454 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.— SUPPLEMENT. 



appear in his lifetime. The work had a certain 

 private circulation, however, among Spinoza's 

 friends. In the same year, 16*75, we have a 

 series of letters raising sundry questions on the 

 most abstruse points in the system. The objec- 

 tions here stated are by far the most acute of 

 those which Spinoza had to encounter from his 

 various correspondents, and it gave him no small 

 trouble to answer them. He does not, indeed, 

 give a complete answer, and all but admits that 

 he cannot. The chief part in these letters is now 

 assigned to Ehrenfried Walter von Tschimhausen, 

 a young German nobleman, who was intimate 

 with both Leibnitz and Spinoza, and afterward 

 became a member of the French Academy of Sci- 

 ences, and was distinguished in mathematics and 

 physics, and most chiefly by advances in optics. 

 In the construction of lenses, in particular, he 

 arrived at brilliant results ; and one may guess 

 that this special study was the common ground 

 on which his acquaintance with Spinoza was first 

 formed. 1 



In 16*76 Spinoza received an extraordinary 

 letter dated from Florence, and written by one 

 Albert Burgh, identified by Van Vloten's plausi- 

 ble conjecture with the fellow-lodger whose facil- 

 ities of intercourse with Spinoza Simon de Vries 

 had envied, and of whose temper and capacities 

 Spinoza had expressed the doubtful opinion al- 

 ready quoted. He now informed Spinoza that he 

 had been received into the Church of Rome, and 

 proceeded to denounce with all the zeal of a 

 proselyte the profane philosophy he had aban- 

 doned. He tells Spinoza that all his learning is 

 merely chimerical, and laments that he should 

 suffer himself to be so deceived by the devil. He 

 asks, with delightful simplicity : 



" How do you know that your philosophy is the 

 best of all that are, or have been, or will be taught 

 in the world ? Have you examined all the ancient 

 and modern systems of philosophy which are 

 taught here, in India, and all over the face of the 

 earth ? And even if you have, how do you know 

 you have chosen the right one ? " 

 Spinoza framed the obvious retort in the easiest 



1 Tschimhausen has received, I think, hard measure 

 from Van Vloten and others for the unacknowledged 

 use of Spinoza's work in his "Medicina Mentis." 

 Not only was it the hahit of the time to be careless in 

 this duty, hut Tschimhausen may not unreasonahly 

 have been of opinion that his only way to secure a fair 

 hearing for Spinoza's ideas was to conceal their true 

 authorship. It is certain, however, that he gave of- 

 fense tobothHuygens and Leibnitz by appropriating, 

 without acknowledgment, unpublished ideas which 

 they had communicated to him (Van Vloten, "Bene- 

 dictus de Spinoza," App. III.). 



and most effective manner by repeating the con- 

 vert's own words : 



" How do you know that your teachers are the 

 best of all those who teach, or have taught, or will 

 teach, other systems of religion \ Have you exam- 

 ined all the ancient and modern systems of reli- 

 gion which are taught here, in India, and all over 

 the face of the earth 'I And even if you nave, how 

 do you know you have chosen the right one ? " 



Burgh's letter runs to a great length, and is a 

 curious specimen of unrefined theological amen- 

 ity. I can give only a condensed extract as a 

 specimen : 



" Do not flatter yourself," he cries, " with the re- 

 flection that the Calvinists, or so-called Eeformers, 

 the Lutherans, the Mennonites, the Socinians, etc., 

 cannot refute your doctrine. All those poor creat- 

 ures, as I have already said, are in as wretched a 

 state as you, and are sitting along with you in the 

 shadow of death. 



" Worm and ashes and food for worms that you 

 are, how dare you set up for knowing better than 

 all the Church ? What foundation have you for 

 this rash, insane, deplorable, accursed arrogance ? 

 What business have you to judge of mysteries 

 which Catholics themselves declare to be incom- 

 prehensible ?" 



One of his arguments is, that it is presump- 

 tuous to disbelieve in alchemy and ghosts because 

 Julius Csesar would probably not have believed 

 a prophecy of gunpowder. Finally, he threatens 

 Spinoza with eternal damnation if he is not 

 convinced. The immortal discourse delivered by 

 Brother Peter in the " Tale of a Tub," which ends 

 with invoking similar consequences on those who 

 offer to believe otherwise, is hardly a caricature 

 of this effusion. 



Spinoza's answer, 1 which I have anticipated 

 in part, was much the sharpest he ever wrote. 

 As far as argument went he had no serious task ; 

 the letter contains, however, some striking pas- 

 sages. " As for your argument about the com- 

 mon consent of multitudes, the unbroken succes- 

 sion of the Church, etc., that is just the story I 

 know of old from the Pharisees : for they pro- 

 duce their multitudes of witnesses with no less 

 confidence than the adherents of Rome." They 

 are the most ancient, the most persistent, the 

 most obstinate of all the Churches ; and if mar- 

 tyrs are evidence, they have more to show than 

 any other. Even in ecclesiastical discipline, he 

 says, Rome is surpassed by the Mohammedans, 

 for they have had no schisms. This seems a 

 rash statement for a writer versed in Jewish 



« Ep. LXXIV. 



