28.01.2015 Views

BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings<br />

whatever position they have taken up, in the name of religion.There seems<br />

to be no room left for reason except perhaps among a very few persons<br />

(few in relation to the rest), so completely have these prejudices taken over<br />

men’s minds. I will however make the attempt and not give up on the task,<br />

since there is no reason for complete despair.<br />

[3] In order to demonstrate these things in due order, I commence with<br />

the false assumptions generally made about the real authors of the sacred<br />

books, and ¢rst with the author of the Pentateuch, whom nearly everyone<br />

has believed to be Moses. Indeed the Pharisees so vigorously defended this<br />

supposition that they considered anyone who took a di¡erent view a heretic.This<br />

is why Ibn Ezra, a man of quite liberal disposition and considerable<br />

learning, who was the ¢rst of all the writers I have read to call attention<br />

to this assumption, did not dare plainly to state his view but merely hinted<br />

at it with some rather obscure words which I shall not be afraid to render<br />

clearer here in order to make the point itself quite evident.<br />

Here are Ibn Ezra’s words from his commentary on Deuteronomy:<br />

‘‘‘Beyond the Jordan etc’’: If you understand the mystery of the twelve and<br />

of ‘‘Moses wrote the Law’’and ‘‘the Canaanite was then in the land’’and ‘‘it<br />

will be revealed on the mountain of God’’and also‘‘behold his bed, a bed of<br />

iron’’, thenyou will know the truth’. 2 In these few words he discloses and, at<br />

the same time, demonstrates that it was not actually Moses who wrote the<br />

Pentateuch but some other person who lived much later, and that the book<br />

Moses wrote was a di¡erent work.<br />

In order to prove this, he notes:<br />

(1) that the preface of Deuteronomy could not have been composed by 119<br />

Moses, since he did not cross the Jordan.<br />

(2) that the entire book of Moses was inscribedvery distinctly on the face of a<br />

single altar (see Deuteronomy 27, Joshua 8.37, etc.), an altar which consisted of<br />

only twelve stones according to the report of the rabbis, from which it follows<br />

that the book of Moses was a much more slender volume than the Pentateuch.<br />

This is what I think our author wished to signify by referring to ‘the mystery of<br />

the twelve’, though he might have meant the twelve curses mentioned in the<br />

same chapter of Deuteronomy. For it could be that he believed that they had<br />

not been included in the book of the Law, because, Moses not only commanded<br />

the Levites to inscribe the Law but also to recite these curses in order to bind the<br />

2 Commentary on Deuteronomy, 1.5.<br />

119

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!