To-day probably October 23. Y. P.
All these days I have been out of tune with my work. Wrote a letter
yesterday to the commander of the disciplinary battalion in
Irkutsk
about Olkhovik.[134]
It is evening now, I am sitting down to write because I feel the
special importance and seriousness of the hours of life which are
left to me. And I do not know what I have to do, but I feel that
there has ripened in me an expression of God’s will which asks to
be let out.
Have re-read Hadji Murad—it
isn’t what I want to say. As to
Resurrection I can’t even get hold of it. The drama
interests me.
A splendid article by Carpenter on science.[135] All of us walk near
the truth and uncover it from various sides.
October 26. Y. P.
I am still just as indisposed and don’t feel like writing. My head
aches. Serezha came
yesterday.[136] Wrote a letter to Sonya and to
Andrusha.
But it seems to me that during this time of doubt, I arrived at two
very important conclusions:
1) That, which I also thought before and wrote down; that art
is an invention, is a temptation for amusement with dolls, with
pictures, with songs, with play, with stories—and nothing more.
But to place art as they do (and they do the same with science), on
the same level with the good is a horrible
sacrilège. The proof
that it is not so, is that about truth also (the right) I can say
that truth is a good (as God said, great good,
teib, i.e., good),
and about beauty one can say that it is good; but it is impossible
to say about good that it is beautiful (at times it is homely), or
that it is true (it is always true).
There is only one good; good and bad; but truth and beauty are good
qualities of certain objects.
The other very important thing, is that reason is the only means
of manifesting, and freeing love. It seems to me that this is an
important thought, omitted in my Declaration of Faith.
To-day November 1. Y. P.
All this time I have felt neither well nor like working. I have
written letters only, among the number was one to the Caucasian
disciplinary battalion.[137] Yesterday, walking at night on the
snow, in the blizzard, I tired my heart and it aches. I think I am
going to die very soon. That is why I am writing out the notes. I
think I am going to die without fear and without resistance.
Just now I sat alone and thought how strange it was that people live
alone. People; I thought of Stasov;[138] how is he living now, what
is he thinking, feeling. Of Kolichka,[139] too. And so strange and
new became the knowledge that they, all of them, people—are living,
and I do not live in them; that they are closed to me.
November 2. Y. P. If I live.
November 2nd. Y. P.
Am alive. Am a little better. Have written on the Declaration of
Faith. I think it is true that it is cold because it endeavours to
be infallible.[140] A blizzard. Sent off the letters to
Schmidt and
Chertkov. Did not send the letter to Mme. Kalmikov.
To-day I thought about art. It is play. And when it is the play
of working, normal people it is good, but when it is the play of
corrupted parasites,
then it is bad—and here now it has reached
to decadence.
November 3. Y. P. If I live.
To-day November 5. Y. P. Morning.
Yesterday was a terrible day.
... At night I hardly slept
and was depressed. I just now found the
prescriptions[141] in my diary, looked them over and began to feel
better; to separate one’s true “self” from that which is offended
and vexed, to remember that this is no hindrance, no accidental
unpleasantness, but the very work predestined me, and above all to
know that if I have a dislike for any one, then as long as there is
that dislike in me—then I am the guilty one. And as soon as you
know you are guilty, you feel better.
To-day, lying on the bed, I thought about love towards God ... I wish
I could say, the love of God, i.e., divine love—that the first and
principal commandment is divine love, but that the other resembling
it and flowing from it, especially flowing from it, is the love for
neighbour.
Yesterday I wrote 18 pages of introduction to Art.[142]
It is wrong to say of a work of art, “You don’t yet understand it.”
If I don’t understand it, that means that the work of art is poor,
because its
task is in making understandable that which is not
understandable.
November 6. Y. P. If I live.
November 6. Y. P.
Am alive. It is the third day that I continue to write on art. It
seems to me it is good. At least I am writing willingly and easily.
... Have received a good letter from Vanderveer. Wrote another letter
to the commander of the battalion in the Caucasus. Chertkov sent me
his copy of a similar letter.
To-day I rode horseback to Tula.
A marvellous day and night. I am
just now going to take a walk to meet the girls.
Have been thinking.
1) Natural sciences, when they wish to determine the very essence
of things, fall into a crude materialism, i.e., ignorance. Such,
besides Descartes’ whirlwinds, are atoms and ether and the origin
of species. All that I can say, is that it appears to me so, just
as the heavenly vault appears round to me, while I know that it is
not round and that it appears to me so, only because my sight for
all directions extends on only one radius.
