BENEDICT DE SPINOZA: Theological-Political Treatise

Furtherqueries
appears penned correctly following the general rule. Did this too occur
because the hand slipped in writing it By what stroke of fate could it
happen that the pen was always in too much of a hurry whenever this word
cropped up They could easily and without scruple have completed the
word and made the correction according to the rules of grammar. Since
these readings are not co-incidental and such obvious faults were not
amended, they hold that they were deliberately made by the earliest writers
to convey something of special signi¢cance.
[17] These arguments are easily answered. I am not going to spend time
on the argument from the customary way of reading which they have
adopted. Superstition may have had some in£uence, and perhaps that was
the origin of it, because they judged both readings to be equally good or
tolerable, and lest either of them be lost, they wanted one to be written and
the other to be read. Being unsure, they were evidently afraid to exercise
their judgement in so important a matter, in case they chose the false
reading instead of the true one. They aimed to avoid giving preference to
either one, which they would certainly have done had they ordered that
only one be read out, especially as marginal notes are not written in the
sacred scrolls. Or perhaps it derived from the fact that they wanted certain
things, although correctly written, to be read out di¡erently, following
instructions in the margin. Hence they made it a general custom to read
the Bible in accordance with the marginal notes.
[18] I will now explain why the scribes were moved to note in the margin
certain things that were to be read out. Not all marginal notes are doubtful
readings; they also made a note about things that were foreign to everyday
usage, for example obsolete words, and words that the current sense of
propriety did not permit to be read in a public gathering.The ancient writers,
without any sense of wrongdoing, called things by their proper names
and did not resort to polite euphemisms. But after vice and debauchery
established their reign, things that the ancients uttered without obscenity, 138
came to be thought obscene.This was not a su⁄cient reason to alter Scripture;
but in order to humour the sensibility of the common people, they
took to ensuring that decent versions of the terms for sexual intercourse and
excrement were read out in public, as they had noted them in the margin.
In any case, whatever the reason why it became customary to read and
interpret Scripture according to the marginal readings, it was not because
139