , s o t h a t h e h a d o b j e c t i v e l y e x p l a i n e d t o h i m t h o s e o f

D e s c a r t e s ? T h e m e a s u r e o f t h i s o b j e c t i v i t y , h o w e v e r , is

o p e n t o a r g u m e n t ; a c c o r d i n g to K u n o F i s c h e r ~ t h e Cogitata Metaphysica c o n s t i t u t e s a d i r e c t a t t a c k o n t h e Pr inc ip ia Philosophiae, b u t t h i s is d i s p u t e d b y s u c h a u t h o r s a s J . F r e u d e n t h a l '~ a n d C h . A p p u h n . It

I d o n o t i n t e n d - - n o r d o I f e e l s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p e t e n t - -

t o a s s e s s t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s l e t t e r w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k

o f o u r k n o w l e d g e o f S p i n o z a ' s w o r k . A f t e r a f a c s i m i l e o f

t h i s l e t t e r , a d i p l o m a t i c r e p r o d u c t i o n a n d a n E n g l i s h

t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e t e x t / ~ I s h a l l e n d e a v o u r t o s h e d s o m e

" See Spinoza 's leitler m Simon de Vries of late February 1663 (Ep. IX, Opera, IV, p. 142): "Net: est quod ( ' asear io invideas. Nul lus n e m p e mihi magis odiosus, nec a quo magis cavere curavi q u a m ab ipso q u a m o b r e m te Olnl les( tue u o [ o s ll[louilos w-llem ne ipsi llleas opin iones communice t i s nisi uhi ad m a t u r i o r e m ae ta tem perveneri t . . . " [You have no cause to envy Casearius. Really, he causes me a great deal of unp l ea saumess , and never have I taken more care to be heedfu l than in his case, so that I would like you and all acquain tances to he caut ioned not to commun i ca t e to h im my views until such l ime as he will have reached a tnore ma tu re age.] Also set: the afi>renlentioued letter to O l d e n b u r g (of. Note 4): ". . .queul ego cu idam juveni , q u e m meas opin iones apert/e docere noleham, au tehac d ic taveram" [... which I had dictated earl ier to a young man w h o m 1 did not wish to leach my views].

~' K u u o Fis(her, Geschichte der neueren Philosophie, Vol. 2: Spinozas Leben, Werke und Lehre, 4th ed., rev. Heidelberg, 1898. (In this edition, Fischer deals in detail with Freuden tha l ' s reaction; see note on pp. 306-310.)

'" J. F reuden tha l , "Spinoza u n d (tie Scholastik," in: Philosophische Aufsiitze, E. Zeller gewidmet. Leipzig, 1887, pp. 98-99.

" Spinoza, Oeuvres. Trans la t ion , c o m m e n t s and notes by Ch. A p p u h n . [New ed., rev.] Vol. I, p. 227, No'~e 4. Paris, 1964.

"-' My s in(ere apprecia t ion goes to Dr. F.F. Blok, Ins t i tu te of Neophi lology and Neo-Latin, A m s t e r d a m , who has been most he lpfu l in establ ishing the text and with the t ranslat ion f rom Latin, and to F. A k k e r m a n , Classical Insti tute, Universi ty of ( ; ron ingen , for his valuable advice.

A.K. OFFENBERG

l igh t on a few aspec t s of t he newly d i s c o v e r e d d o c u m e n t , I t is my h o p e tha t o the r s , m o r e k n o w l e d g e a b l e t h a n myse l f , will u n d e r t a k e to sub jec t its m a n y o t h e r face ts o f i n t e r e s t to a m o r e p r o f o u n d analysis .

2 . y ~ ~ , , b ~ " ~ 7 I " ~ u . ~ , , ! . a ,

o ~) ~ / . " . , . ~ ,

o . - ~ , , ' , ~ . . ~.,._,,~.,,.~.,((.Z,~,.~. ~ ' c , - , - , . , - ,~ . . . . ' , ~ ~0 ''~''~'~'>''-''-----

} ~ o ' M ' ~ ~ . . '~.',~-,-,,.x."~' ~ ' ' ~ ' q ' ~ ~ " " ~ . . . . . ,..4.:, :~ ~ . ~ , ~ .

�9 .- c . - / ~ ~. :2~ . - ~ ' . ' . :

c~, "3 i . - / - . , ~ . , , ~ %. ~ c.~.,)o M~."-o-~-<.-,v..-~. 7 . ~ . . ; . ~ . . J - , ~ - ~ ~ . .