2) The highest perfection of art is its cosmopolitanism. But on
the contrary, with us at present it is becoming more and more
specialised, if not according to nations, then according to classes.
3) The refinement of art and its strength are always in inverse
proportion.
4) “Conservatism lies in this” ... That is the way I have it noted,
but further I can’t remember now.
5) Why is it pleasant to ride? Because it is the very emblem of
life. Life—you ride.
I wanted to take a walk....
November 7. Y. P. If I live.
To-day November 12. Y. P.
I haven’t noted down anything during this time. I was writing
the essay on Art. To-day a little on the Declaration of Faith. A
weakness of thought and I am sad. One must learn to be satisfied
with stupidity. If I do not love, at least not not to love. That,
thank the Lord, I have attained.
November 16. Y. P. Morning.
I still work just as badly and am therefore depressed. The day after
to-morrow I am going to Moscow, if God commands.[143]
... In the meantime I received a strange letter from the Spaniard
Zanini, with an offer of
22,000 francs for good works. I answered
that
I would like to use them for the Dukhobors. What is going to
happen?[144] I wrote to Kuzminsky on
Witte and Dragomirov[145] and
the day before yesterday I wrote diligently all morning on War.[146]
Something will come of it.
I am thinking continually about art and about the temptations or
seductions which becloud the mind, and I see that art belongs to
this class, but I do not know how to make it clear. This occupies
me very, very much. I fall asleep and wake up with this thought,
but up to now I have come to no conclusion.
The notes during this time about God and the future life are:
1) They say that God must be understood as a personality. In this
lies great misunderstanding; personality is limitation. Man feels
himself a personality, only because he comes in contact with other
personalities. If man were only one, he would not be a personality.
These two conceptions are mutually determined; the outer world, other
beings, and the personality. If there were not a world of other
beings, man would not feel himself, would not recognise himself as
a personality; if man were not a personality he would not recognise
the existence of other beings. And therefore man within this Universe
is inconceivable otherwise than as a personality. But how can it
be said of God, that He is a personality, that God is personal? In
this lies the root of anthropomorphism.
Of God it only can be said what Moses and Mohammed said, that he is
one, and one, not in that sense that there is no other or other gods
(in relation to God there can be no notion of number and therefore
it is even impossible to say of God that he is one (1 in the sense
of a number), but in that sense that he is monocentric, that he is
not a conception, but a being, that which the Greek Orthodox call
a living God in opposition to a pantheistic God, i.e., a superior
spiritual being living in everything. He is one in that sense that He
is, like a being to whom one can address oneself, i.e., not exactly
to pray, but that there is a relationship between me, something
which is limited, a personality, and God—something inconceivable
but existing.
The most inconceivable thing about God for us consists exactly in
this, that we know Him as a one being, can know him in no other way,
and at the same time it is impossible for us to understand a one being
who fills up everything with himself. If God is not one, then He is
scattered and He does not exist. If He is one, then we involuntarily
represent him to ourselves in the shape of a personality and then He
is no longer a higher being,
no longer everything. But, however,
in order to know God and to lean on Him one must understand Him as
filling everything and at the same time as one.
2) I have been thinking how obviously mistaken is our conception of
the future life in bodies either more or less similar to ours. Our
bodies as we know them are nothing but the products of our outer
six senses. How then can there be life for that spiritual being who
is separated from his body—how can it be in that form which is
determined and produced by that body through its senses?
November 17. Y. P. If I live.
November 17. Y. P.
Yesterday I hardly wrote anything.
... There is a fight in the papers over Repine’s[147]
definition of
art as amusement. How it fits into my work. The full significance
of Art has still not been made clear. It is clear to me, and I can
write and prove it, but not briefly and simply. I cannot bring it
up to that point.
Yesterday there was a letter from Ivan
Michailovich[148] and from
the Dukhobors.
Amusement is all right, if the amusement is not corrupted, is honest,
and if people do not suffer from that amusement. I have been thinking
just
now; the æsthetic is the expression of the ethical, i.e., in
plain language; art expresses those feelings which the artist feels.
If the feelings are good, lofty, then art will be good, lofty, and
the reverse. If the artist is a moral man, then his art will be
moral, and the reverse. (Nothing has come of this.)
