Spinoza, Ethics, De Deo, Propositio 15, Scholium:
Exempli gratia aquam quatenus aqua est, dividi concipimus ejusque partes ab invicem separari; at non quatenus substantia est corporea; eatenus enim neque separatur neque dividitur.
Boyle translation:
E.g., we can conceive water, in so far as it is water, to be divided and its parts separated one from the other: but not in so far as it is a corporeal substance, for then it is neither separated nor divided
Elwes translation:
For instance, water, in so far as it is water, we conceive to be divided, and its parts to be separated one from the other; but not in so far as it is extended substance; from this point of view it is neither separated nor divisible
I have two questions.
1- Translations are so as if the text is:
at non quatenus est substantia corporea
Why?
2- If eatenus means so far, why are translation otherwise?