A new and complete translation in English of this modern text, with substantive apparatus to allow the student and serious reader to grapple in a meaningful way with this seminal text, which Dr. Yaffe describes in his Translator’s Remarks: “the philosophical founding-document of both modern biblical criticism and modern liberal democracy....” As such, “it is also the philosophical founding-document of modern liberal religion.”
Tools in the text for the serious reader include the translation, ample footnotes, Spinoza’s annotations, an interpretative essay, glossary and other indices.
【Table of Contents】
Translator's Remarks
Acknowledgements
Spinoza's Preface
THEOLOGICO-POLITICAL TREATISE
Spinoza's Annotations
Glossary
Interpretive Essay
Selected Bibliography
Indexes
Citations
Names
Terms
【Translator's Remarks】
The following translation of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670)— the philosophical founding-document of both modern biblical criticism and modern liberal democracy—aims at the utmost literalness and consistency of terms which my own moderate ability and a proper and intelligible English allow. It is based on the Latin text found in Benedictus Spinoza, Opera, ed. C. Gebhardt (4 vols.; Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1925), III, 3-267, as corrected where necessary by Fokke Akkerman in Spinoza, Tractatus theologico-politicus / Traité théologico-politique, ed. F. Akkerman, trans. J. Lagrée and P.-F. Moreau (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1999). Boldface numbers enclosed in curly brackets indicate the corresponding pages in Gebhardt’s edition; numbers enclosed in square brackets indicate the section numbers superimposed onto the text of the Treatise by C.H. Bruder in Benedicti de Spinoza Opera quae supersunt omnia, ed. Bruder (3 vols.; Leipzig: B. Tauchnitz, Jr., 1843-46), III, 1-271.
Spinoza’s text consists of a Preface and twenty chapters, including occasional footnotes by Spinoza, plus thirty-nine Annotations added by Spinoza to the margins of his manuscript of the Treatise after its first publication and appended by subsequent editors. I have surrounded with quotation marks each of Spinoza’s footnotes, along with footnote references to the Annotations, and placed them among my own translator’s footnotes at the bottom of each page. Gebhardt has supplemented the Latin text of the Annotations with interpolations drawn from early Dutch and French translations; I have instead followed the text established by Akkerman, which drops most of the interpolations and surrounds the remaining ones with angular brackets. I have also consulted Akkerman’s footnotes freely for the purpose of confirming or supplementing my translator’s footnotes concerning Spinoza’s literary sources, etc.
Spinoza’s numerous Hebrew and Aramaic quotations have been retained in their original fonts, as have the three Greek words found in Annotation 26. That same Annotation contains in addition four Syriac expressions; although Spinoza himself also transliterates them, I have retained their original fonts as well.
Here and there I have altered Spinoza’s occasional transliteration of Hebrew words, to fit the ear of the modern Hebrew-speaker.
Citations to classical Greek and Latin authors are to the Loeb Classical Library editions of their works. Unless otherwise indicated, citations to rabbinic commentators other than Maimonides are to Mikraot Gedolot (10 vols.; New York: Pardes, 1951).
Interpolations of my own, consisting of an English word or two added or repeated so as to convey the drift of Spinoza’s Latin, are occasionally indicated by a small circle immediately following the inserted expression—thus°.
Spinoza’s Latin is fairly straightforward in its sentence structure, but often subtle in its word choices. Throughout his argument, he imputes new meanings to old words or, what amounts to the same thing, relies on the double meanings of Translator’s Remarks those words to convey his gist. On the one hand, then, his Treatise is like a routine political pamphlet in that he limits himself by and large to oldfashioned theological and political terms whose meanings are familiar to his intended reader from routine usage. On the other hand, it is like an academic textbook in that during the course of his argument Spinoza endows many of those terms with newfangled meanings —sometimes explicitly (e.g., “prophet,” “law”), sometimes only implicitly (e.g., “worship,” “imperium”)—so as to support his innovative conclusions. That Spinoza invites his reader to connect the oldfashioned and newfangled meanings of important theological and political terms is another way of describing his argument as a whole. Often a single English equivalent will serve to translate Spinoza’s Latin puns (if that is the right word for them), but often not. Whenever I have been forced to choose which lexical meaning to bring to the surface and which to leave submerged—in the hope that it will somehow survive and reemerge in the larger flow of the argument—I have usually preferred an English equivalent that keeps to the Treatise’s rhetorical flow, albeit at the risk of departing from its conceptual precision. Where appropriate, I have tried to indicate that risk by a footnote that supplies an alternate translation or else refers the reader to the Glossary, or both. Occasionally, too, I have used a footnote to indicate where in keeping with the rhetorical flow I have had to sacrifice the literal meaning of a Latin term, or where in keeping with the literal meaning I have had to sacrifice the rhetorical flow by translating in a way that at first glance might appear jarring to the English reader.