4

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

Amyn heer

Myn her Lo&ov~k Myer

Doctor in de medecyn, L.A.M.

tot

Amsterdam

per cuvert.

Amice Suavissime

epistolam tuam gratissimam heri accepi; in qua quaeris an recte [ citaveris] indicaveris cap. 2. p. z. appendicis omnes prop. etc." quae ibi ex parte i princ, citantur, deinde an non delendum sit id quod in 2" parte assero. [-filium] nempe filium dej esse ipsum patrem, denique art non mutandum sit, quod ajo me nescire quid vocabulo roersonalitatis intelligant theologi, quibus Dico i*. te omnia quae cap. 2. appendicis indicavisti; recte a t e indicata esse. Sod capite x ~ dicti appendicis pag. r. indicasd scholium prop. 4. et tamen mallem ut scholium prop. 15 indicasses, ubi ex professo, de omnibus modis cogitandi dissero, deinde pag. 2 ejusdem capitis in margine scripsisti haec verba, negationes cur non sint ideae ubi loco hujus verbi negationes ponen- dum entia rationis nam de enti ratione in gene- rc loquor, quod nempe non sit idea, 2" quod [-quae] dixi filium dej esse ipsum patrem puto clarissime sequi cx boc ax. nempe, quae in uno tertio conveniunt ca inter se convcniunt. Verum qula res apud me nuiIius cst momenti, si hoc quosdam theologos posse offendere putas: fac prout tibi melius videbitur. 3* de- nique me lugit quid vocabulo personalitatis iatelligant theologi, non vero quid per id vocabulum critiei intelli- gant. interim, quia exemplar penes te est, ipse haec melius videre potes, si tibi'videntur mutanda, fac ut lubet. Vale amice Singularis mcjque memor vivc qui sum tibi addictissimus

Datum Vorburgi. 26 Julii B. d r. Spinoza.

1663

A.K. OFFENBERG

Most amiab le F r i end ,

Y o u r very welcome let ter r e a c h e d me yes terday. You ask me w h e t h e r you have correc t ly i nd i ca t ed in C h a p t e r 2 of the first par t of the A p p e n d i x all p r o p o s i t i o n s etc. c i ted the re f r o m Par t 1 of the Principia. Moreover , w h e t h e r or no t my asser t ion in the s econd chap te r , i.e., that the Son of God is the F a t h e r h imsel f , s h o u l d be de le ted . Final ly , w h e t h e r a modi f i ca t ion s h o u l d be m a d e wh e r e I state that I do no t k n o w what the t heo log i ans m e a n by the word "persona l i tas . " T o this I say:

(1) T h a t e v e r y t h i n g i nd i ca t ed by you in C h a p t e r 2 of the A p p e n d i x is i n d e e d ind ica ted correct ly. In the first c h a p t e r of this A p p e n d i x , however , on the first page, you re fe r to the scho l ium on Prop. 4, whereas I would have p r e f e r r e d you to r e fe r to the s cho l ium on Prop. 15, where I par t icu la r ly discuss all m a n n e r s of t h o u g h t . T h e n , on page 2 of the same chap te r , you have wr i t ten these words in the m a r g i n : "Why the ' n e g a t i o n e s ' a re no ' i deae , ' " where the word "nega t i ones" shou ld be rep laced by "en t ia ra t ionis ," since I am d i scuss ing an "ens ra t ionis" genera l ly , a n d am saying that this is no t an "idea."

(2) T h a t the Son of God is the Fa the r himself , as I have said, follows very clearly, I believe, fr<,m the ax iom that those th ings which coinc ide with a th i rd t h i ng also co inc ide with o n e a n o t h e r . However , this ques t ion is of no impor - tance at all to me; the re fo re , if you bel ieve that this might give offence to some theologians , please do wha teve r you th ink is best.

(3) Final ly, it e ludes me what the t heo log i ans inean by the word "persona l i t as , " bu t I am aware of the i n e a n i n g a t t ached to it by the philologists . In the m e a n t i m e , since the copy is avai lable to you, it would be be t t e r if you were to dec ide on these th ings yourse l f ; if you feel this shou ld he c h a n g e d , please follow y o u r own j u d g m e n t .

