Even more, in the created thing, is a perfection that she exists; since the greatest of all imperfections is, not to exist. - Benedictus de Spinoza

Although proclaiming Spinoza the chief and most prominent ‘representative’ of the underground atheistic tradition supposedly striving to undermine the main structures of authority underpinning Christendom has an astoundingly long history, from 1673 when we first encounter this notion that Spinozism was a forbidden philosophy being promoted, first in Holland, by an underground sect of disciples, called ‘spinozistes’, continuing down to the 1820s, roughly lasting a century and a half, modern historians took very little interest in this striking phenomenon until the question became tied to the (since 2001) highly divisive issue of ‘Radical Enlightenment’. The remarkable historiographical and philosophical controversy over the role of Spinoza and Spinozism in the Western Enlightenment generally sparked by the debate over ‘Radical Enlightenment’ since 2001, instead of receding after some years, as one might expect from the normal course of historiographical controversies, has been escalating for more than a decade now especially since 2009, in a dramatic fashion.

[...] In this Spartan room there was a man pacing little steps, his hands clasped behind his back, his big head thrust forward as though to butt. The man looked exactly like Ben-Gurion, but there was no way he could actually be Ben-Gurion. Every child in Israel, even in kindergarten, in those days knew in his sleep what Ben-Gurion looked like. But since there was no television yet, it was obvious to me that the Father of the Nation was a giant whose head reached the clouds, whereas this impostor was a short, tubby man whose height was less than five foot three. (...) David Ben-Gurion was about seventy-five at the time, and I was barely twenty. (...) I sat down in a flash on the chair facing the desk. I sat bolt upright, but only on the edge of the chair. There was no question of leaning back. Silence. The Father of the Nation continued to pace to and fro with hasty little steps, like a caged lion or someone who was determined not to be late. After half an eternity, he suddenly said: “Spinoza!” And he stopped. When he had walked away as far as the window, he whirled around and said: “Have you read Spinoza? You have. But maybe you didn't understand? Few people understand Spinoza. Very few.” And then, still pacing to and fro, to and fro, between the window and the door, he burst into a protracted dawn lecture on Spinoza's thought. (...) But Ben-Gurion, it turned out, was enjoying lecturing on Spinoza before seven o'clock in the morning. And he did indeed continue for a few minutes without interruption.

لقد أُوحيَت كلُّ المقاييس إلى سُليمان بوسائل على مُستوى فَهْمِه وطبقًا لآرائه؛ ذلك لأنه، نظرًا إلى أننا غير مُلزَمين بالاعتقاد بأنَّ سليمان كان رياضيًّا، فمن حقِّنا أن نؤكِّد أنه كان يجهَلُ نِسبة مُحيط الدائرة إلى قُطرها، وكان يظنُّ مع جمهرة العُمَّال أنها نسبة ٣ إلى ١، فإذا قيل إنَّنا لم نفهم نصَّ سِفر الملوك (٧: ٢٣) فإني لا أعلم، في الحق، ماذا يُمكننا أن نفهم من الكتاب؛ ذلك لأنَّ ما ورَد في هذا الموضع كان مُجرَّد وصفٍ للبناء، وعلى نحوٍ تاريخي مَحْض. أمَّا إذا اعتقَدَ أحدٌ أنه يستطيع افتراضَ قصْدٍ آخر للكِتاب لم يُصرَّح به لسبب نجهله، فإنَّ هذا أمرٌ لا يترتَّب عليه أقلُّ من أن نقلِبَ الكتاب بأسره رأسًا على عقب