The reading is Sellier 491–611, which is Lafuma 592–729 and 970, or

• Pensées diverses II (also called Série XXIV: 37 fragments)

• Pensées diverses III (also called Série XXV: 85 fragments)

Numbers of fragments are in the order Sellier–Le Guern–Lafuma–Brunschvicg, possibly preceded by number within the bundles above.

Themes

Before the seminar of April 13, 2021, on this reading, I noted as below the themes of religion, passion, hatred, sin, blindness, and witnessing. The church as distinct from religion is also a theme, but I am mostly ignorant of the history that Pascal alludes to.

During the seminar, I saw how much I had left out.

There is something to be said for reading the Pensées (or anything else) in a printed book, where words have a place on a page, and the page a place among other pages.

I had forgotten a short fragment that summarizes everything, II.31–557–572–678–358:

L’homme n’est ni ange ni bête, et le malheur veut que qui veut faire l’ange fait la bête.

Connected to this is one that I couldn’t recall during the seminar, III.46–572–587–693–906:

rien n’est si difficile selon le monde que la vie religieuse;
rien n’est plus facile que de la passer selon Dieu.

I remember these as having been discussed (surely I have forgotten some):

• II.5–494–509–597–455 Le moi est haïssable. Vous, Mitton, le couvrez

• II.11–500–515–603–502 Les passions ainsi dominées sont vertus : l’avarice, la jalousie, la colère, Dieu même se les attribue

• II.13–502–517–605–36 Il faut donc un honnête homme qui puisse s’accommoder à tous mes besoins généralement

• II.16–506–520–613–443 À mesure qu’on a de lumière on découvre plus de grandeur et plus de bassesse dans l’homme

• II.19–509–523–616–660 La concupiscence nous est devenue naturelle et a fait notre seconde nature. Ainsi il y a deux natures en nous

• II.22–512–526–619–394 Tous leurs principes sont vrais, des pyrrhoniens, des stoïques, des athées, etc.

• II.23–513–527–620–146 L’homme est visiblement fait pour penser

• II.26–516–530–623–495 Si c’est un aveuglement surnaturel de vivre sans chercher ce qu’on est, c’en est un terrible de vivre mal en croyant Dieu

• II.31–521–535–628–153 Nous perdons encore la vie avec joie pourvu qu’on en parle

• II.33–523–537–630–94 La nature de l’homme est toute nature : « omne animal. »

• II.34–524–538–631–422 Il est bon d’être lassé et fatigué par l’inutile recherche du vrai bien, afin de tendre les bras au Libérateur

• II.37–527–541–634–97 La chose la plus importante à toute la vie est le choix du métier

• III.3–529–544–643–159 Les belles actions cachées sont les plus estimables

• III.5–531–546–646–95 même les propositions géométriques deviennent sentiments

• III.10–536–551

  • 651–369 La mémoire est nécessaire pour toutes les opérations de la raison

  • 652–14 Quand un discours naturel peint une passion ou un effet on trouve dans soi-même la vérité de ce qu’on entend

• III.15–541–556–657–452 Plaindre les malheureux n’est pas contre la concupiscence

• III.21–547–562–668–457 Chacun est un tout à soi-même, car lui mort le tout est mort pour soi

• III.27–553–568–674–359 Nous ne nous soutenons pas dans la vertu par notre propre force, mais par le contrepoids de deux vices opposés

• III.34–560–575–681–353 Je n’admire point l’excès d’une vertu comme de la valeur si je ne vois en même temps l’excès de la vertu opposée

• III.36–562–577–683–20 Pourquoi prendrai-je plutôt à diviser ma morale en quatre qu’en six ?

• III.41–567–582–688–323 Qu’est‑ce que le moi ? … On n’aime donc jamais personne mais seulement des qualités

• III.42–568–583–689–64 Ce n’est pas dans Montaigne mais dans moi que je trouve tout ce que j’y vois

• III.43–569–584–690–506 Que Dieu ne nous impute pas nos péchés

• III.48–574–589–695–445 Le péché originel est folie devant les hommes, mais on le donne pour tel … Car, sans cela, que dira-t-on qu’est l’homme ?

• III.49–575–590–696–22 Qu’on ne dise pas que je n’ai rien dit de nouveau, la disposition des matières est nouvelle

• III.50–576–591–697–383 où prendrons-nous un port dans la morale ?

• III.65–591–606–713–923 Ce n’est pas l’absolution seule qui remet les péchés au sacrement de pénitence mais la contrition qui n’est point véritable si elle ne recherche le sacrement

Religion

Religion is a theme throughout the Pensées, but in this reading has three grand summaries (which I shall take up again in consideration of more specific themes):

• II.1–491–507–595–450:

  Si l’on ne se connaît plein de superbe, d’ambition, de concupiscence, de faiblesse, de misère et d’injustice, on est bien aveugle. Et si en le connaissant, on ne désire d’en être délivré, que peut‑on dire d’un homme ?