Farewell , my d e a r f r i end , a n d c o n t i n u e to th ink of me, who am,

Most dew)tedly yours ,

B. d" Sp inoza V o o r b u r g , 26 July 1663

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

C o m m e n t s

T h i s S p i n o z a l e t t e r a l l o w s s e v e r a l n e w i n f e r e n c e s w h i c h a r e r e l e v a n t to t h e o r i g i n a l h i s t o r y o f t h e p r i n t e d t e x t o f t h e P r i n c i p i a P h i l o s o p h i a e a n d t h e a p p e n d e d Cog i ta ta Metaphys ica , a n d l e a d s to c e r t a i n c o n c l u s i o n s w h i c h , in t u r n , r a i s e n e w q u e s t i o n s .

T h e s y s t e m a t i c m a n n e r in w h i c h S p i n o z a s u m m a r i z e s t h e p r e c e d i n g l e t t e r f r o m M e i j e r c o n v e y s m o r e o v e r a f a i r l y c l e a r p i c t u r e o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h a t h i t h e r t o u n k n o w n l e t t e r .

A t t h e t i m e o f S p i n o z a ' s r e p l y , 2 6 J u l y 1 6 6 3 , at l eas t t h e f i r s t p a r t o f t h e Cogi ta ta Me taphys i ca h a d a l r e a d y b e e n t y p e s e t , a n d p o s s i b l y t h e r e s t o f t h e b o o k as wel l ( e x c e p t f o r M e i j e r ' s p r e f a c e , as e v i d e n c e d by t h e l e t t e r w h i c h S p i n o z a w r o t e t o h i m o n 3 A u g u s t ) . M e i j e r n e v e r t h e l e s s a s k e d w h e t h e r a n y t h i n g h a d to b e c h a n g e d o r eveTl o m i t t e d , a n d it d o e s s e e m t h a t c h a n g e s m u s t i n d e e d h a v e b e e n m a d e in t h e t e x t . S p i n o z a s t a t e s in h i s l e t t e r t h a t t h e " ' e x e m p l a r " is a c c e s s i b l e to M e t i e r , t h u s r e f e r r i n g m o s t p roba tzdy to t h e m a n u s c r i p t s u h m i t t e d f o r t y p e s e t t i n g . ~s It is u n l i k e l y t h a t

' : ' When preparing the Dutch e<t.iti<m of d~is pat>or [Brie[ van Spinoza aan l,odewijk Metier, "-~ti juli 1663. Amslcr<tanl: University [Ahrary, 1975), l hesitated al)out the tncatlmg of "exempl:tr" and su|)p~scd at lit'st that Spinoza migllt have seen proofs. Having since had the pleasure of receiving a cOlnlntlnicalion with detailed doctllnetltatiol| from MI'. F.A. Jaassen, Krommcnie - - who has strongly influenced my opinions in this respect - - 1 am now satisfied thai the term "exemplar" can only refer to the manuscript copy submitted to the printer ft~r typescttit~g,, it being most unlikely that proofs were sent to Spinoza. It in difl:ictHt to communicate the evidence within the sc~q)e of thin contribution. For a contemporary reference to the meaning of "exemplar," of., e.g., J.A. Comenius, Orbis sensualium pictus. Hoc est omnium [undamentaliurn ~n mundo rerum et in vita actionum pictura et nomenclatura. / Die sichtbare Welt. Das ist aUer vornemsten Welt-Dinge und Lebens-Verrichtungen Vorbil- dung und Benahmung, Nuremberg, 1658, p. 190 (leaf M7. verso). For the question of proofs, ~f. 1,. Voct, The (;olden Compasses. A History and Evaluation of the Printing and 1'ublishing Activities o[ the O~cina I'lantiniana at Antwerp. Vol. II. Amsterdam, 1972, pp. 300-301.