I thought last night:
We rejoice over our technical achievements—steam, ... phonographs. We
are so pleased with these achievements that if any one were to tell
us that these achievements are being attained by the loss of human
lives we would shrug our shoulders and say, “We must try not to have
this so; an 8-hour day, labour insurance, and so forth; but because
several people perish, is no reason to renounce those achievements
which we have attained.” I. e., Fiat mirrors, phonographs, etc.,
pereat several people.
It is but sufficient to admit this principle—and there will be no
limit to cruelty, and it will be very easy to attain every kind of
technical improvement. I had an acquaintance in Kazan who used to
ride to his estate in Viatka, 130 versts away, in this fashion: he
would buy a pair of horses at the market for 20 roubles (horses
were very cheap) and would hitch them up and drive 130 versts to
the place. Sometimes they would reach the place, and he would have
the horses
plus the cost of the journey. Sometimes they would not
cover a part of the road and he would hire. But nevertheless it used
to cost him cheaper than hiring stage horses. Even Swift proposed
eating children. And that would have been very convenient. In New
York, the railroad companies in the city crush several passers-by
every year and do not change the crossings to make the disasters
impossible, because the change would cost dearer than paying to the
families of those crushed yearly. The same thing happens also in the
technical improvements of our age. They are accomplished by human
lives. But one has to value every human life—not to value it, but
to place it above any value and to make improvements in a way that
lives should not be lost and spoilt, and to stop every improvement
if it harms human life.
November 18. If I live, then Moscow.
November 22. Moscow.
The fourth day in Moscow. Dissatisfied with myself. No work. Got
tangled up in the article on art and have not moved forward.
... There were here; the Gorbunovs,[149] Boulanger,[150]
Dunaev. I
called on Rusanov myself.[151] Received a very good impression.
Read Plato; embryos of idealism.
I recalled two subjects which were very good:
1) A wife’s deception of her passionate, jealous husband; his
suffering, his struggle and the enjoyment of forgiveness, and
2) A description of the oppression
of the serfs and later the very
same kind of oppression by land property, or rather by being deprived
of it.
Just now Goldenweiser[152] played. One thing—a fantasy
fugue:[153]
an artificiality; studied, cold, pretentious; another—“Bigarrure” by
Arensky;[154] sensual, artificial; and a third—a ballad by Chopin;
sickly, nervous, not one or the other or the third can be of any
use to the people.
The devil who has been sent to me is still with me, and
tortures me.
November 23. Moscow. If I live.
To-day November 25. Moscow.
Am very weak. My stomach isn’t working. I am trying to write on
art—but it doesn’t go. One thing is good; have found myself, my
heart.... A letter from Zanini
with an offer of 31,500 francs.[155]
Tischenko, a good novel on poverty.[156] It is now past two, am
going for a walk.
To-day November 27. Moscow.
Very weak, poor in all respects. And feel as if I had only just now
awakened. Have been thinking:
1) We are all in this life—workers placed at the work of saving our
souls. It can be compared to keeping up the fire given from heaven
and lighted on the hearth of my body. My work lies in this, to keep
up and feed this fire in myself (not to spend the material of this
fire as I have done lately, except in burning it) and not to think
how and what gets lighted from this fire. It is not a difficult
matter to thresh with several flails, but to keep in order, not to
get confused (and not only to thresh, but not to interfere with the
others), one has only to remember oneself, one’s own tempo while
beating. But as soon as you have begun to think of others, to look
at them, you get confused.
The same thing happens in life. Remember only yourself, your own
work—and this work is one: to love, to enlarge love in yourself—not
to think of others, of the consequences of your labour and the work
of life will go on fruitfully, joyously. Just as soon as you begin
to think of that which you are producing, about the results of your
labour, just as soon as you begin to modify it in accordance with
its results—your work becomes confused and ceases, and there comes
the consciousness of the vanity of life. The master of life gave to
each one of us separately such a labour, that the fulfilment of that
labour is the most fruitful work. And He himself will use and guide
this work, give it a place and a meaning. But as soon as I try to
find and fix a place for it, and in accordance with this, to modify
it then I become confused, see the vanity of labour and I despair.
My task is to work and He already knows for what it is needed and
will make use of it. “Man walks, God leads.” And the work is one;
to enlarge love in oneself.
I am a self-moving saw or a living spade and its life consists in
this, to keep its edge clean and sharp. And it will work well enough,
and its work will be useful. To keep it sharp, and to sharpen and
sharpen it all the time, that is to make oneself always kinder and
kinder.
2) Once more I wrote to N that she is wrong in thinking that it is
possible for one to renounce oneself from the exploit of living.