I have also retained Spinoza’s habit, preserved by Gebhardt in his edition of the Latin text, of frequently capitalizing common nouns for emphasis.
To indicate further what I have seen in Spinoza’s Latin which has led me to try to preserve the consistency of important terms wherever possible, I have added an Interpretive Essay and, alongside Indexes of Citations and Names, an extensive Index of Terms.
Finally, Spinoza’s Latin is characterized by paragraphs and sentences of often considerable length. To ease the burden on the English reader and to facilitate references to Spinoza’s text, I have numbered each Latin paragraph, as well as each Latin sentence within that paragraph. I have then treated each numbered sentence as a separate paragraph and punctuated Spinoza’s Latin half-stops as English full-stops. As a result, the third Latin sentence of the second paragraph of Spinoza’s first chapter, say, is 1.2.3. An “A” instead of a Chapter-number in the citation refers to Spinoza’s Annotations, a “P” to his Preface, a “T” to a Chapter-title, and “TP” to the Title Page. To help the reader’s eye while scanning the Indexes, I have placed all Chapter-numbers (and the aforementioned letters) there in boldface.
【Reviews】
[Professor Yaffe's] learned study of the treatise and his interpretations of its significance are simply among the most intelligent studies that one may find - his devotion to researching the teachings of the treatise has encouraged the production of this new English translation of it which is unique and comprehensive...and is valuable to every reader of Spinoza at every level of ability. Indeed, I have every confidence that his translated edition of the treatise, together with the outstanding scholarly critical apparatus that it employs, will be acknowledged universally as the best English translation and edition of the work available.
-- Paul J. Bagley, President North American Spinoza Society
Spinoza's Theologico-Political Treatise edited by Martin Yaffe (Focus, 480 pp., $24.95) Anyone lacking Latin who is seriously interested in, among other things, the philosophical foundations of liberal democracy, the rise of the historical-critical approach to the Bible, and Leo Strauss owes Martin Yaffe a substantial debt of gratitude for his edition of Spinoza's Theologico-Political Treatise. Yaffe's edition of the Treatise far surpasses all its competitors in its faithfulness to Spinoza's peculiar manner of writing. It thus provides us fresh access to the late 17th-century work, which is at once "the philosophical founding document of both modern liberal democracy and modern biblical criticism."
Yaffe's excellent interpretive essay helps readers to see why Spinoza regarded his dual foundings--of liberal democracy and of a "critical" way of reading the Bible--as being inextricably linked. As for Yaffe's contribution to the study of Strauss, it consists not only of the way in which he follows Strauss's admonition to translators not to impose their own prejudices on a text, but also the way he keys his text to the Latin editions that Strauss employed in his great essay "How to Study Spinoza's Theologico-Political Treatise."
Yaffe thereby enables Latinless readers to investigate the hundreds of citations to the Treatise that Strauss provides throughout his essay. Because of his seriousness and because of his modesty--he does not confuse himself with a thinker of Spinoza's rank--Yaffe is a most able guide to Spinoza.
-- Steven Lenzner, Weekly Standard
Martin Yaffe’s remarkable new translation of the Treatise faces these issues in an explicit and engaging manner that is likely to attract new interest among students in Theology, Political Theory, and Philosophy. Rather than cover his tracks, he attempts to share with the reader the central decisions confronting a sensitive and careful translator. Throughout the text, he notes those occasions where the literal translation would simplify and distort the argument. In some cases, where the transformation of meaning is more dramatic, he chooses to retain the Latin original as, for example, with the term “imperium.” To shed further light on these decisions, he provides a glossary of key terms and a commentary on the entire text.