  Que peut‑on donc avoir que de l’estime pour une religion qui connaît si bien les défauts de l’homme, et que du désir pour la vérité d’une religion qui y promet des remèdes si souhaitables ?

• II.20–510–524–617–492

  Qui ne hait en soi son amour propre et cet instinct qui le porte à se faire Dieu, est bien aveuglé. Qui ne voit que rien n’est si opposé à la justice et à la vérité ? Car il est faux que nous méritions cela, et il est injuste et impossible d’y arriver, puisque tous demandent la même chose. C’est donc une manifeste injustice où nous sommes nés, dont nous ne pouvons nous défaire et dont il faut nous défaire.

  Cependant aucune religion n’a remarqué que ce fût un péché, ni que nous y fussions nés, ni que nous fussions obligés d’y résister, ni n’a pensé à nous en donner les remèdes.

• III.48–574–589–695–445:

  Le péché originel est folie devant les hommes, mais on le donne pour tel. Vous ne me devez donc pas reprocher le défaut de raison en cette doctrine, puisque je la donne pour être sans raison. Mais cette folie est plus sage que toute la sagesse des hommes, sapientius est hominibus. Car sans cela que dira‑t‑on qu’est l’homme ? Tout son état dépend de ce point imperceptible. Et comment s’en fût‑il aperçu par sa raison, puisque c’est une chose contre sa raison, et que sa raison, bien loin de l’inventer par ses voies, s’en éloigne quand on le lui présente ?

That last one doesn’t actually name religion. Here are the remaining fragments that do:

• I.16–506–520–613–443

  Grandeur, misère. À mesure qu’on a de lumière, on découvre plus de grandeur et plus de bassesse dans l’homme. [1] Le commun des hommes. [2] Ceux qui sont plus élevés. [3] Les philosophes – Ils étonnent le commun des hommes. [4] Les chrétiens – Ils étonnent les philosophes. Qui s’étonnera donc de voir que la religion ne fasse que connaître à fond ce qu’on reconnaît d’autant plus qu’on a plus de lumière ?

• III.16–542–557–658–391:

  Conversation: Grands mots à la religion : Je la nie.

  Conversation: Le pyrrhonisme sert à la religion.

• III.45–571–586–692–915

  Montalte. Les opinions relâchées plaisent tant aux hommes qu’il est étrange que les leurs déplaisent. C’est qu’ils ont excédé toute borne. Et de plus il y a bien des gens qui voient le vrai et qui n’y peuvent atteindre, mais il y en a peu qui ne sachent que la pureté de la religion est contraire à nos corruptions. Ridicule de dire qu’une récompense éternelle est offerte à des mœurs escobartines.

I have quoted the whole fragments (with some removal of paragraph breaks, and the addition of the numbering in the middle fragment). The quotations below are excerpts only.

Passion

The virtuous is not who is without passion, but who controls it:

• II.6–495–510–598–868 Elie était un homme comme nous et sujet aux mêmes passions que nous

• II.11–500–515–603–502 le juste ne prend rien pour soi … mais seulement pour ses passions desquelles il se sert comme maître … Les passions ainsi dominées sont vertus … ce sont aussi bien vertus … qui sont aussi des passions … quand les passions sont les maîtresses, elles sont vices

• II.24–514–528–621–412 Guerre intestine de l’homme entre la raison et les passions

• II.25–515–529–622–131 Ennui. Rien n’est si insupportable à l’homme que d’être dans un plein repos, sans passions

• III.1–528–542–635–13 On aime à voir l’erreur, la passion de Cléobuline parce qu’elle ne la connaît pas

• III.2–529–543–638–109 La nature donne alors des passions et des désirs conformes à l’état présent

• III.10–536–551–652–14 Quand un discours naturel peint une passion ou un effet on trouve dans soi-même la vérité de ce qu’on entend

• III.57–583–598–705–180 Les grands et les petits ont mêmes accidents et même fâcheries, et même passions

Hatred

Haïr is Frankish and thus cognate with “hate.” We should hate ourselves, but for the right reason!

• II.5–494–509–597–455 Le moi est haïssable in two senses. We may remove what brings the opprobrium of others, but this is satisfactory only to the unjust

• II.13–503–517–610–30 [Je hais également le bouffon et l’enflé]

• II.20–510–524–617–492 Qui ne hait en soi son amour-propre et cet instinct qui le porte à se faire Dieu, est bien aveuglé (as above; the subject is original sin, but not by name)

• II.21–511–525–618–479 nous devons nous haïr nous-mêmes, et tout ce qui nous excite à autre attache qu’à Dieu seul

• II.37–527–541–634–97 La chose la plus importante à toute la vie est le choix du métier, le hasard en dispose … naturellement on aime la vertu et on hait la folie

• III.30–556–571–677–873 Le pape hait et craint les savants qui ne lui sont pas soumis par vœu

Sin

Péché is from peccatum (faute); pécher, from peccāre (commetre une faute); unrelated are empêcher, which Pascal also uses and which is from impedicare (prendre au piège); and pêcher, which Pascal does not use, and is from piscāri.