Life is an exploit. And the principal thing is, that that very thing
that pains us and seems to us to hinder us from fulfilling our work
in life—is our very work in life. There is some circumstance, a
condition in life which tortures you; poverty, illness, faithlessness
of a husband, calumny, humiliation,—it suffices only to pity
yourself and you become the unhappiest among the unhappy. And it
suffices only to understand that this is the very work of life which
you are called to do; to live in poverty, in illness, to forgive
faithlessness, calumny, humiliation—and instead of depression and
pain there is energy and joy.
3) Art becoming all the time more and more exclusive, satisfying
continually a smaller and smaller circle of people, becoming more
and more selfish, has gone crazy, since insanity is only selfishness
reaching to its last degree. Art has reached the last degree of
selfishness—and has gone out of its mind.
I have felt very badly and depressed these days. Father, help me to
live with Thee, not to wander from Thy will.
November 28. Moscow. If I live.
To-day December 2. Moscow.
Five days have passed and very torturing ones. Everything is still
the same.
...
My feeling; I have discovered on myself a terrible putrefying
sore. They had promised me to heal it and have bound it. The sore
was so disgusting to me, it was so depressing for me to think that
it was there, that I tried to forget it, to convince myself that
it was not there. But some time has passed—they unbound the sore
and though it was healing, nevertheless it was there. And it was
torturingly painful to me and I began to reproach the doctor—and
unjustly. That is my condition. The principal thing is the devil that
has been sent me. Oh, this luxury, this richness, this absence of
care about the material life! Like an over-fertilised soil. If they
do not cultivate
good plants on it, weeding it, cleaning everything
around them,—it will become overgrown with horrible ugliness and
will become terrible. But it is difficult—I am old and am almost
unable to do it. Yesterday I walked, thought, suffered and prayed
and it seems to me not in vain.
Yesterday I went to Princess Helen Sergeievna.[157] It was very
pleasant. I still cannot work. I shall try to in a minute. I have
written nothing in the note book. Letters from
Koni,[158] from
Mme. Kudriavtsev.[159] Yesterday
the factory hands came and a new
one, Medusov, I think.
Dec. 12. Moscow.
I have suffered much during these days and it seems I have advanced
towards peace, towards the good—towards God. Am reading much on
art. It is becoming clear. I am not even sitting down to write.
Masha went away. The Chertkovs came.
To-day I wrote the appendix to The Appeal.[160]
Dec. 15. Moscow.
Now 2 o’clock in the morning. Have done nothing. My stomach ached.
Am calm; have no desire to write.
... I have made some notes. I don’t write out everything. Something
struck me forcibly—it is my clear consciousness of the weight of the
oppressiveness from my personality, from the fact that I am I. This
gives me joy because it means that I understood, that I recognised
as myself, at least partly, a “self” that was not personal.
December 16, Moscow. If I live.
To-day December 19 or 20.
Five days have passed and I feel the oppressiveness, the weight of
my body and therefore the consciousness of the existence of that
which is not the body has strengthened terribly. I want to throw off
this weight, free myself from these chains and nevertheless I feel
them. I am sick of my body.
All this time I have not worked at all and I feel heavy melancholy. I
am fighting against it by seeking in my life a task which is beyond
this life. There is only one such: an approach to the perfection of
God, to love. Yesterday it became so clear to me that life here is
nothing else than a manifestation in these forms of the greatest
perfection of God. “To live an age and unto the night”—that is in
terms of time. To live for a universal life and for this one—that
is in terms of space.
I have done nothing during this time and am unable to. I am living
badly.
I have noted a few trifles on Art:
1) They bring as a proof that art is good, the fact that it produces
a great impression on you. Yes, but who are you? On the decadents,
their works produce a great impression on them. You say that they
are spoilt. But Beethoven, who does not produce an impression on
the working man, produces such an impression on you, only because
you are spoilt. Who then is right? What music is beyond question as
to its value? That kind which produces as impression on a decadent
and on you and on the working man; simple, understandable, popular
music.
2) What relief all would feel who are locked up in a concert-room
listening to Beethoven’s last works, if a jig or a cherdash or
something similar would be played for them.
3) N. was here and said that he recognised only sensation, that
man himself, the “self” was only a sensation. Sensation receives
sensation. He reached this nonsense because of the scientific
method; the limiting of the field of research, the non-recognition
of anything else than sensation, is very good and profitable for the
practical ends of the science of experimental psychology, but it
is good-for-nothing as far as a living universal point of view is
concerned. And this error is often made by people; they transfer
to life the method which is suitable to science.