This decision to allow the reader to observe and participate in the process of translation is deliberate and reflects Yaffe’s thoughtful interpretation of the Treatise. Yaffe argues that the problems of translating the shifting meanings of Spinoza’s key terms and the relationship between theology and politics are really two sides of the same coin. In his view, Spinoza exploits the ambiguity of language to appeal to Christian readers, while at the same time, pushing them to reflect on the underlying basis of their theology. Indeed, at the very beginning of his argument, Spinoza asks his readers to consider “why human beings who boast that they profess the Christian religion – that is, love, gladness, peace, continence, and faith toward all – should clash in a more than inequitable spirit and exercise the bitterest hatred toward one another daily…” (preface, xviii). He goes on to suggest that Christianity has been hijacked and vulgarized by unscrupulous men who abuse its teachings in order to satisfy their ambitions for the wealth and power of ecclesiastical offices. Among their most insidious methods for obscuring and twisting the word of God is the importation of foreign or superstitious ideas into the Bible, particularly “the theories of Aristotelians and Platonists” (preface, xix). Spinoza invites us then, in this apparent spirit of piety, to rediscover the essential teachings of Christianity so that we may safeguard them in the future.
-- Steven Frankel, Interpretation 32.2 (Spring, 2005): 171-78.
Baruch or Benedict de Spinoza (Hebrew: ברוך שפינוזה, Portuguese: Bento de Espinosa, Latin: Benedictus de Spinoza) (November 24, 1632 – February 21, 1677) was a Dutch philosopher of Portuguese Jewish origin.[1] Revealing considerable scientific aptitude, the breadth and importance of Spinoza's work was not fully realized until years after his death. Today, he is considered one of the great rationalists[2] of 17th-century philosophy, laying the groundwork for the 18th century Enlightenment[2] and modern biblical criticism.[2] By virtue of his magnum opus, the posthumous Ethics, in which he opposed Descartes' mind–body dualism, Spinoza is considered to be one of Western philosophy's most important philosophers. Philosopher and historian Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel said of all modern philosophers, "You are either a Spinozist or not a philosopher at all."[3] Spinoza has consistently attracted the interest of thinkers including during the last hundred years.[4][5][6]
Though active in the Dutch Jewish community and extremely well-versed in Jewish texts, his controversial ideas eventually led community leaders to issue a cherem (Hebrew: חרם, a kind of excommunication) against Spinoza, effectively dismissing him from Jewish society at age 23.[1][2] Likewise, all of Spinoza's works were listed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (List of Prohibited Books) by the Roman Catholic Church.
Spinoza lived quietly as a lens grinder, turning down rewards and honors throughout his life, including prestigious teaching positions, and gave his family inheritance to his sister. Spinoza's moral character and philosophical accomplishments prompted 20th century philosopher Gilles Deleuze to name him "the 'prince' of philosophers."[7] Spinoza died at the age of 44 of a lung illness, perhaps tuberculosis or silicosis exacerbated by fine glass dust inhaled while tending to his trade. Spinoza is buried in the churchyard of the Nieuwe Kerk on Spui in The Hague.
In Theological-Political Treatise, Spinoza addresses his argument towards his treatise under the presumption and his discovery that Scriptures are not constructed by philosophic mysteries but instead of simple narrations of past events which are presented ...
评分斯宾诺莎的著作不好理解,对一个普通的中国人而言,一来对《圣经》不够熟悉,二来对斯宾诺莎所处时代的《圣经》的神学解释不够熟悉,笔者亦非专门做《圣经》研究或圣经阐释学的人,在此仅分享下个人对斯宾诺莎此本《神学政治论》的章节结构的理解。 从一般的阅读而言,自然要从...
评分In Theological-Political Treatise, Spinoza addresses his argument towards his treatise under the presumption and his discovery that Scriptures are not constructed by philosophic mysteries but instead of simple narrations of past events which are presented ...
