Spinoza

This book is in two parts which are almost equal in length. The first half covers the migration of the Sephardic Jews from Portugal to Amsterdam, Spinoza’s family background, details about some of the leaders in the Jewish community, a bit about Spinoza’s neighbor Rembrandt, and life for young Bento (or Baruch) growing up and as a merchant after his father died. The cut-off point is Spinoza’s excommunication (“herem”) at age 23 from the Jewish community in July 1656, and the author’s analysis of why that happened. Nadler’s extensive and detailed research gives the reader a deep context by which to understand Spinoza’s early life. The second half, while also detailing Spinoza’s life after leaving the Jewish community, has much more about his philosophy. Nadler gives highly readable summaries of Spinoza’s two most important works, the Ethics and the Theological-Political Treatise. Though he worked on the Ethics before the Treatise, Spinoza published the Treatise first so that readers would have a better understanding of his metaphysical and moral analysis in the Ethics. But, with a few exceptions, the reading public did not care and did not want to understand (or detested) the Treatise. While the Dutch Republic has a reputation of being the most tolerant European country in the 1600’s, Nadler points out how in Spinoza’s lifetime religious absolutism was becoming (again) tied to the secular state and Spinoza, fearing for his safety, did not publish the Ethics during his lifetime. Nadler does a superb job of interweaving the changes in the government to Spinoza’s later life. The liberal leader, Johan De Witt, under whom the freedom to publish and discuss unorthodox ideas was acceptable, was taken by a mob, beaten to death, and his body hung by the feet and torn to bits. One of Spinoza’ closest friends who wrote in a similar vein as Spinoza was arrested and died in prison a year later. As Nadler shows, Spinoza was a fortunate man whose “atheism” was being condemned by official government bodies even as he lay dying of tuberculosis augmented by dust from his lens-grinding work. Nadler points out that Spinoza was not the loner often associated with his image. Nor was he always quiet and unassuming which is another part of the common image of the man. But what Nadler does show unmistakably is the genius and breadth of mind of this remarkable man in the 1600’s. With modifications today based on current science, Spinoza’s goal of understanding and incorporating into the mind as many causes in the universe as possible (including understanding causes of our own emotions) continues to be a goal worthy of any human being if we are to have a future together. His criticisms of narrow-minded religions and authoritarian governments are as relevant today as in 1670. And, unlike many thinkers and philosophers, Spinoza lived what he taught – toleration, open-mindedness, and constant attempts to expand his understanding. Nadler’s biography gives full justice to this extraordinary man.

A definitive biography and philosophy of this throughly modern philosopher.

For the first 117 pages of this biography you are emmeshed in the micro-history of a struggling and ultimately successful Sephardic community in Amsterdam-- Spinoza doesn't even get born until chapter 3 and doesn't really enter history until he is anathemized in chapter 6. The net effect of this focus on the Amsterdam synagogue is to root Spinoza in his Jewishness--they kicked him out and he renounced them but in this book he remains Bento and Baruch much more than Benedictus. (Nadler p.388 suggests Spinoza "may have even had a mind to be present" at the consecration of the community's new synagogue in 1675--a delightful but very unlikely speculation that tells us more about this book's strategy than about Spinoza). Bringing that community back to life is a real achievement and I for one found it a unique window into the birth struggles of capitalism and the modern liberal state (it sounds a lot like today). As far as laying out Spinoza's story, Nadler has a lifetime of study behind him and this is the standard biography in English. If the Sephardic rabbis in their disputes and foibles come across as more lively than Bento, that may be what happens when you cultivate equanimity (and also perhaps a result of most of Spinoza's personal correspondence being destroyed, to avoid incriminating others). Nadler lets you know in the preface that this is not an "intellectual" biography. Nevertheless he could have done more to tell the reader about the Ethics (p. 265ff). The Tractatus gets fuller coverage (but if religion is so bad, why do are Nadler's Amsterdam Sephardim so sympathetic?). I would have been curious to know more about Spinoza's opinions about Jesus, whom he apparently calls "Christ" in his writings (we get a paragraph p.337 and there is no Jesus or Christ in the Index). Supplementing this book with the recent Spinoza's Religion, by Claire Carlisle, may provide a more rounded view of what Leibnitz called Spinoza's "strange metaphysics." In the end it isn't the metaphysics that fascinates but the fact that this man in the mid 1600s sounds so 22d century. Like our celebrity atheists he reduces religion to morality (he sees the cultural and community aspects of religion as not only irrational, as they certainly are, but pernicious, which is more arguable). In a universe with no goal, run by a "philosophical" God who does not know your name (or apparently anything beyond physics equations), where everything you do is predetermined by rigid causality, Spinoza managed not only to be cheerful and positive but also found meaning in his work. In the special sense the word carries in his system, but also perhaps in the usual sense of the word, he was truly blessed.