A.K. OFFENBERG

Mei je r sent p roo f sheets to Spinoza , it b e i n g u n c o m m o n in those days to leave so m u c h text s t a n d i n g in type while wai t ing for the o u t c o m e of a c o r r e s p o n d e n c e c o n d u c t e d with an a u t h o r r e s id ing far f r o m the place where the book was be ing set in type a n d p r i n t e d . Since Mei je r l ived in A m s t e r d a m , the copy was accessible to h im, i.e., he cou ld check a n d consu l t it at the p r in t e r ' s , a n d was in a pos i t ion to m a k e changes . It is m o r e likely that s p e c i m e n sheets of the typeset pages were sen t to Spinoza , a n d the m i n o r changes which he w a n t e d were even tua l ly i n c l u d e d in the list of e r r a t a p r i n t e d a f te r Mei jer ' s preface , in the f inal phase of the p u b l i s h i n g o p e r a t i o n . Ma jo r c ha nge s cou ld be m a d e only by "cancel l ing ," i.e., by rese t t ing the pages inw)lved, while d i s ca rd ing a n d r ep l ac ing the leaves tha t had a l ready been p r in t ed . T h e le t ter of 3 A u g u s t indicates , a m o n g o the r th ings , that at tha t t ime Sp i noz a r e q u i r e d a c h a n g e as well as an add i t i on in the text of the Principia Philosophiae, which en ta i l ed the r e se t t ing of f o u r p r i n t e d pages (the leaves K2 a n d K3). ~4

T h e new let ter also establ ishes that Mei jer ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n to the def in i t ive text of the Principia Philosophiae a n d the Cogitata Metaphysica actually a m o u n t e d to m o r e than a m e r e po l i sh ing of the l ,a l in style (as had b e e n the i m p r e s s i o n conveyed to O l d e n h u r g in Sp inoza ' s a f o r e m e n t i o n e d le t ter of 17/27 July 1663), since Sp inoza states in his answer to Mei jer that the la t ler has p r o v i d e d all r e f e r ences correct ly - - a n d these re fe rences are par t of the text. Sp inoza f u r t h e r m o r e notes that Mei je r had wr i t ten s o m e t h i n g e r r o n e o u s in the lat ter 's m a r g i n a l a n n o t a t i o n s , which would seem Io ind ica te thal the m a r g i n a l i a are in Mei jer ' s h a n d . In most of the m o d e r n t rans la t ions , these m a r g i n a l no tes are i n c o r p o r a t e d in Ihe c o n t i n u o u s text, w h i t h o u t the t rans la to rs or edi tors hav ing been aware that they were no t a u t h o r i z e d by Spinoza.

T h e fo l lowing r emarks may be of fered on the final changes in the p r i n t e d text: as a resul t of this letter. First of all, Sp inoza suggesls lha l the r e f e r e n c e to the s cho l ium o n

'" Cf. Gebhardl, "Textgeslalnmg," Opera, I, p. 610.

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

P r o p o s i t i o n 4 a p p e a r i n g o n t h e f i r s t p a g e o f t h e C o g i t a t a M e t a p h y s i c a - - a p a r t t o w h i c h h e r e f e r s as t h e " A p p e n d i x " - - b e c h a n g e d to a r e f e r e n c e to t h e s c h o l i u m o n P r o p o s i - t i o n 15. T h i s f i r s t p a g e is p. 93 o f t h e d e f i n i t i v e e d i t i o n . ~5 T h e c h a n g e was e v e n t u a l l y i n c l u d e d in t h e l ist o f e r r a t a , a n d was c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d a n d j u s i t f i e d b y G e b h a r d t i n t h e t e x t as e s t a b l i s h e d b y h i m . H o w e v e r , a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f a f a i r l y r a n d o m n u m b e r o f t r a n s l a t i o n s o f t h i s t e x t p u b l i s h e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e p a s t c e n t u r y ~+ s h o w s t h a t S p i n o z a ' s r e q u e s t was n o t in a n y w ay i n p l e m e n t e d ; t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e s c h o l i u m o n P r o p o s i t i o n 4 was r e t a i n e d i n all cases .

O n t h e n e x t p a g e , t h e w o r d " n e g a t i o n e s " in t h e m a r g i n was to b e c h a n g e d to " e n t i a r a t i o n i s . ''~7 T h i s c o r r e c t i o n was l i k e w i s e i n c l u d e d in t h e e r r a t a , b u t , s t r a n g e l y e n o u g h , n o t j u s t i f i e d by G e b h a r d t , t~ w h e r e a s t h e t r a n s l a t i o n s c i t e d j6 c o n s i s t e n t l y g i v e t h e v e r s i o n h e r e s p e c i f i e d b y S p i n o z a . H o w a r e we to e x p l a i n t h i s d i s c r e p a n c y ? M y o r i g i n a l s u r m i s e o f

'~' Opera, I, p. 233, line 33. "~ Examples of translations examined:

(a) Rend Descartes' Prinzipien der Philosophie, erster und zweiter Theil, in geometrischer Weise begriindet durch Benedict yon ,Spinoza aus Amsterdam. Mit einem Anhang: Metaphysische Gedanken des l,etztern... Translated and annotated hy J.J. Kirchmann. Berlin, 18,71, p. I00. (Philosophische Bibliothek, Vol. 41.)

