It seems to me that both the manuscript and its annotations are being entirely misinterpreted by the other commenters here. It doesn't help that the article in

It seems to me that both the manuscript and its annotations are being entirely misinterpreted by the other commenters here. It doesn't help that the article in question is giving so few details or context. Near as I can tell, the manuscript is creating some sort of allegory whereby a creator god (in this case that of Christianity) creates humanity, to be compared with the way that humans create or make cheese. In that context, the "is cheese rational?" annotation is expressing doubt at the validity of the comparison, by pointing out that the distinguishing feature of humans is their ability to think (to reason or be rational). The second annotation about cheese being animal and eaten seems to further criticize the comparison by pointing out that human is to cheese not as creator is to humanity. At least without some deep theological background into the time and place of the writings, that would be my interpretation.