Used this book for a paper on Spinoza. Super knowledgeable and interesting. Plus gave me all the background info I needed to write.

Steven Nadler’s 2018 432-page “Spinoza: A Life,” Second Edition, published by Cambridge University Press, is a treasure trove for readers intrigued by philosophy, history, and biographies. It takes us on a unique journey into the life of Spinoza ((1632-1677), reminding us that our understanding of his life is a tapestry of uncertainties, where what we believe to be accurate and how we interpret his philosophy are mere conjectures, prone to disagreements. For instance, we have no portrait of Spinoza. We know he was never in perfect health but do not know the extent of his condition. However, Nadler's narrative is not devoid of certainty. He paints a vivid picture of the past, immersing us in the historical events that shaped Holland and its neighboring countries during Spinoza’s short 45-year lifetime. Nadler's account reveals intriguing mysteries about Spinoza's life. For instance, he tells us that Bauch de Spinoza was apparently among the more gifted students in Amsterdam’s Portuguese-Jewish School, but we do not know how long he studied there. Thus, we do not know the extent of his Jewish education. We do not know what turned him into a philosopher and why he was put in herem, excommunicated, in a biting 1656 ban that was never rescinded when he was 24. We know he had Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed in his library but do not know to what extent the book influenced his thinking. What is clear is that he wanted to be a rational thinker, but how logical is conjectural. For example, he wrote that women are inferior to men, must be excluded from the government because of their natural weakness, and must submit to men. We know that, as did other Jews in Holland, he feared if his actual views were stated, the government in Holland would kill him, so he had to hide his philosophy in ways that would only be interpretable by highly educated people, but this resulted in his writings being unclear and subject to debate. It seems that he agreed with Aristotle and Maimonides that there is no such thing as a soul separate from the human body and eternal. However, the mind, thinking, is part of the body and does continue after death, but how or where it goes is unknown. He agrees with the Jewish sage Abraham ibn Ezra (1089-1167) that at least parts of the Pentateuch, the Five Books of Moses, were not written by Moses. He adds to the list of later compositions that ibn Ezra composed. He seems to conclude that God did not communicate the Torah to Moses. We know he expressed his strong feelings that he was not an atheist, but we do not know if this was just his public persona. He equated God and nature together, but how this should be interpreted is unclear. Did he mean that God does not exist but that what we call God is nature? Or did he think, as did Maimonides, that we can learn something about God by viewing what was created in nature, and, therefore, science reveals to humans some things about God? While the certainty of Spinoza's ideas may be debatable, what is undeniable is their thought-provoking nature. As we delve into the history of Holland and explore Spinoza's ideas, we are compelled to think deeply, a testament to the enduring relevance of his philosophy.

Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677) is one of the most influential philosophers in history. As a young man, her was excommunicated by the elders of the Jewish community in Amsterdam and subsequently came to be regarded by some as a "secular saint" and by others as an infamous atheist. Although there are many legends and myths about Spinoza's life, there has been no extended biography in English until Nadler's study. In fact, outside of brief accounts written shortly after Spinoza's death, this book is probably the first extended treatment of Spinoza's life in any language. Given the scarcity of biographical information, Nadler does an excellent job in placing Spinoza's life in historical context. He discusses in detail how the Jewish community in Amsterdam became established, precariously, by immigrants from the Inquisition in Spain and Portugal. He describes the efforts the Jewish community made to win acceptance in Amsterdam, the place of Spinoza's family in the Jewish community, and the rabbis and leaders of the community. Some of this material is well-known, others of it is less so. It is all valuable to getting to understand Spinoza. There is a great deal of discussion of the history of the Dutch republic in Spinoza's time. Nadler's discussion includes both internal affairs (the tension between those who wanted a powerful monarch and those who wanted republican institutions) and the complex foreign wars and shifting alliances of the Netherlands during Spinoza's time. I never could make sense of this material before, but Nadler has discussed it well and in sufficient detail to provide a good background in understanding Spinoza's political ideas. Nadler's book is not itself a philosophical study. But he treats carefully and instructively the origin of Spinoza's works and he summarizes their complex ideas well. He does not limit his discussion to the "Ethics". Instead, Nadler spends a great deal of time on the "Theological-Political Treatise" which he rightly views as a neglected masterpiece complementary to the Ethics. There are also good discussions of Spinoza's unfinished "Hebrew Grammar" and, particularly, of the Epistles, as well as of his other works. Nadler has a good sense of Spinoza's naturalism encompassed be the famous phrase "deus, siva natura". He gives the reader a good feel for the revolutionary nature of Spinoza's thought and shows how and why Spinoza departed from the traditional religious belief of his day. Nadler is a careful in his use of sources. He tells the reader what evidence from a record both complex and sparse he accepts, what he doubts, and why. When Nadler draws a conclusion that goes beyond the available evidence, he tells the reader that he has done so and why he has done so. This is measured, careful writing about a figure Nadler obviously admires. There is much creative detail in this book as Nadler draws on recent scholarship to cast light on Spinoza and his times. For example, he relies substantially on the report made to the Inquisition of a person who knew Spinoza in Amsterdam. He discusses the Sabatti Zvi incident (a false Jewish Messiah who appealed to many people during Spinoza's lifetime) and Spinoza's possible knowledge of it. The book debunks the myth of Spinoza as a recluse. One of the strongest features of the book is its picture of Spinoza's intellectual circle and of his relationship to many friends. The book doesn't include a critical analysis of Spinoza's thought. Such studies are legion and there still is much to say and learn. Also, the book doesn't discuss the reception and influence of Spinoza through the years. Again, this is beyond the scope of the book. The book is an excellent biography of a seminal figure in Western philosophy. I came away from the book with a increased understanding of and appreciation for Spinoza's life and thought. Robin Friedman

Nadler's work is distinguished by his great familiarity with not only Spinoza, but also his contemporaries, Descartes and Leibniz. I've read one other book by Nadler, but this one stands out. The integration of social, political, and cultural life in the Netherlands in the 1600s is very impressive. And, while some scholars prefer just a treatment of the ideas of great authors, I value those who can integrate the personal life of a thinker with the evolution of his ideas. Spinoza, perhaps more than some others, benefits from rendering his revolutionary ideas in less theological language, thus making them easier for 21st Century readers. From this study, I came to see in Spinoza, a very daring thinker who really advanced a world view that clearly foreshadows the 'modern' world. Nadler's writing style is persistently engaging and informative without unnecessary commentary. Again, many scholars dismiss the role of biography as a way of gaining access to a thinker's work, but Nadler's presentation of what is known about Spinoza's character and experiences with censure and friendship, makes his writings all the more trenchant. Sadly, Descartes seems to get most of the attention among 17th C. philosophers and Spinoza remains unexamined by many - perhaps due to his theological language. In many ways, it seems S. might prove the more original thinker once one carefully listens to the meaning behind what seems, on the surface, to be just so much theology. Students of this period in history in Europe ought to add this to one's required list of reading.

My husband read this to the two of us. We expected a biography, but got many philosophy lessons as well. Not much about his actual life. A little dissappointing.