The key notion is of original sin. Pascal mentions le péché originel only once by name, in III.48–574–589–695–445:

Le péché originel est folie devant les hommes … Mais cette folie est plus sage … Car, sans cela, que dira-t-on qu’est l’homme ?

What indeed is man? Something makes the study of us different from the study of the natural world. Pascal calls it original sin. I might call it the awareness – the conception, the formation – of ideals – aims, goals – that we may fall short of. Though our failures may not always be moral failures, we do fail at things. Nothing fails in nature, unless we have imputed our ideals to it. And yet there is scientism.

In taking up the hatred, just mentioned, of amour propre in II.20–510–524–617–492, Pascal distinguishes Christianity from other religions for its recognition of what is implicitly original sin:

Qui ne hait en soi son amour-propre et cet instinct qui le porte à se faire Dieu, est bien aveuglé … aucune religion n’a remarqué que ce fût un péché, ni que nous y fussions nés, ni que nous fussions obligés d’y résister, ni n’a pensé à nous en donner les remèdes …

A third fragment on sin, III.43–569–584–690–506, could be suggesting something remarkable:

Que Dieu ne nous impute pas nos péchés … si on veut les suivre sans miséricorde.

If you wish not be blamed for the consequences of your actions, then you will have to live with them without mercy. But this reading depends on the interpretation of suivre sans miséricorde: whose misericordia is this?

Other fragments mentioning sin are the following:

• II.11–500–515–602–885 Autrefois [l’Église] était bonne infailliblement et on trouve qu’on a pu la changer sans péché

• II.14–504–518

  • 608–766 Il devait lui seul produire un grand peuple, élu, saint et choisi … le délivrer de la servitude du péché qui règne visiblement dans l’homme … devant offrir lui-même son corps et son sang. Et néanmoins offrir pain et vin à Dieu

  • 609–736 Qu’il devait venir un Libérateur qui écraserait la tête au démon, qui devait délivrer son peuple de ses péchés

• II.37–527–541–634–97 À force d’ouïr louer en l’enfance ces métiers et mépriser tous les autres, on choisit. Car naturellement on aime la vertu et on hait la folie. Ces mots nous émeuvent, on ne pèche qu’en l’application

• III.65–591–606–713–923 Ce n’est pas l’absolution seule qui remet les péchés … ce n’est pas la bénédiction nuptiale qui empêche le péché dans la génération

• III.80–606–617–725–884 bis Des pécheurs sans pénitence, des justes sans charité, un Dieu sans pouvoir sur les volontés des hommes, une prédestination sans mystère

Blindness

Aveugle is from the medieval Latin ab ŏcŭlis (conjectural calque of ἀπ’ ὀμμάτων). Aveugler is opposed to éclairer, as in the first fragment below, II.1–491–507–594–576:

Conduite générale du monde envers l’Église. Dieu voulant aveugler et éclairer.

Fitting in here is the brief II.29–555–570–676–937:

Il faut que le monde soit bien aveuglé s’il vous croit.

In II.4–(493)–508–596–202 (of which the original is lost), blinding is distinguished from omitting to enlighten:

Par ceux qui sont dans le déplaisir de se voir sans foi, on voit que Dieu ne les éclaire pas ; mais les autres, on voit qu’il y a un Dieu qui les aveugle.

There are even two kinds of blinding, in I.26–516–530–623–495:

Si c’est un aveuglement surnaturel de vivre sans chercher ce qu’on est, c’en est un terrible de vivre mal en croyant Dieu.

A key fragment, already mentioned twice, is II.20–510–524–617–492:

Qui ne hait en soi son amour-propre et cet instinct qui le porte à se faire Dieu, est bien aveuglé.

Similar is II.1–491–507–595–450:

Si l’on ne se connaît plein de superbe, d’ambition, de concupiscence, de faiblesse, de misère et d’injustice, on est bien aveugle. Et si en le connaissant on ne désire d’en être délivré que peut-on dire d’un homme ?

Witnessing

Témoin is from testimonium. Paradoxically, the Jews are the better witnesses for not all having converted.

• II.2–492–505–592–750 Si les Juifs eussent été tous convertis par Jésus-Christ nous n’aurions plus que des témoins suspects. Et s’ils avaient été exterminés, nous n’en aurions point du tout

• II.3–493–506–593–760 Les Juifs le refusent mais non pas tous … ce n’est que le vice qui leur a empêché de le recevoir et par ce refus ils sont des témoins sans reproche

• 18–508–522–615–663: les Juifs … avaient les deux qualités qu’il fallait qu’ils eussent d’être

  • très conformes au Messie, pour le figurer, et
  • très contraires pour n’être point témoins suspects

• III.15–541–556–657–452: Plaindre les malheureux n’est pas contre la concupiscence, au contraire, on est bien aise d’avoir à rendre ce témoignage d’amitié et à s’attirer la réputation de tendresse sans rien donner.