4) Nothing so confuses the conception of art as the acceptance of
authorities. Instead of determining by a clear concise conception
of art whether the works of Sophocles, Homer, Dante, Shakespeare,
Goethe, Beethoven, Bach, Raphael, Michael-Angelo, come up to the
conception of good art and exactly how they do so, they determine
by the existing works of the recognised great artists, art itself
and its laws. But, however, there are many works of noted artists
which are below every criticism and there are many false reputations,
accidentally won fame; Dante, Shakespeare.
5) I am reading the history of music:[161] out of sixteen chapters
on artificial music there is one short chapter on popular music. And
they know almost nothing about it. So that the history of music is
not the history of how real music was born and spread and developed;
the music of melodies—but the history of artificial music, i.e.,
how real melodious music was distorted.
6) Artificial, master-class music, the music of parasites, feeling
its own impotence, its own hollowness, takes recourse, in order to
replace real interest by artificiality, now to counterpoint, to the
fugue, now to opera, to illustration.
7) Church music is good, therefore, because it is understood by
the masses. The undeniably good is only that which is understood by
all. And therefore it is true, that the more understandable it is,
the better.
8) The various characters expressed by art touch us only because
in each one of us is the possibility of every possible character.
(Forgot)
9) The history of music, like all history, is written on the plan to
show how it has gradually reached that condition in which the thing
is found about which the history is now being written. The present
condition of music, or that about which the history is written, is
supposed to be the highest. But what if it is not only a lower thing,
but something entirely distorted, an accidental deviation towards
distortion.
10) Belief in authorities causes the errors of authorities to be
accepted as models.
11) They say that music strengthens the impression of words—in
arias, songs. It isn’t true. Music gets ahead of impressions made
by words, by heaven knows how far. An aria of Bach; what words can
rival it at the time when it is being rendered? It is a different
thing—the words by themselves. To whatever music you would place
the Sermon on the Mount, the music would remain far behind, once
you penetrated the words. “Crucifix” by Faure,[162] the music is
pitiable compared to the words. They are two entirely different and
incompatible feelings. In song they go along together only because
the words give tone.
(Not exact. About this in another place.)
12) So vividly have I recalled Vasili Perfileev[163] and others,
whom I saw in Moscow, and so clear did it become that, although they
are dead, they still are.
13) The Scylla and Charybdis of artists; either understandable, but
shallow, vulgar; or pseudo-lofty, original and incomprehensible.
14) The poetry of the people always reflected and not only
reflected, predicted, prepared, popular movements; the Crusades,
the Reformation. What could the poetry of our parasitical circle
predict and prepare?—Love, debauchery; debauchery, love.
15) Popular poetry, music, art in general is exhausted, because all
the talented have been won over by bribes to be buffoons to the rich
and the titled; chamber music, opera, odes and[164] ...
16) In all art, there exists the struggle between the Christian and
the pagan. The Christian begins to conquer and the new wave of the
15th Century overflows, the Renaissance, and only now at the end of
the 19th, the Christian rises again, and paganism in the shape of
decadence having reached the highest degree of nonsense, is being
destroyed.
17) Besides the fact that the most gifted of the people were won
over by bribes into the camp of the parasites, the cause of the
destruction of popular poetry and music were: at first the serfdom
of the people and later the most important one—printing.
18) Chertkov said that around us there are four walls of the unknown;
in front, the wall of the future, in back the wall of the past, to
the right the wall of ignorance, of that which is taking place there
where we are not, and the fourth wall, he says, is the ignorance of
that which is going on in the soul of another. In my mind this is
not so. The first three walls are as he says. One should not look
through them. The less we look beyond them the better. But as to
the fourth wall of the ignorance of that which is going on in the
souls of other people, this wall we ought to break down with all our
strength, striving for a fusion with the souls of other people. And
the less we will look beyond those three other walls, the closer we
will get to others in this respect.
19) After death in importance, and before death in time, there is
nothing more important, more irrevocable, than marriage. And just
as death is only good then when it is unavoidable, but every death
on purpose is bad, so it is with marriage. Only then is marriage
not evil, when it is not to be conquered.
20) Apostasy comes from a man professing what he professes not for
himself, not for God, but for people. He betrays his professions,
either because he has become convinced that more people, or better
people according to his mind, do not profess the same thing as he,
or because that which he did before, he did for human fame and now
he wants to live for himself, before God.