评分斯宾诺莎《神学政治论》 内容摘要: 序言 斯宾诺莎在序言之初先分析了迷信产生及其作用。他认为,“迷信是由恐惧而生,由恐惧维系而后助长的”,故而“谬误的宗教所崇奉的预兆不过是心在沮丧或惧怕的时候所生的幻影而已”,自然宗教也就成为造成诸多的混乱的根源;因此,写作...
评分斯宾诺莎(Spinoza)不是最早挑战传统基督教和神权的, 但是读了<神学政治论>, 对一个不过三十出头的青年在那个还未走出中世纪阴影的时代, 对宗教, 政治, 自由, 人权能有如此清晰的思考和论述, 不禁令人敬仰. 这本书的主旨应该还是为了抨击神权的. 虽然有意无意的绕了一点圈...
在我翻阅《Theologico-Political Treatise》这本书的时候,我的内心充盈着一种对知识的渴望和对思想的敬畏。书名本身就揭示了一种深刻的智力追求,它预示着这本书将深入探讨神学与政治这两个人类文明的基石性范畴,以及它们之间复杂而又引人入胜的互动关系。我设想,作者定是一位拥有深厚学养、敏锐洞察力以及非凡勇气来挑战既定观念的思想家。这本书的出现,对我来说,更像是一扇通往智慧殿堂的门扉,邀请我进行一次深刻的哲学探索。我期待着,通过阅读这本书,能够获得一种全新的理解,一种能够让我更好地认识世界、认识自我、认识我们所处时代的力量。
评分这本书的封面设计,散发着一种古老而又神秘的气息,仿佛里面蕴藏着足以改变世界的力量。《Theologico-Political Treatise》这个书名,更是直接挑动了我对那些能够揭示社会运行本质和人类信仰根源的著作的兴趣。我设想,作者一定是一位极具远见卓识的思想家,他能够以一种超凡的视角,剖析神学与政治之间那错综复杂、却又密不可分的联系。我期待这本书能够像一位博学的导师,引领我穿越历史的迷雾,去理解那些塑造我们现代世界的深层力量,并从中获得宝贵的启示。
评分我对那些能够引发深入思考的著作有着近乎痴迷的追求,而《Theologico-Political Treatise》的书名,恰恰是这种追求的完美体现。它直接指向了人类思想史上两个永恒的、相互交织的主题:神学与政治。我设想,作者必定是一位对这两个领域都有着极其深刻理解的学者,他能够以一种前所未有的方式,将它们融汇贯通,揭示出它们之间隐藏的深刻联系。这本书的到来,仿佛是一个精心打磨的钥匙,即将开启我通往更广阔精神世界的大门。我期待它能够挑战我固有的认知,提供一种全新的视角来审视我们所处的社会以及我们赖以生存的信仰体系。
评分我一直坚信,思想的力量是无穷的,而那些能够深刻触及人类存在本质的著作,更是弥足珍贵。《Theologico-Political Treatise》这个书名,就如同一个充满智慧的灯塔,指引着我走向对神学与政治这两个宏大主题的深入探索。我设想,作者一定是位对人类历史、哲学思想以及社会结构有着深刻洞察的智者。这本书的出现,对我来说,不仅仅是一次阅读,更是一次心灵的洗礼,一次智力的冒险。我期待它能够挑战我固有的观念,让我以全新的视角去审视那些塑造我们世界的根本性力量,并最终找到属于自己的思想定位。
评分在如今这个信息爆炸的时代,找到一本真正能够沉淀心灵、引发长久思考的书籍实属不易。而《Theologico-Political Treatise》正是这样一本让我眼前一亮的著作。它的命名本身就充满了哲学的高度和历史的厚度,预示着它将触及人类文明中最核心的议题。我喜欢这种不落俗套的书名,它立刻将我从日常的琐碎中抽离出来,引向更广阔的精神领域。我设想,作者在撰写此书时,必定投入了极大的心力,去梳理、去构建一个严谨而又充满洞见的思想体系。这本书就像一位博学的长者,正带着他的人生智慧,等待着与我进行一场跨越时空的对话。我渴望通过阅读它,能够对那些关于社会治理、个体信仰以及它们之间微妙平衡的理解,有一个全新的认识。