As a noun, superbe is an old word, meaning vanité qui rend orgueilleux (source: Le petit Robert 2006). Why then are what Pascal identifies as superbe and ambition qualities that one would want to be delivered from?

Does Pascal mean that some conversions would have been insincere, as was suspected in Spain? This would seem to be an argument for religious freedom.

The Latin is apparently Psalm 44:4 in the Bible de Port-Royal, but in King James it’s verse 3 of Psalm 45:

To the chief Musician upon Shoshannim, for the
sons of Korah, Maschil, A Song of loves.

MY heart is inditing a good matter: I speak of the things which I have made touching the king: my tongue is the pen of a ready writer.

2 Thou art fairer than the children of men: grace is poured into thy lips: therefore God hath blessed thee for ever.

3 Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty.

4 And in thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness; and thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things.

Zèle + lumière.

The source on Elias (Elijah) is not an epistle of Peter, but James 5:

16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

17 Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.

18 And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.

If Elias was like us, can we too make efficacious prayers for weather? Typography: the + is a signe de renvoi.

This pensée appears in Littré to show how, in the 17th century, the modern form (je vécus, nous vécûmes) of the prétérit (passé simple) of vivre had not been settled on.

This sounds like an argument against the last reading, and in particular

• Toutes les bonnes maximes sont dans le monde ; on ne manque qu’à les appliquer … Il n’y a point de bornes dans les choses. Les lois en veulent mettre, et l’esprit ne peut le souffrir (6–458–473–540–380)

• « Il n’y a point, dit-on, de règle qui n’ait quelque exception ni de vérité si générale qui n’ait quelque face par où elle manque. » (24–477–491–574–263)

Pascal wants to keep everything good about the synagogues and the philosophers, while making them better still. But the next fragment may take up the problem here.

1 Kings 13:

1 And, behold, there came a man of God out of Judah by the word of the Lord unto Beth-el: and Jeroboam stood by the altar to burn incense.

2 And he cried against the altar in the word of the Lord, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the Lord; Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men’s bones shall be burnt upon thee.

3 And he gave a sign the same day, saying, This is the sign which the Lord hath spoken; Behold, the altar shall be rent, and the ashes that are upon it shall be poured out.

32 For the saying which he cried by the word of the Lord against the altar in Beth-el, and against all the houses of the high places which are in the cities of Samaria, shall surely come to pass.

33 ¶ After this thing Jeroboam returned not from his evil way, but made again of the lowest of the people priests of the high places: whosoever would, he consecrated him, and he became one of the priests of the high places.

34 And this thing became sin unto the house of Jeroboam, even to cut it off, and to destroy it from off the face of the earth.

Genesis 4:

5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Église, pape.

Unité, Multitude.

• La multitude qui ne se réduit pas à l’unité est confusion.
• L’unité qui ne dépend pas de la multitude est tyrannie.

Il n’y a presque plus que la France où il soit permis de dire que le concile est au-dessus du pape.

Maugham, The Razor’s Edge:

“Have you never thought of divorcing Gray?”

“I’ve got no reason for divorcing him.”

“That doesn’t prevent your countrywomen from divorcing their husbands when they have a mind to.”

She laughed.

“Why d’you suppose they do it?”

“Don’t you know? Because American women expect to find in their husbands a perfection that English women only hope to find in their butlers.”

Fig.

Jésus-Christ offices.

Genesis 14:

17 And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king’s dale.

18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.

Hebrews 10:

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

Mark 13:

1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!

2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Prophéties.

Zechariah 12:

9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.

Psalm 130:

7 Let Israel hope in the Lord: for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.

8 And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.

Grandeur, misère.

À mesure qu’on a de lumière on découvre

• plus de grandeur et
• plus de bassesse

dans l’homme.

Figuratif.

Figuratif.

• très conformes au Messie, pour le figurer, et
• très contraires pour n’être point témoins suspects.

What is our first nature?

That last phrase, tout ce qui nous excite à autre attache qu’à Dieu seul, seems to be an independent clause, “everything that excites us in another attaches but to God alone.” The meaning would seem to be that others are as contemptible as we are, and therefore whatever we do find attractive in them must be owing to God.

However, Trotter treats the phrase as a noun phrase in his translation of the latter paragraph:

Therefore all that incites us to attach ourselves to the creatures is bad; since it prevents us from serving God if we know Him, or from seeking Him if we know Him not. Now we are full of lust. Therefore we are full of evil; therefore we ought to hate ourselves and all that excited us to attach ourselves to any other object than God only.

Pascal should spell this out, but meanwhile, it resembles the doctrine of the overlap of classes in Collingwood’s Essay on Philosophical Method (1933). That this is true does not automatically mean that is false (pp. 105–6):

The normal and natural way of replying to a philosophical statement from which we dissent is by saying, not simply ‘this view seems to me wrong’, but ‘the truth, I would suggest, is something more like this’, and then we should attempt to state a view of our own …

This is not a mere opinion. It is a corollary of the Socratic principle (itself a necessary consequence of the principle of overlapping classes) that there is in philosophy no such thing as a transition from sheer ignorance to sheer knowledge, but only a progress in which we come to know better what in some sense we know already …

… To reject one account of a philosophical matter is to accept the responsibility of giving a better account of it; and hence in philosophy, whatever may be the case elsewhere, it is a rule of sound method that every negation in this special sense implies an affirmation. This rule may be called the principle of concrete negation, and the neglect of it the fallacy of abstract negation.