21) If I believed in a personal God to whom one could turn to with
questions, I would say, Why, for what has God made it so, that some,
knowing the undoubted truth, burn wholly with its fire, while others
do not want it, cannot understand or accept it, and even hate it.
It is now past one. The same weakness, but keen in spirit, when I
remember the significance of the whole of life, and not only this
one which I have lived through as Leo Nicholaievich (Tolstoi). Help
me, Lord, to do always, everywhere Thy will, to be with Thee. But
not my will, but Thine, be done.
December 21, Moscow, if I live.
I am still writing December the 20th, Moscow.
Still the same depression. Father, help me. Relieve me. Strengthen
Thyself in me, vanquish, drive forth, destroy, the foul flesh and
all that I feel through it.
... Father, help me. Moreover,
I feel better already. What is
especially calming is the task, the test of humility, of humiliation,
an entirely
unexpected, exceptional humiliation. In chains, in a
prison, one can pride oneself on one’s humiliation, but here it is
only painful, unless one accepts it as a trial sent by God. Yes,
learn to bear calmly, joyfully and to love.
December 21. Moscow.
I am learning badly. I continually suffer, helplessly, weakly. Only
in rare moments do I rise to the consciousness of the whole of my
life (not only this one) and my duties in it.
I thought (and felt): There are people lacking both in æsthetic
feeling and in the ethical (especially the ethical), to whom it is
impossible to instil that which is good—the less so when they do
and love that which is bad, and think that the bad is good ...
December 22,
Moscow, if I live, which is getting to be very
doubtful; my heart does not stop aching. Almost nothing gives me
rest. To-day Posha alone refreshed me. It is so disgusting I want to
cry over myself, over the remnant of my life which is being futilely
ruined. But perhaps it must be so, yes, in fact, it must be so ...
December 25, Moscow.
9 o’c. at night. Spiritually I feel better. But I have no
intellectual, artistic work, and I am melancholy. Just now I felt
that particular Christmas
softening and gentleness, and poetical
impulse. My hands are cold, I want to cry and to love ...
December 26, Moscow.
I am still not writing anything, but I feel my thoughts revive. The
devil still does not leave me.
I thought to-day about
The Diary of a Mad Man.[165] The principal
thing is that I have understood my filial relation to God,
brotherhood,—and my attitude to the whole world has changed.
1897
Jan. 5,
Moscow.
There is still nothing good to write about myself. I feel no need
of working and the devil does not leave me. Have been ill for about
6 days.
Began to reread Resurrection and reached up to his decision to
marry and threw it away with disgust. It is all untrue, invented,
weak. It is hard to repair a spoiled thing. In order to repair it,
there is necessary: 1) alternately to describe his feeling and
life, and hers,[166] and 2) sympathetically and seriously hers, and
critically and with a smile, his. I shall hardly finish it. It is
all very spoilt.
Yesterday I read Arkhangelsky’s[167] article “Whom to Serve” and
was very delighted.
Have finished the notebook. And here I am writing from it:
1) My article on ... must be written for the people ...
2) (For The Notes of a Madman or for The Drama). Despair because
of madness and wretchedness of life. Salvation from this despair in
the recognition of God and one’s filiality to Him. The recognition of
filiality is the
recognition of brotherhood. The recognition of the
brotherhood of man and the cruel, brutal, unbrotherly arrangement of
life which is justified by people—leads inevitably to a recognition
of one’s own insanity or that of the whole world.
3) I read Nakashidze’s[168] letter about the Congress of the
Dukhobors, where they discussed social questions. Here is an instance
of the possibility of administration without violence. One condition
is necessary—no, two conditions: the respect of the youth and of
the spiritually weak in general, to the resolutions of the elected
elders, the spiritually stronger—the “little old men” as the
Dukhobors call them; and the second condition that these “little
old men” be rational and loving. At this Congress the question of
uniting property (in common), was discussed and the “little old men”
were in favour of it, but constantly repeated: “Only let there be
no violence, let things be done voluntarily.”
Among the people and the Dukhobors this respect and recognition of
the necessity of fulfilling the resolutions of the old men exist. And
all this without forms; the election of the elders and the methods
of agreement.
4) No matter how you grind a crystal, how you dissolve it, compress
it, it will mould itself again at the first opportunity into the
same form. And so the structure of society will be always the same,
no matter to what changes you submit it. The form of a crystal will
only then be changed when chemical changes occur in it, inner ones;
the same with society.
