{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_46272/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_46272","id":"gutenberg_46272","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46272","summary":null,"tags":["Authors, Russian -- 19th century -- Diaries","Category: Biographies","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Russian Literature","Tolstoy, Leo, graf, 1828-1910 -- Diaries"],"text":"[Transcriber\u2019s Note: Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.\nBlank representing omitted text is represented as a line of\nunderscores: ______.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  THE JOURNAL OF\n  LEO TOLSTOI\n  (_First Volume--1895\u20131899_)\n\n\n\n\nTHE NEWEST BORZOI BOOKS\n\n\n  ASPHALT\n     _By Orrick Johns_\n\n  BACKWATER\n     _By Dorothy Richardson_\n\n  DANDELIONS\n     _By Coulson T. Cade_\n\n  CENTRAL EUROPE\n     _By Friedrich Naumann_\n\n  CRIMES OF CHARITY\n     _By Konrad Bercovici_\n\n  RUSSIA\u2019S MESSAGE\n     _By William English Walling_\n\n  THE BOOK OF SELF\n     _By James Oppenheim_\n\n  THE BOOK OF CAMPING\n     _By A. Hyatt Verrill_\n\n  MODERN RUSSIAN HISTORY\n     _By Alexander Kornilov_\n\n  THE RUSSIAN SCHOOL OF PAINTING\n     _By Alexandre Benois_\n\n  THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A SUPER-TRAMP\n     _By William H. Davies_\n     _With a Preface by Bernard Shaw_\n\n\n\n\n  THE JOURNAL OF\n  LEO TOLSTOI\n  (_First Volume--1895\u20131899_)\n\n\n  TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN\n  By ROSE STRUNSKY\n\n\n  [Illustration: Publisher\u2019s logo]\n\n\n  ALFRED A. KNOPF\n  NEW YORK \u00b7 MCMXVII\n\n\n\n\n  COPYRIGHT, 1917, BY\n  ALFRED A. KNOPF\n\n\n  PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n\nThe ultimate meaning of the Russian Revolution which took place\nin March, 1917, can be best understood through the pages of the\nJournal of Leo Tolstoi which is here printed. The spiritual qualities\nwhich make up the mind and personality of Tolstoi are the spiritual\nqualities which make up the new era among men which is being waged\nso painfully and so uncompromisingly at the present moment on the\nsoil of Russia. One holds the key to the other, for no land but\nRussia could have produced a Tolstoi, and in no land but Russia\ncould Tolstoi have been so embraced and so absorbed.\n\nThey are both flesh of each other\u2019s flesh, and I place them equally\nin greatness against each other. Great and wonderful as is the\nRussian people, so Tolstoi was as great and wonderful as the Russian\npeople. I say this knowing well the pain and impatience both felt\nfor each other in the long eighty-two years of Tolstoi\u2019s life here,\nbut it was the pain and the impatience of great love and infinite\nunderstanding, of feeling and knowing each other\u2019s pulse-beats,\nand not the misunderstanding of strangers. It was the wise father\ndoubting the impatient methods of his children; it was the ardent\nchildren desiring and struggling to accomplish the wishes of the\nfather and being lost in the maelstrom of an insistent reality.\n\nThe youth went faster than the father, and yet so infinite and\nuniversal were the words of the latter that when the last summings-up\nare made both stand together in total harmony and agreement. Tolstoi\nat thirty took no part in the great educational agrarian movement of\nthe latter Fifties, and even had a fine scorn for their exponents\nwhich did not leave him in his later years--witness the phrase against\nHerzen and Chernishevsky, \u201craised to great men,\u201d he said, \u201cand who\nought to be grateful to the government and the censorship, without\nwhich they would have been the most unnoticed of sketch-writers.\u201d\nAnd yet it was Herzen and Chernishevsky and Dobrolubov, these\n\u201csketch-writers,\u201d who kept up the fire of agrarian reform and who\npractically forced the issue upon Alexander II. Tolstoi ignored the\nwhole revolutionary movement of that time; even more than ignored it;\nthrew himself seemingly into the opposite camp, leading the life of\na gay f\u00eated hero returned from the Crimean War. But his _Morning of\na Landed Proprietor_ shows that he was thinking deeply even at that\ntime of the social problems around him, only he was thinking more\nslowly than the rest. He was just waking up to the fact that the\npeasant conditions needed improvement, at the time when all around\nhim the youth had passed to the idea that it was not an improvement\nthat they needed, but an absolute change in the fundamental ideas of\nproperty. It took him forty years to say, that you might as well ask\nhim how to make use of the ownership, or the labour or the rent of\na bonded slave as to ask him for advice as to the problem of owning\nof land. Here was no reformer speaking, but one who was united with\nthe revolutionary thought around him.\n\nBut when the men of the Sixties were making that answer for themselves,\nand had won the first great step toward the change--the abolition of\nserfdom--Tolstoi was away altogether from his native land writing\nthat great epoch of the War of 1812--_War and Peace_. It was because\nthis great soul was undogmatic, and reached out into the world not by\nmass thinking, but marvellously enough entirely by himself, laying\nhis roots far and deep, that he seemed so slow moving. Yet it was\nthe direction and the end that counted, and the end finds him, like\nthe race between the tortoise and the hare--that he is still ahead.