There is also a principle of concrete affirmation and a corresponding fallacy of abstract affirmation.

Collingwood, “Desire,” The New Leviathan (1942):

11. 38. Thomas Carlyle, posing as the sage he never was, suggested that the impossible maxim ‘know thyself’ should be ‘translated’ into the partially possible one ‘know what thou canst work at’. A wiser man would have seen that the Delphic maxim is not so much impossible as inexhaustible.

11. 39. Part, indeed the first part, of knowing yourself is knowing what you want. This is not only the first thing a man can know about himself, it is the first thing he knows at all. It is not impossible, though it is very difficult. But a man who does not know what he wants will never know what he can work at. The Carlylese gospel of work is no substitute for the Delphic gospel of self-knowledge. Either work is based on self-knowledge or it is a form of self-intoxication, and the gospel of work a recommendation to pointless, purposeless activity for men who lack the courage to think and can only dissipate their energies in a blind fury of self-deception.

Ennui.

Here c’en est un terrible is short for c’est un aveuglement terrible. (Confirmation in Boss and Borglum, Révision de Grammaire Française [New York: Harper & Brothers, 1949], example on p. 87: J’avais de belles idées becomes J’en avais de belles.) Thus there are two kinds of blindness:

1. supernatural if you don’t believe in God;
2. terrible if you do.

Thus supernatural blindness would seem to be blindness to (or of) the supernatural.

Prophéties.

“Prophecy: that Jesus Christ will be on the right when to him God subjects his enemies. Therefore the Christ himself will not subject those enemies.” As in 3–493–506–593–760, he will not dominate the nations with mailed fist. The allusion is to Psalm 110 and perhaps elsewhere; I quote to the mention of Melchizedek:

A Psalm of David.

The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

2 The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

4 The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Injustice.

Recherche du vrai bien.

How exactly is the commoner wrong? The philosophers may correctly identify the good for themselves; but how for others? Can everybody be a philosopher? I cite Maugham again, from “Appearance and Reality” (1934):

Though Lisette was a philosopher only in the sense in which we are all philosophers, that she exercised thought in dealing with the problems of existence, her feeling for reality was so strong and her sympathy for appearance so genuine that she might almost claim to have established that reconciliation of irreconcilables at which the philosophers have for so many centuries been aiming.

Thus Pascal expects his very notes to be read.

Being remembered is a kind of immortality.

“Subject” in the philosophical sense, as in Collingwood’s Speculum Mentis (1924), p. 11:

When I call a thing subjective I mean that it is or pertains to a subject or conscious mind. When I call it objective, I mean that it is or pertains to an object of which such a mind is conscious. I do not call a real rose objective and an imaginary one subjective, or the rose objective and its colour subjective, or the molecules in it objective and the beauty of it subjective. A real rose I call real, and an imaginary rose I call imaginary; and I call them both objective because they are the objects of a perceiving and an imagining mind respectively. Similarly, the molecules are objective to a scientist and the beauty to an artist.

Ecclesiasticus 13:

19 omne animal diligit similem sibi sic et omnis homo proximum sibi

15 Every beast loveth his like, and every man loveth his neighbor.

16 All flesh consorteth according to kind, and a man will cleave to his like.

17 What fellowship hath the wolf with the lamb? so the sinner with the godly.

18 What agreement is there between the hyena and a dog? and what peace between the rich and the poor?

19 As the wild ass is the lion’s prey in the wilderness: so the rich eat up the poor.

20 As the proud hate humility: so doth the rich abhor the poor.

Genesis 7:

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

14 ipsi et omne animal secundum genus suum universaque iumenta in genus suum et omne quod movetur super terram in genere suo cunctumque volatile secundum genus suum universae aves omnesque volucres

The philosophers of 29–519–533–626–462 do not actually know the true good?

Cleobulina is not the ancient poetess, but, as Ariew notes (his p. 165), the queen of Corinth in Madeleine de Scudéry, Artamène ou le Grand Cyrus (7500 pages. Descotes and Proust quote the relevant passage, in modern spelling, but long lines of fixed width. They also link to the édition numérique … imaginée, conçue et développée par Christophe Schuwey (Yale), en collaboration avec Claude Bourqui (Université de Fribourg) (part 7, book 2, episode 80, page 434), in old spelling:

J’ay donc sçeu Seigneur, comme je vous l’ay desja dit, qu’on ne peut pas avoir une inclination plus puissante à aimer quelqu’un, que Cleobuline en a toujours eu à aimer Myrinthe : en effet cette affection est tellement née avec elle, qu’elle ne s’est aperçeuë de sa grandeur, que lors qu’elle a esté Reine. Elle sentoit bien auparavant que la veuë de Myrinthe luy plaisoit plus que celle des autres qui l’aprochoient ; que sa conversation la divertissoit davantage ; qu’il luy sembloit estre de meilleure mine que tout le reste de la Cour ; qu’elle trouvoit qu’il s’habilloit mieux ; qu’il avoit meilleure grace que les autres ; que son esprit estoit plus agreable ; et qu’elle l’estimoit plus que tous ceux qu’elle connoissoit : mais elle croyoit que c’estoit un pur effet de sa raison, de sa connoissance, et du merite de Myrinthe, sans croire que son inclination y eust aucune part. Ainsi elle l’aimoit sans penser l’aimer : et elle fut si longtemps dans cette erreur, que cette affection ne fut plus en estat d’estre surmontée, lors qu’elle s’en aperçeut.

There is a contemporary translation by F. G. Gent, digitized by the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership at the University of Michigan:

I know therefore Sir (as I told you) that none can have a stronger inclination to love another, then Cleobuline ever had to love Myrinthus, and this affection was so bred in her from the Cradle, as she percei∣ved not the greatness of it until she was a Queen: She knew before that the sight of My∣rinthus did please her more then the sight of any other, that his company did more divert her, that in her eye he had a better Garb then any in the Court, that his cloaths did bet∣ter become him, that he had a better grace then any else, that his Spirit was more pleasing, [p. 110] ing, and that she esteemed him more then any she knew, but she thought all these to be pure effects of her reason, and of Myrinthus his merits, not thinking her inclination had any other ground: But the truth is, she loved him, and knew it not; and she went on so long in this error, that her flame could not be quenched when she discovered it:

The comment at the end recalls Collingwood, again from chapter “Desire” of The New Leviathan:

11. 18. It is important for the conduct of practical life to realize that coming to know what you want is not to be done by reflection; not because your appetites are repressed as too vile to contemplate; but because they remain preconscious until they have changed into passions and so into desires.

11. 19. Trying to force oneself or another to identify the object of an appetite by reflection (‘come, come,’—one knows the hectoring voice—‘think; tell me what you want’) can only do untold damage. Already the vulgarized Freud, Jung, and Adler which constitutes our popular psychology warns us against the danger of repressing desires; but not against the far worse danger of abating appetites by never letting them grow into desires.

11. 25. You loathe a person, or a dish, or a book, when you are forced by inopportune solicitation to ask yourself ‘Do I love this person (or whatever it may be) or not?’ and find yourself obliged to answer ‘no’. The question has converted indifference into loathing.

11. 26. That is why a wise man, hoping for a woman’s love, never asks her whether she loves him until he knows she does. If she does not, she may come to do so if he leaves her alone; but an untimely question will convert indifference into loathing.

• à l’état où nous sommes
• les passions de l’état où nous ne sommes pas.

• à l’état où nous sommes
• les plaisirs de l’état où nous ne sommes pas

It’s not clear how to parse the initial noun phrase. Do “those persons” do both of the two things, or only the first, during unfortunate times? Trotter retains the ambiguity, but Ariew settles it; for they say respectively,

Those who have always good hope in the midst of misfortunes, and who are delighted with good luck,

Those who continue to have good hope and are delighted with good luck when something goes wrong.

Sentiment.

Honnête homme.

Miracles.

Montaigne.

Probabilité.

Larousse de poche, 1979:

Plaindre v. t. Témoigner de la compassion : Plaindre les malheureux. Déplorer, regretter. V. pr. Se lamenter. Témoigner son mécontentement : se plaindre de quelqu’un.

Conversation.

Conversation.

Romans 12:

17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.

18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.

21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

21 noli vinci a malo sed vince in bono malum

« Spongia Solis. »

Editors have thought spongia solis was sunspots; but now, the phosphorescent form of baryte called Bologna stone.

I think nature breaks not her own rules, but only those that we mistakenly propose.

The term “natural” is ambiguous, since natural law both resembles and is distinct from moral law.

See II.33–523–537–630–94 above.

Eloquence.

In lui mort le tout est mort pour soi, the first two words would seem to be the shorter from of the absolute construction lui étant mort.

• Trotter treats the words that way: “he being dead, all is dead to him.”

• Ariew makes them a dangling modifier: “once dead everything is dead for him.”

Unfortunately I cannot find explicit recognition of a French absolute on Wikipedia, though “Ablatif absolu” allows it implicitly as a mot à mot translation of the Latin ablative absolute. Pascal himself uses the construction elsewhere, as below in Son livre n’étant pas fait pour porter à la piété il n’y était pas obligé (33–559–574–680–63).

Trotter renders this as,

Do you wish people to believe good of you? Don’t speak.

Thus he treats the pensée as a version of the saying attributed to Lincoln,

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

The attribution is weakly founded, according to Garson O’Toole, Quote Investigator, who also suggests an ultimate origin in Proverbs 17:

27 He that hath knowledge spareth his words: and a man of understanding is of an excellent spirit.

28 Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

Descotes and Proust do not suggest this reference; but then Trotter has ignored the en in N’en dites pas. Far from ignoring it, Ariew expands on it:

Do you want people to think well of you? Do not speak well of yourself.