5) It would be good to write a preface to Spier[169] containing the
following:
The world is such as we see it, only if there do not exist any other
beings differently built from us and endowed with other senses than
ours. If we see not only the possibility, but the necessity, of the
existence of other beings endowed with other senses than ours, then
the world is in no case, merely such as we see it. Our imagination of
the world shows only our attitude to the world, just as the visual
picture which we form for ourselves from what we see as far as the
horizon and the sky represents in no way the actual outlines of the
objects seen. The other senses, hearing, smell, principally—touch, in
verifying our visual impressions give us a more definite conception
of the seen objects; but that which we know as broad, thick, hard
or soft or how the things seen by us sound or smell, do not prove
that we know these things fully and that if a new sense (above the
five) were given us, it would not disclose to us that our conception
of things formed by our five senses was not just as deceptive as
that conception of the flatness of objects and their diminishing in
perspective which sight only gives us.
I see a man in the mirror, hear his voice and am fully convinced
that he is a real man; but I approach, I want to grasp his hand
and I touch the glass of the mirror and see my delusion. The same
thing must come to pass in a dying man; a new feeling is born which
discloses to him (through his new feeling and the new knowledge it
gives him) the delusion of recognising his body as himself, and of
all that he recognised as existing through the means of the senses
of this body.
So that the world is certainly not such as we know it to be: let
there be other instruments of knowledge—and there will be another
world.
But no matter how that which we consider as the world, our attitude
to the world, should change—one thing is unalterably such as we
know it and is always unchanging, it is that which knows. And it
knows not only in me, but in everything which knows. This thing
which knows is the same everywhere and in everything and in itself.
It is God, and it is that for some reason limited particle of God
which composes our actual “self.”
But what then, is this God, i. e., something eternal, infinite,
omnipotent, which has become mortal, finite, weak? Why did God
divide himself within himself? I do not know, but I know that this
is so, and that in this is life. All that we know is nothing else
than just such divisions of
God. All that we know as the world is
the knowledge of these divisions. Our knowledge of the world (that
which we call matter in space and time) is the contact of the limits
of our divinity with its other divisions. Birth and death are the
transitions from one division into another.
6) The difference between Christian happiness and pagan is this,
that the pagan seeks happiness, prepares it for himself, awaits it,
demands it—the Christian seeks, prepares, awaits and demands the
kingdom of God and accepts happiness when it comes as something
unexpected, undeserved, unprepared. And it is no less.
Jan. 18. Moscow.
Dismal, horrid. Everything
repels me in the life they lead around
me. Now I free myself from sadness and suffering, then again I fall
into it. In nothing is it so apparent, as in this, how far I am from
what I want to be. If my life were really entirely in the service
of God, there would be nothing which could disturb it.
I am still writing on art. It is bad. A Dukhobor was here.
Feb. 4. Nicholskoe with the Olsuphievs.
I am already here the 4th day and am inexpressibly sad. I am writing
badly on art. I just now prayed and became horrified at how low
I have
fallen. I think, I ask myself, what am I to do; I doubt,
I hesitate, as if I did not know or had forgotten who I was and
therefore what I was to do. To remember that I am not master, but
servant and to do that to which I have been put. With what labour
have I struggled and attained this knowledge, how undoubted is this
knowledge and how I can forget it nevertheless—not exactly forget
it, but live without applying it.
... Well, enough about this.
I am going to write out what I thought during this time:
1) When all is said and done, it is those people over whom
violence is used who always rule, i.e., those who fulfil the law
of non-resistance. So women seek rights, but it is they who rule,
just because they are the ones subjected to force—they were and
they still are. Institutions are in the power of men, but public
opinion is in the power of women. And public opinion is a million
times stronger than any laws and armies. The proof that public
opinion is in the hands of women is that not only the construction
of homes, food, are determined by women, and not only do the women
spend the wealth, consequently control the labour of men, but the
success of works of art, of books, even the appointment of rulers,
are determined by public opinion; and public opinion is determined
by women. Some one well said that men must seek emancipation from
women, and not the contrary.
2) (For The Appeal).[170] Unmask the deceivers, spread the truth
and do not fear. If it were a matter of spreading deception and
murder, then of course, it would be terrible, but here you would be
spreading the freedom from deception and murder. Besides, there is
no ground for fear. Of whom? They ... are themselves afraid.
I remember there worked for us in our village a weak and phlegmatic
12 year-old boy who once caught on the road and brought back, an
enormous healthy peasant, a thief, who had taken a coat from the
hall.