(h) B. de ,Spinoza's siimratliche Werke, aus dem lateinischen, rait einer Lebensgeschichte, by Berthold Auerbach. Vol. I, 2nd ed. Stuttgart, 1871, p. 88.

(c) The Principles of l)escartes Philosophy by Benedictus de ,Spinoza (The Philosopher's Earliest Work). Translated from the Latin with an introduc- tion by Halbert Hains Britau. l+a Satle, Ill., 1~.t61, p. 116. (Reprint of the 1905 edition.)

(d) Baruch Spinoza, Earlier Philosophical Writings: The Cartesian Principles and Thoughts on Metaphysics. Translated by Frank A. Hayes with an introduction hy David Bidney. Indianapolis, Ind., 1963, p. 108. (The Library of Liberal Arts, No. 16)

(e) Spinoza, Oeuvres. Translation, comments and notes by Ch. Appuhn. [New ed., rev.] Vol. I. Paris, 1964, p. 337. (Originally published in 1905.)

" Opera, I, p.234, line 28. ~ This also applies to the change from Ei to Si, Opera, I, p. 236, line 16.

A.K. OFFENBERG

text co r rec t ions hav ing b e e n m a d e on the press for pa r t of the ed i t ion a p p e a r s to be u n t e n a b l e . T h i s is c o r r o b o r a t e d by a pe r sona l i n spec t ion of some twenty copies ( largely in the f o r m of p h o t o g r a p h i c r e p r o d u c t i o n s ) , m T h e m o r e likely e x p l a n a t i o n is to be f o u n d in the ed i t ion of the text p r e c e d i n g Gebha rd t ' s , i.e., the o n e ed i t ed by J. van Vlo ten a n d J+P.N. Land , ~~ on which the t r ans l a t i ons a re ev iden t ly based. T h e second e r r a t u m was co r rec t ed in this 1895 edi t ion , while the first was a l lowed to persist t h r o u g h some inadve r t ence , o r overs ight .

T h e two o t h e r possible changes are h a r d e r to trace. T h e y re la te to Mei jer ' s sugges t ion , cited by Sp inoza in the first p a r a g r a p h of his letter, to de le te the asser t ion that " the Son of God is the Fa the r h imsel f ," a n d Io Spinoza ' s i n t i m a t i o n that he does no t know what m e a n i n g the theo log ians assign to the concep t of "persona l i t as . " T h e b a c k g r o u n d a n d impl ica t ions of these ques t i ons in t e rms of the p h i l o s o p h y of re l igion will have to he e x p o u n d e d a n d i n t e r p r e t e d by au thor i t i e s in this field; suttice it he re to su rmise that Mei jer d id i n d e e d do what he i n t e n d e d to, a n d to some extent modi f i ed - - with Spinoza ' s consen t - - the o r ig ina l text.

T h e r e m a r k that " the Son of ( ;od is thc' F a t h e r h imse l f" occurs in C h a p t e r X of part II of the (;ogitata Metaphysica. In the p r i n t e d text, however , it is mere ly stated that the

'" Amsterdam. University l.ibrary (2 c~pies); The Hague, Royal Library (3 copies); Leeuwarden, Provincial IAbrary; Rijnshurg, l.ibrary of The Spinoza House Society; P, aarn, private collectim~ of Menno Hertzberger; Nieuwkoop, Messrs. De (;raaf, antiquarian booksellers; Paris, Bibloithbque Nationale (3 copies); |'mhn, University l,ibrary; Munich, Municipal l,ibrary (2 copies): Hanover, State IAhrary ~ff lx~wer Saxony; (;iittingen, Municipal and University IAbrary; Jert,salem, University Library; Washingum, I).C., l.ibrary of C<mgress (2 copies). Not examined: l,ond(m, British l,ibrary (2 copies); (3incinmui, Hebrew Union College Library; East Berlin, (;erman City l,ibrary; Tfibingen, University Library.

"~+' Benedicti de ,Spinoza Opera quotquot reperta ,sunt. Edited hy J. van Vloten and J.P.N. 1,and. 2nd ed., Vol. II1. The Hague, 1895, pp. 192-193.

