Leo Strauss: Gerhard Krüger's review of Strauss' Religionskritik Spinozas [1930-1]

:--

,I

,

1< lti.\' c.~(I ,

o.b \.. l;

s/lI:..ua a)) .... oJ> 6~ .,;... ;.~ ,W ' ..~I 6-"173I h"9" I rf . _ I ~t ril.;'J Lt '... ~ .... ~' ~_1:::: " . ..w !!l .. ..-0

G. e: ~ tl.1IltO,'" R~

Voi.J~ C I~81/1td.,...d ..'kN_ oIP'd"'1Cf'IoY

~

~ tA cw.O·

0.., w..'~ ~ Il.JJlt.1J

l REVIEW O F LEO ST RAUSS' DIE RELlGIONSKRITlK S PiN OZ A S A L S GR UND LAG E SEINER BIBELW fSSEN SCHA F ?

a'"

/'1 _

l

'I .I

S- /1 'i

G ERH A R D K R OGER

'I'M /o/lqwi", il Q frQ7LfItz1io1f 0/ Q ,ro~ ~~ Krii,ero/lAJ S""",,'/lnt book. Spinau.',CrltiqJe of Religion (/ 930}.' TM 1YVI_. a >lQltwOTfhy aal1tplc of 1M iITt, discu..... tM lhmln 0/ ,hi• ..."k in" ....1IIItJ" oo/h /llcJd ,,1Id .ymp'lIhuic y tt nol wit/rout" cerN tlf criliall dl,tann, The imporrllnce to Stnlu.. oJ tid, ~ WIU tmphIJ'ized in Iitt prefocc writt en In 1965 {or 1M PMlk
to'

'O ,

and rai'l'd In Gmnony who fou nd hi"""lf In rhe grip of the Ihtoiofical.poUl ini prohIml. It;u book whkh ob.loully addu~a a {undtmrenlal pon of thlll probhm o. it p,nent' Itstlfill modem tllooKh I. But tM """k of KIJr I &rt h b al'O port of 1M Iheologicol ~"",ken'ng. M obS6> td. It moy be surmlJed INtI St=J& did not Ihlnk 1M IMoiog/t:ltl-pohtical problem ~hJli>dy JrwiJh IIOf exc/u~1y Gcmon; it "",y IIaH befc~ once ogoin 0 prob~ for Olhfr foil lu and countrln and for all who o nce co nfidently exp«r SuxltBut iIl,"~ of tho EaliCh_nl in JftI c.al- ( p. 199. 209) . TIUl. ' '£picu,""n '''''''M is ill ltoelf ".......... ~ 1Io d,ff~' posabdllits for safisCacbon - Motts loImdolooolul ~ed ialmonalit:y""""roninl- ..... bl lho M..... do C-.. It Ihtarmtd " non (I'. 28f; 511-9) ; bu l in Ihe """ it is 00-, Ihe ............, """""_~ mosl lhoroupdy .. t;.fle< Ihe inte""t in 1",1lI • tho .'con bu ill'· (I'. 29; 60)_ Iu . " udy ill tho c:a< 01 Epicu"" and lMc.. t'" (I'. l or;HO. tbo;- d f as incIpIble of allplPllnL io Iobn ....1 as JI'I'I'Idtfor r.. 1lt bu. fOf *opbC:ll ~ of iuclcmtnl (I'. 10, 03 ). And tiIw;2 mirMdoes belooIa abme all to 1bI past. it io our to •.Inc ( p. 117; US). ' 'Pooilioa cnonly as tkfouioe ( I'. 121 ; 14S) . That is. il io ' _ .triol/y ..If..-.lderlt. M lle l;p:. ao:a.on Ihe ••1'10< o f obJIinacy and of fli&/It flOnl • , ldical ",fleclioa on hio A1Wll:ien
II

t....··

'"

Hr ".. . IJ,

with 11 M ( p. 164; 179). The fundamenllll Epicuru o O"",, 1I11on reoo;"'1 in modernity • .se.:IoM mod,f.. "1T~ Colll_ Ill tht p • ..,llistiPt raol oi , MdoJrnolic MrcliliOft ich In .......... willl iii rlrt;Jli,hl IrI Ihf twdtr of iii.. (~ 1 .1tiI r~. The Jltugle .it no 100Fr apinol: the mad ....tId> ill ' 'fearful'' oaJy to !he indiYidu.al but abo . - u.. 10 M ot ropby - ofl.... con,",ty 10 ill 0.... . xpteUluon.. The ,,".rpr.'"1Ofl of tho cnliclI mou ltll 0( Spina.. i. compI. ..d by in¥OIlipl io full cotnpUl. The """"' IleedI • tIICW trulparent "'"""""'"'" of tho ..1lole and I more pon:ep(ible Ot'Jl'liulion ill ;"dmd porta . Tho ..... yg 01 teIip>rl by IIoI>be:s and Spinou aIolll; with the -tIIf'IJ'yin,c leachinp I boYl the . .~ d certainly be bet,"" Ittadaed 10 the fnl ~ PhI