\n\nEven Russia will have far and long to travel to come to that kingdom\nof God on earth, to that conception of the manifestation of the\nwill of God on earth, which is the spiritual ideal of Tolstoi, and\ntoward which, express it in any materialistic or naturalistic terms\nit may, the Russian nation has with one mind been working with such\nmarvellous self-consciousness.\n\nAgain, after the emancipation of the serfs, Tolstoi seemed to fail\nthe New Russia, interesting himself only at this moment with the\neducation of the youth and the need of reform--ever the need of\nreform, when already for over a decade the cry of Russia was for new\nforms entirely, new land arrangements, new relations between man\nand man, and man and his property. The time had come, they said,\nfor the Will of the People to be made manifest.\n\nBut before Tolstoi could decide on that, he had to decide on a more\nfundamental problem of what his relation was to God, as well as what\nhis relation was to man. In other words, what were the true spiritual\nrelations between man and man, not only the economic, political and\nsocial ones. And it is this attempt to solve the real fundamental\nmeaning to all relationship, the very reason for the youth\u2019s outbursts\nagainst the economic, political and social injustices that existed,\nthat kept him moving forward so slowly. For he moved whole worlds\nat a step.\n\nThe only reason for life, he said, is the universal desire for well\nbeing, which in man, whose reason has awakened, is expanded into\na desire for universal welfare; in other words, for love. For he\nknows that he is not a separate being, but a part of a whole, and\ntherefore it is meaningless to think that he can obtain anything\nfor himself alone. It is only in struggling and attaining for the\nWhole that he can find his true life.\n\nThe Russian youth agreed with him entirely. To their logic, the\nstruggle for universal welfare led to terrorism; to Tolstoi, to the\nabsolute non-resistance to evil by violence. The youth said the will\nof God is being thwarted by a band of oppressors. If we do away with\nthe oppressors we can get together in mutual love. Tolstoi said that\nhe who thinks he can violate the will of God for an immediate good\nis only short-sighted. Never at any moment can the will of God be\nthwarted and the good attained.\n\nFor a while the Russian Government rather approved of the Tolstoyan\nattitude of non-resistance to evil. The one who used the greatest\namount of violence and evil of all, was pleased to meet the philosophy\nwhich advised non-resistance to it. But Tolstoi grew and travelled\nin his long years and he had to change his conclusions, so that\nhis logic led him to that most self-conscious and difficult of\nall revolutionary movements, passive-resistance. Take no part in\nviolence, he said; therefore, pay no taxes that support a government\nwhich violates, and do not serve in the army which is an act of\nviolence in itself. It was then that Tolstoi was looked upon with\naskance by the Russian authorities and formerly anathematised from\nthe church. It was to his followers that the more drastic punishment\nof imprisonment and exile was meted out.\n\nToward the latter years of his life, his great human heart could\nnot remain quite closed to the violence around him, and religious\nthinker that he was, he had to stop his meditations to cry out\nagainst the Kishineff massacres of the Jews and against the raising\nof the scaffolds and the tying of the \u201cStolypine\u2019s neck-ties,\u201d that\nmost telling nick-name of the Russian people for the noose, which\nwas tied even for school children on the crossroads of Russia after\nthe bitter failure of the revolution of 1905.\n\nIt was only in _What Is Art?_ that the Russian people and Tolstoi\nwere unanimously at one. Art is to serve the people, to be of the\npeople, to be something understandable by all people. There were to\nbe no dogmas for art, no German metaphysics for art. It was merely\nthe means of expressing to his neighbour the mysteries that went on\nin the soul of the artist. There was no quarrel here between his\nfellow countrymen and the great thinker. Everything was to be for\nthe people; the spiritual manifestations of life as well as the\nmaterial.\n\nHow to make clear that for all this seeming lack of harmony, there\nexisted the greatest bond of all between this teacher and his\nchildren. Thousands in Russia took his life as an example and left\nthe vainglories of the city with all its false standards and went\nto live among the people. They went not only to serve them but to\nbe one of them, to live by the sweat of their brow as the masses\ndid, because it was the only moral thing to do, and because the\ngreatest happiness lay in the spiritual values of life, and because,\nas Tolstoi himself says, \u201cIt is good with them, but with us it is\nshameful.\u201d\n\nI remember so well the deep-set eyes and the long shaggy eyebrows\nof that all-knowing seer, as he sat on the veranda of his home in\nYasnaya Polyana one May afternoon in 1906, and told us that he was a\nreligious thinker and not a political one but that to his mind the\nrevolution in Russia would take fifty years to develop. And with\nthat fine scorn for parliamentarism which would have rejoiced the\nheart of any syndicalist, he added that that which we were witnessing\nnow, the assembling of the first Duma, was only the first scene of\nthe first act of a five act drama and it was high comedy!\n\nThe second scene followed soon and turned out to be bitter tragedy,\nand before it was quite over Tolstoi wandered off on that last\npilgrimage which ended in the little railway station of Ostopova.