3) The poets, the verse-makers torture their tongues in order to
be able to say every possible kind of thought in every possible
variety of word and to be able to form from all these words something
which resembles a thought. Such exercise can only be indulged in by
unserious people. And so it is.
4) If we never moved, then everything which we saw would appear to us
flat and not in perspective. Motion gives us a conception of things
in three dimensions of space. The same thing is true concerning the
material side of things: if we weren’t living, were not moving in
life, we would see only the material side of things; but moving in
life, moving our spiritual side across the material side of the
world, we recognise the falseness of the idea that the material is
actually such as it appears to us.
5) Twenty times I have repeated it, and 20 times the thought comes
to me as new, that release from all excitement, fear, suffering,
from physical and especially from spiritual, lies in destroying in
one’s self the illusion of the union of one’s spiritual “self” with
one’s physical. And this is always possible. When the illusion is
destroyed then the spiritual “self” can suffer only from the fact
that it is joined to the physical, but not from hunger, pain, sorrow,
jealousy, shame, etc. In the first case, as long as it is joined it
does that which the physical “self” wants: it gets angry, condemns,
scolds, strikes; in the second case, when it is separated from the
physical, it does only that which can free it from the torturing
union. And only the manifestations of love frees it.
6) For the article on Art. When it is beauty that is recognised as
the aim of art, then everything will be art which for certain people
will appear as beauty, i.e., everything which will please certain
people.
7) I have noted, “the harm of art, especially music” and I wanted to
write that I had forgotten, but while I was writing, I remembered.
The
harm of art is principally this, that it takes up time,
hiding from people their idleness. I know that it is harmful when
it encourages idleness both for the producers and those who enjoy
it, but I cannot see a clear definition of when it is permissible,
useful, good. I should like to say only then when it is a rest from
labour, like sleep, but I do not yet know if that is so.
8) (For The Appeal). You are mistaken, you poor, if you think that
you can shame or touch or convince the rich man to divide with you.
He cannot do that because he sees that you want the same thing that
he wants and that you are fighting him with the same means with which
he fights you. You will not only convince him, but you will compel
him to yield to you only by ceasing to seek that which he seeks,
ceasing to struggle with him, but if you cease to struggle you will
cease also ... (very important).
9) If the end of art is not the good, but pleasure, then the
distribution of art will be different. If its end is the good, then
it will inevitably be spread among the greatest number of people;
if its end is pleasure, then it will be confined to a small number
(not exact and still unclear).
10) Art is—I was going to write food, but it is better to say—sleep,
necessary for the sustenance of the spiritual life. Sleep is useful,
necessary
after labour. But artificial sleep is harmful, does not
refresh, does not stimulate, but weakens.
11) I heard counterpoint singing and ...[171] This is the destruction
of music, a means of perverting it. There is no sense to it, no
melody, and any first senseless sequence of sounds are taken and
from the combination of these insignificant sequences is formed some
kind of a tedious resemblance to music. The best is when the last
chord is finished.
12) The most severe and consequential agnostic, whether he wants it
or does not want it, recognises God. He cannot but recognise that in
the first place, in the existence both of himself and of the whole
world, there is some meaning inaccessible to him; and in the second,
there is a law of his life, a law to which he can submit or from which
he can escape. And it is this recognition of the highest meaning of
life, inaccessible to man but inevitably existing, and of the law of
one’s life, which is God and His will. And this recognition of God
is immensely stronger than the recognition of ... etc. To believe
like this means to dig to bedrock, to the mainland, and to build
the house on that.
13) Stepa[172] related the physiologic process which takes place in
the infant when it separates from its mother. Truly it is a miracle.
This thought occupied me in relation to the doctrine that everything
material is illusion. How can illusion take place there where I do
not see it? As you see it, so it takes place. You see everything
through your glasses. That is well enough as regards all other
phenomena, but here the most fundamental thing is taking place,
that from which the whole of my life and of everything living is
composed: the detachment from the world. And here right in front of
my eyes this detachment is taking place; there was one and there
became two, like among the first cells, (unclear.)
14) Every living being carries within himself all the possibilities
of its ancestors. Having been detached, he manifests several of them,
but carries in himself the remaining ones and acquires new ones.
In this lies the process of life; to unite and to separate. (Still
more unclear.)
I have decided no matter what happens, to write every day. Nothing
strengthens one so much for the good. It is the best prayer.