Klever's Spinozana Redux  Schouwburg
Klever beschrijft dat Spinoza speelt in het stuk Eunuchus. Klik op onderstaande kleine versie om te vergroten.
Ik heb op benedictusdespinoza.nl een inhoudsopgave geplaatst van al deze stukjes.
Aanvulling: Er is nog een interessantere verbinding tussen Rojas en Spinoza.
Rojas (1476? -1541) was een marrano. Marrano's zijn joden van het Iberisch schiereiland die gedwongen moesten overgaan tot het katholicisme, maar heimelijk probeerden aan de joodse geboden en rituelen vast te houden. Het stuk dat Rojas schreef, La Celestina, speelt zich af tijdens de onderdrukking van de Marrano's door de Spaanse inquisitie.
Yirmiyahu Yovel trekt een vergelijking tussen Spinoza en Rojas in zijn boek "Spinoza and Other Heretics" op blz. 127Herein lies the major difference between Rojas and Spinoza, the philosopher who both continued and opposed him. Spinoza's new world picture had inner power and coherence lacking in Rojas. The difference, however, does not lie in the contrast between Spinoza the systematic thinker and Rojas the poet. It transcends all matters of form, method, and rigor, penetrating to the deeper layers of their respective metaphysical outlooks. The fact that Spinoza's world is much more coherent and organized is partly due to the fact that, in its metaphysical content, it is a world enjoying intrinsic meaning and unity, not a hybrid of two lost religions but a new, positive entity, a deified nature that inherits the absolute positivity, divinity, and sublimity of the old transcendent God. It is this inner feature of Spinoza's universe, its intrinsic power and coherence, that is manifest in the logical coherence of his philosophical system. But, in addition, this is the outcome of the fact that logos, or reason, has been restored to the natural world just as the perspective of a transcendent God has been banished from it. Reason itself is deified in Spinoza, as the principle governing Nature/God. Unlike Rojas before him - and unlike Nietzsche later - Spinoza sees rational meaning in natural necessity, and rational meaning is divine meaning to him. It has - or will have for the true philosopher - the same invigorating power, and even the same function - a this-worldly form of salvation, occurring immanently within this life - that belief in a transcendent God and the next world had for religious believers. Moreover, Spinoza discards the vestiges of the Christian outlook which we have found in Rojas and with which Nietzsche grapples - those vestiges which, in the Nietzschean idiom would be called 'the shadows of the dead God." For Spinoza, abolishing the transcendent God does not leave the world subject to the Christian outlook of an inferior, Godless sphere; rather, it is the world itself that is deified. The absolute, or G-D, is relegated to where it really belongs, as opposed to its distortion in historical religion. It is above all, I think, this total liberation from the vestiges of Judaism and Christianity, which neither Rojas, nor even Nietzsche, can claim, and which elevates this world to a divine plane, that has aroused the uproar against Spinoza and branded him the most challenging atheist. [hier aangetroffen]