10

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

F a t h e r s h a r e d h i s o w n e t e r n i t y w i t h t h e S o n , z] w h i c h d o e s n o t a c c o r d w i t h t h e p h r a s e c i t e d b y S p i n o z a . T h e a x i o m w h i c h S p i n o z a c i tes in t h e l e t t e r in s u p p o r t o f h i s P r o p o s i - t i o n is A x i o m 15 in P a r t I I o f t h e Principia Philosophiae? 2 H i s c o m m e n t o n t h e " p e r s o n a l i t a s " o c c u r s a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f C h a p t e r V I I I in P a r t I I o f t h e Cogitata Metaphysica. "e:+

C o m p a r i s o n o f t h e p r i n t e d t e x t w i t h S p i n o z a ' s a n s w e r in t h e l e t t er d e f i n i t e l y s u g g e s t s that t h e t e x t w a s a d a p t e d in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h S p i n o z a ' s r e s p o n s e . H a d t h e s e c h a n g e s b e e n m a d e a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e a c t u a l p r i n t i n g , o n e w o u l d e x p e c t t h e p e r t i n e n t p a s s a g e s to h a v e b e e n c a n c e l l e d , b u t n o c e r t a i n e v i d e n c e t h a t t h i s w as t h e c a s e h a s c o m e t o m y k n o w l e d g e . ~4 C o n c e i v a b l y , h o w e v e r , t h e s e c o n d p a r t o f t h e Cogitata Metaphysica h a d n o t ye t bee r ) se t a n d p r i n l e d w h e n M e i j e r c o n s u l t e d S p i n o z a ; t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y a s s u m e s e v e n g r e a t e r s i g n i f i c a n c e in t h e l i g h t o f S p i n o z a ' s r e m a r k t h a t M e i j e r m i g h t as wel l d e c i d e f o r h i m s e l f , s i n c e t h e c o p y was a c c e s s i b l e to h i m .

In c o n c l u s i o n , 1 m a y h e p e r m i t t e d s o m e r e m a r k s a b o u t S p i n o z a ' s p e r s o n a l a l t i t ude w i l h r e g a r d 1o I h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f h i s b o o k . His r e a l i n l e n l i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h t h e (?ogitata Metaphysica, h a v e o f t e n e l i c i l e d w o n d e r m e n t . T h i s w o r k h a s a h e r n a l e l y h e e n r e g a r d e d as a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f s c h o l a s t i c i s m , a n u n c o n s c i o u s e x p r e s s i o n o f F, a n t h e i s l i c i d e a s a n d , c o n - v e r s e l y , a n i n g e n i o u s d e m o n s l r a t i o n t h a l t h e t ) l a i l o s o p h y o f D e s c a r t e s h a d t m w b e e n SUF)erseded.'2~' S p i n o z a m a k e s it

"' Opera, 1, p. 271, lines 29-30+ h is ot inltrresl to nott.: the retnark of Dtanin-Borkowski, op. cit., I ). 136, on the tea(lion of Professor A. Heerelmort, of l,eiden, to the theories of the Spanish t)hilos<)pher Benedict Pereyra on this qt, estion, l lere we may possibly have the background to explain Meijer's reluctam:t" to publish this assertion.

"~ Opera, 1, p. 185, lines 4-5. ~ Opera, 1, p. 264, lines 10-13. ~' Only in the copy No. 1815 P, 36 of the Amstcrdanl University l,ibrary

are the l,caves QI antt Q4, RI, R2, R3 and R4 l)astcd on strips. These leaves cover part of the text <)f Chapters VIII and X. Remarkably, however, the text is printed from {he same type as the other copies examined by me, where there is no question of any cancels.

~' B. Wielenga, Spinoza's "Cogitata Metaphysica" als Anhang zu seiner DarsteUung der cartesianischen Prinzipienlehre. Heidelberg, 1899, p. 8. [Doctoral thesis.]