Trotter:

We view things not only from different sides, but with different eyes; we have no wish to find them alike.

Ariew:

Not only do we look at different things from different sides, but with different eyes. We are far from finding them alike.

Both have justification in Le petit Robert, according to which (under Garde), N’avoir garde de (faire une chose) is literary for S’abstenir soigneusement, n’avoir aucunement l’intention, être bien éloigné de (la faire).

He being not the same either, why should he love her still, had she stayed the same?

Style.

Petronius, Satyricon 90.

Tell me, cannot you get rid of your disease? You have been in my company less than two hours, and you have talked more often like a poet than like a man. I am not surprised that the crowd pursue you with stones.

Rogo quid tibi vis cum isto morbo? Minus quam duabus horis mecum moraris, et saepius poetice quam humane locutus es. Itaque non miror, si te populus lapidibus persequitur.

Prov.

Collingwood, Religion and Philosophy (1916):

The crimes of the Church are a testimony to the fact that religion does dictate duties, and is believed to do so, for the most part, in a worthy manner.

… We tried to show in the last chapter that it was an essential note of religion to lay down certain statements, and to say, “ Believe these ” ; and that could only mean, “ Believe these, for they are true. ” Truth is the governing conception, even if the dogmas propounded fail of reaching it. Similarly, religion always lays down certain courses of action and says, “ Do these, ” that is to say, “ Do these, because they are right. ” Not merely “ because they are God’s will, ” for God is a righteous God ; nor merely “ for fear he should punish you, ” for his punishments are just.

Historically, religions may have been guilty of infinite crimes ; but this condemnation is a proof, not a disproof, that their fundamental aim is moral. They represent a continual attempt to conform to the good will of God, and the fact that they err in determining or in obeying that will does not alter the fact that the standard by which they test actions is a moral standard.

Montaigne.

Mouvement infini.

Ordre.

There’s no summarizing virtue. One may imagine that all of Euclid comes from the postulates; but even if Pascal did think that way (he may not have), morality is not like that. See also the next fragment.

Sustine et abstine is a popular Stoic slogan; you can buy it on a tee-shirt. The Greek is ἀνέχου καὶ ἀπέχου, two second-person singular imperatives: “Hold up and hold off,” perhaps. Wikipédia says Arrian attributes the slogan to Epictetus; but I cannot find any other ancient source than Aulus Gellius. Descotes and Proust give the relevant quote:

Enfin ce même Épictète (je l’ai entendu de la bouche de Favorinus) avait coutume de dire que les deux vices les plus graves et les plus honteux étaient l’impatience et l’incontinence :

• le premier, qui consiste à ne pas savoir endurer les injustices qu’il faut supporter ;
• le second, à ne pas savoir s’abstenir des plaisirs qu’on doit s’interdire.

Voici deux paroles, disait-il ; gardez-les dans vos cœurs, observez-les en vous maîtrisant et veillant sur vous-même ; vous serez impeccables, et vivrez tranquille. Ces deux mots sont ἀνέχου καὶ ἀπέχου, supporte et abstiens-toi.

Ordre.

Closing one truth in another: is this a logical notion?

Gloire.

Qu’est‑ce que le moi ?

What would be the body or soul, aside from its so-called qualities?

Collingwood, “Art,” Speculum Mentis (1924):

… The teacher’s words are not mathematics, but a stimulus to mathematics; and the rope is not climbing, but a moral support to the climber; yet through their help it is evident that things can be done by the weaker brethren which without such aid they would not have the confidence to attempt.

Thus the work of art in the false sense, the perceptible painting or writing, is valued not at all by its author, but highly by the aesthetic weakling, because it helps him to aesthetic activities which he could not have achieved alone. And it must be added that he habitually exaggerates the actual help which these things give him. If he is the sort of man who could not see for himself the dramatic force of situations like those of Sophocles, the effectiveness of colour-schemes like those of Titian or of modulation schemes like those of Schubert, he will not see much of these things when Sophocles, Titian, and Schubert thrust them under his very nose: he will simply not notice the irony, the contrast of colours and keys; and those parts of the work of art which he could not in some sort have invented for himself will pass him by unseen. ‘How much, as one grows older, one finds in so-and-so,’ people say, ‘that one never saw before!’ Yes; and how much one has not even yet seen! For one never sees anything in anybody’s work but what one brings to it, and it is as true of art as of nature that

          we receive but what we give,
And in our life alone doth Nature live;
Ours is her wedding-garment, ours her shroud.

Miséricorde would seem to have a strict and a loose sense. Under the strict reading, refusing the blame for one’s actions means giving up the forgiveness. One is then perhaps accepting karma.

Under the loose reading, Pascal is just echoing Psalm 32:

A Psalm of David, Maschil.

Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.

2 Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.