评分在我看来,一本真正伟大的著作,往往在于它能够触及人类经验中最核心、最根本的问题。《Theologico-Political Treatise》这个书名,就精准地传达了这种信息。它暗示着这本书将深入探讨神学与政治这两个看似独立实则紧密相连的领域,揭示它们之间复杂而又充满张力的关系。我设想,作者必定是一位有着深厚学养和独特洞察力的思想家,他将以一种严谨而又富有启发性的方式,引导读者去思考这些关乎人类文明走向的根本性议题。当我拿到这本书时,我感受到的不仅仅是纸张的触感,更是一种精神上的召唤,一种探索真理的渴望。
评分这本书的封面设计就足够吸引人,一种复古的、带着古老智慧的质感扑面而来。纸张的触感也很好,不是那种过于光滑的印刷品,而是带着些许纹理,让人联想到那些承载着历史的古籍。当我在静谧的午后,翻开这本书的时候,我立刻被它散发出的深邃气息所吸引。它的装帧精美,每一个细节都透露着制作者的用心。我喜欢那种厚重感,它暗示着书页中蕴含的知识和思想的份量。尽管我还没有深入阅读,但我已经可以预见到,这将是一次充满挑战但也极具回报的智力之旅。书的整体风格,从字体选择到段落排版,都展现出一种严谨而又不失美学的态度,这让我对作者的创作过程充满了好奇。我常常在想,在作者构思这些文字的时候,他或许也是在这样一个宁静的午后,怀揣着怎样的信念和思考?这本书不仅仅是一个阅读的对象,更像是一扇通往另一个世界的大门,等待我去探索。我迫不及待地想要沉浸其中,去感受那些超越时代的思想碰撞。
评分我对于任何能够触及人类思想核心的著作都抱有极大的兴趣,而《Theologico-Political Treatise》这个书名,无疑精准地击中了我的阅读偏好。它暗示着作者将深入探讨信仰与政治这两个人类社会最基本、也最复杂的维度,并试图在它们之间找到一种深刻的联系或张力。当我拿到这本书时,我感受到的不仅仅是纸张的物理重量,更是一种精神上的期待。我预感这本书的作者一定是一位具有远见卓识的思想家,他能够以一种独特的方式,揭示出我们所生活的世界背后更深层次的运作逻辑。我期待这本书能够挑战我习以为常的观念,用其精妙的论证和深刻的见解,为我打开新的思维窗口。
评分读一本好书,就像与一位伟大的灵魂进行一场深入的交流。而《Theologico-Political Treatise》这个书名,就如同一个精心设计的邀请函,邀请我去探索那些关于人类精神信仰与社会政治结构之间错综复杂的关系。我设想,作者必然是一位对历史进程、人类心理以及社会组织有着深刻理解的思想巨匠。这本书的出现,对于我这样一个长期以来对这些宏大议题充满好奇的读者来说,无疑是一场期待已久的智力盛宴。我喜欢它那种低调而又充满力量的书名,它暗示着内容将是严肃且富有启发的,而不是浮于表面的浅薄论述。我期待它能够带领我穿梭于思想的历史长河,去领悟那些塑造我们现代社会的根本性力量。
评分我一直对那些能够引发深度思考的著作情有独钟,而这本《Theologico-Political Treatise》从书名上就散发着这样一种强大的吸引力。它唤起了我对人类存在意义、社会结构以及信仰与理性之间复杂关系的永恒追问。这本书的出现,仿佛是为我长期以来内心深处的某些困惑提供了一个潜在的解答方向。我设想,作者一定是一位对历史、哲学和宗教有着深刻洞察的思想家,他将以一种前所未有的方式,将这些看似独立却又密不可分的领域联系起来。当我拿到这本书时,我并没有立刻急于翻阅,而是先静静地感受它的分量,想象着书页中那些将要字字珠玑的思想。我期待它能够挑战我固有的认知,拓宽我理解世界的视野。我相信,阅读这样一本书,不仅仅是为了获取知识,更是为了进行一场深刻的自我对话,重新审视自己在这个宏大叙事中的位置。
评分 评分 评分 评分 评分本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有