11

A.K. OFFENBERG

c l e a r in h i s l e t t e r to O l d e n b u r g t h a t h e a l so w i s h e d to u s e t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n to d r a w a t t e n t i o n o f t h o s e in h i g h p l a c e s in t h e R e p u b l i c to h i s p e r s o n a n d w o r k ; t h e n , in c a s e h i s o p u s w e r e f a v o u r a b l y r e c e i v e d , h e w o u l d b e a l l o w e d to c o n t i n u e p u b l i s h i n g u n m o l e s t e d , a n d t h u s b e in a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n to e x p r e s s h i s p e r s o n a l v iews . ~ S p i n o z a h e r e e v i d e n t l y a l l u d e s to t h e b r o t h e r s D e W i t t , a n d a c c o r d i n g to W i l l e m M e i j e r h e d i d i n d e e d a t t a i n h i s a i m . '27 T h e w o r k was t r a n s l a t e d i n t o D u t c h by P i e t e r B a i l i n g '2" w i t h i n t h e n e x t y e a r , a n d it p r o b a b l y a l so c o n t r i b u t e d - - a l o n g w i t h t h e i m p r e s s i o n c r e a t e d b y h i s T r a c t a t u s T h e o l o g i c o - P o l i t i c u s , w h i c h w a s a l r e a d y w i d e l y c i r c u l a t e d b y t h a t t i m e - - to t h e h o n o r i f i c i n v i t a t i o n o f 1 6 7 3 to o c c u p y t h e C h a i r o f p h i l o s o p h y a t H e i d e l b e r g , a l t h o u g h h e h a d t o d e c l i n e t h i s o f f e r . "29

I t s e e m s p l a u s i b l e , h o w e v e r , t h a t V l o e m a n s was c o r r e c t in 19'r w h e n h e s u s p e c t e d i n t u i t i v e l y t h a t S p i n o z a in 1 6 6 3 d i d i n d e e d h o p e to e a r n a p r o f e s s o r a t e w i t h h i s b o o k .

'~" Ep. XIII: "... Hat: nempe occasione forte aliqui, qui in mefi patrifi partas tenent, reperientur, t|tli t:aetera, quae srripsi, atque pro meis agnosco, desiderabunt videre; ade6que curabunt, ut ea extra omne incommodi pericuham communis juris facere possim ..." [For perhaps on this occasion persons will be found who in my native country hold the highest offices, and who will wish to see the other things which 1 have written and acknowledge as my own work; and who will then see that I can publish them without any risk of inconvenience.]

~7 Brieven van en aan Benedictus de Spinoza benevens des schrijvers Betoog over her zuivere denken. Translated from the Latin by W. Meijer. Amsterdam, 1897, p. 82. (Klassieke Schrijvers, Vol. 44; Spinoza's Works, Vol. Ill.)

~" This translation actually offers more than the original; Spinoza corrected, changed and expanded the text in many places. Cf. Gehhardt, "Textgestaltung," Opera, I, pp. 6 1 1 - 6 1 2 . - The two minor changes on pp. 93 and 94 of the l,atin edition are indeed incorporated in this translation; the more influential changes which Meijer had proposed in Chapters VIII and X of the Cogitata Metaphysica were evidently approved by Spinoza: the l,atin text is translated literally in these instances.

~' See the letter from ]. l,udwig Fabritius to Spinoza of 16 February 1673 and Spinoza's reply of 30 March 1673, Ep. XLVII and Ep. XLVIII, respectively, Opera, IV, pp. 234-236.

12

NEW LETTER OF SPINOZA

V l o e m a n s writes ( t r ans la t ed f rom the o r ig ina l passageS~ "Wha t can Sp inoza possibly have i n t e n d e d or h o p e d to convey with all these expos i t ions a b o u t which, at hear t , he c o u l d n ' t have ca red less, s ince the convic t ions he he ld d i f fered f u n d a m e n t a l l y f r o m the ones he re wr i t t en d o w n ? "

A n d now we read for the first t ime how Sp inoza h imse l f felt a b o u t a ce r ta in ques t i on in his book: ."... res a p u d me nu l l ius est m o m e n t i ..."!

Bibl io theca R o s e n t h a l i a n a Unive r s i ty of A m s t e r d a m A m s t e r d a m , T h e N e t h e r l a n d s

Dr. Of f enbe rg ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n , as well as those by Professors Naess a n d E i senbe rg , are pub l i shed by pe rmi s s ion of Rou t l edge & Kegan Paul, L o n d o n , a n d Mr. S. Hess ing , ed i to r of Speculum Spinozanum 1677-1977 which includes these papers.

~" A. VIoemans, Spinoza. De mensch, her leve~ en her werk. The Hague, 1931, p. 273.

13