3 When I kept silence, my bones waxed old through my roaring all the day long.

4 For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned into the drought of summer. Selah.

5 I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

6 For this shall every one that is godly pray unto thee in a time when thou mayest be found: surely in the floods of great waters they shall not come nigh unto him.

7 Thou art my hiding place; thou shalt preserve me from trouble; thou shalt compass me about with songs of deliverance. Selah.

8 I will instruct thee and teach thee in the way which thou shalt go: I will guide thee with mine eye.

9 Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding: whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near unto thee.

10 Many sorrows shall be to the wicked: but he that trusteth in the Lord, mercy shall compass him about.

11 Be glad in the Lord, and rejoice, ye righteous: and shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart.

Pyrrhonisme.

Acts 17:

22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.

Montalte.

How does one claim to know what God likes?

Ordre.

The fungibility of wisdom and foolishness is a big Biblical theme. Pascal quotes 1 Corinthians 1:

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

In verses 19 and 20, Paul in turn quotes Isaiah (I take the references from The Greek New Testament, Aland et al., editors).

Isaiah 29:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent”

10 For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.

11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:

12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.

13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.

Isaiah 19:

“Where is the wise?”

11 Surely the princes of Zoan are fools, the counsel of the wise counsellers of Pharaoh is become brutish: how say ye unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings?

12 Where are they? where are thy wise men? and let them tell thee now, and let them know what the Lord of hosts hath purposed upon Egypt.

Isaiah 33:

“where is the scribe?”

17 Thine eyes shall see the king in his beauty: they shall behold the land that is very far off.

18 Thine heart shall meditate terror. Where is the scribe? where is the receiver? where is he that counted the towers?

19 Thou shalt not see a fierce people, a people of a deeper speech than thou canst perceive; of a stammering tongue, that thou canst not understand.

Isaiah 44:

“hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?”

24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

25 That frustrateth the tokens of the liars, and maketh diviners mad; that turneth wise men backward, and maketh their knowledge foolish;

26 That confirmeth the word of his servant, and performeth the counsel of his messengers; that saith to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Judah, Ye shall be built, and I will raise up the decayed places thereof:

27 That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers:

28 That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.

Nature s’imite.

It would seem Pascal alludes to the distinction between arithmetic and geometry, removed by Descartes in the Geometry of 1637, when Pascal was 14.

Généraux.

Wisdom 14:

15 For a father afflicted with untimely mourning, when he hath made an image of his child soon taken away, now honoured him as a god, which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were under him ceremonies and sacrifices.

16 Thus in process of time an ungodly custom grown strong was kept as a law, and graven images were worshipped by the commandments of kings.

17 Whom men could not honour in presence, because they dwelt far off, they took the counterfeit of his visage from far, and made an express image of a king whom they honoured, to the end that by this their forwardness they might flatter him that was absent, as if he were present.

18 Also the singular diligence of the artificer did help to set forward the ignorant to more superstition.

19 For he, peradventure willing to please one in authority, forced all his skill to make the resemblance of the best fashion.

20 And so the multitude, allured by the grace of the work, took him now for a god, which a little before was but honoured.

21 And this was an occasion to deceive the world: for men, serving either calamity or tyranny, did ascribe unto stones and stocks the incommunicable name.

22 Moreover this was not enough for them, that they erred in the knowledge of God; but whereas they lived in the great war of ignorance, those so great plagues called they peace.

• on ne se fâche pas de ne pas tout voir, mais
• on ne veut pas être trompé,

Grace

Glory seems to be understood as vainglory. The Greek term is καύχησις “boasting, pride, object of boasting” in Romans 3:

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Venise.

Lier et délier.

The idea seems to be,

Gender allows elle and il to refer to l’Église and Dieu without confusion.

Papes.

Is ignorance of our physical health a “figure” of ignorance of our moral condition?

Langage.

Force.

The theory of the social contract is only just being developed as an alternative to reason and force.

Diversity seems to be a dirty word.

Pape.

A misreading of cinq propositions as prophéties created 611–718–830 (Le Guern, Lafuma, Brunschvicg). In the seventh reading, see 443–881–850,

Les cinq propositions condamnées, point de miracle. Car la vérité n’était point attaquée, mais la Sorbonne, mais la bulle.

1 Kings 19, concerning Elijah:

15 And the Lord said unto him, Go, return on thy way to the wilderness of Damascus: and when thou comest, anoint Hazael to be king over Syria:

16 And Jehu the son of Nimshi shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel: and Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy room.

17 And it shall come to pass, that him that escapeth the sword of Hazael shall Jehu slay: and him that escapeth from the sword of Jehu shall Elisha slay.

18 Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.

Universel.

Probabilité.

Probable.

Deux infinis. Milieu.

The two infinities were in the third reading, 230–199–72, “Disproportion de l’homme”:

Car enfin qu’est‑ce que l’homme dans la nature ? Un néant à l’égard de l’infini, un tout à l’égard du néant, un milieu entre rien et tout.

Probable.

Pape.

Casuistes.