\nHe succumbed at last to that \u201ctemptation\u201d he speaks of so freely in\nhis Journal, to leave his home conditions, negate himself entirely,\nand find himself again, merged and at one with the Whole. And the\nGreat Deliverer came and offered him even a greater fusion with all,\ngiving him that \u201cother post,\u201d the \u201cnew appointment\u201d he so ardently\nprayed for in life. When that happened he became at once clear and\nlucid even to those nearest him--who had criticised him the most.\nThe Russian youth was disconsolate. Our spiritual guide is gone,\nthey cried. Who will hold up the candle for us now? What black night\nis there in the world, and how to grope our way in it alone!\n\nHow lonely it was without that spiritual guide!\n\nThe first act of the March Revolution was to redecorate the grave\nof Tolstoi in the forest of Zakaz, to make the sacred pilgrimage to\nhis resting place and tell the father of the good news--the will of\nGod is being established, reason is awakened in man. Love toward\nneighbour; nay, the greatest of all, love toward enemies, is being\naccomplished.\n\nIt is with a feeling of reverence that I bring this gift of the inner\nsoul of Tolstoi to the English-speaking public. The very formlessness\nof the phrases of this Journal helps toward a sincerity of thought\nwhich shows itself pure by its nakedness. Tolstoi himself knew the\nvalue of these documents, for one man was to him as another, and\nthe sincere gropings of a man\u2019s reason toward the understanding of\nthe meaning of life was of value even if they were his own, and\nespecially if they were of one who had lived much and thought much\nas he did. \u201cIt is especially disagreeable to me,\u201d he writes, \u201cwhen\npeople who have lived little and thought little do not believe me,\nand, not understanding me, argue with me about moral problems. It\nwould be the same for which a veterinary surgeon would be hurt if\npeople who were not familiar with his art would argue with him.\u201d\nAnd Tolstoi knew that he knew his art, he knew consciously, since\nthe spiritual awakening that came to him in the Eighties, the great\nmission to which he dedicated his life--to find a moral justification\nof living--and it is therefore that he laid special stress in the\ndisposal of these documents for the public after his death. The\nvolume here printed is only four years of over sixty years of Journal\nwhich he kept since his early twenties. They are published first,\nbecause it is only with the Journal beginning 1890 that his editor\nand friend, V. G. Chertkov, has the copied manuscripts in their\nentirety--from that date up to Tolstoi\u2019s death in 1910.\n\nOver and over again in his life, Tolstoi attempted to make special\nand legal provision for his journals and notebooks, as he calls\nthem, that they be given and spread free to the public, and he\ndesignated his friend and follower, who has edited and published\nthis volume in Russian, as the practical inheritor and executor of\nthese manuscripts. He was to publish them in their entirety, except\nfor certain revisions so that there should be preserved, as Tolstoi\nexpressed it, that which ought to be preserved and there should be\nthrown out that which ought to be thrown out.\n\n\u201cI know,\u201d he wrote to Chertkov, February 8, 1900, \u201cthat no one\nbears such an esteem, respect and love for my spiritual life and\nits expression as you do. I always said it and now I write it in my\nnotes which express my wishes after my death, asking you especially,\nand only you, to undertake the revision of my papers.\u201d\n\nThis Chertkov has done exceedingly well in the original Russian\nedition, giving in double brackets the number of the words he left\nout, which seemed to him necessary on account of their too intimate\ncharacter. These places I have merely indicated by three points.\nUnfortunately the Russian volume was printed under the old r\u00e9gime and\ndeletions had to be made on account of the censor, which, because of\nthe difficulty of communication during the war, it was impossible\nto fill in. These places are also designated in this volume by\nthree points, but in the Russian edition they are given in double\nparenthesis, also enclosing the number of the words left out. So\nthat a record of all omissions have been kept.\n\nThe problem of disposing of these documents after his death according\nto his principles against copyrights, occupied Tolstoi for many\nyears. The Russian law nullified any such disposal of property,\nfor legally the inheritor had to be a fixed person \u201cand works to\nbe disposed of free to all\u201d meant nothing. He therefore wrote many\nwills, defining and modifying his position in all possible ways so\nthat his ideas might be carried out, and in such a form that they\ncould not be frustrated by any one.\n\nHis plans were threefold:\n\n1. That all his works written after 1881 as well as all his writings\nwritten before that year (the year that marks his spiritual\nregeneration) but not published until later or not published at all\nup to his death, should be no one\u2019s property, but be given free to\nthe public for printing and translation.\n\n2. That all his manuscripts and documents (among that number the\njournals, first drafts of books, letters, etc.,) which would remain\nafter his death should be given over to V. G. Chertkov, who was to\nrevise them and arrange them in suitable form for publication.\n\n3. That the estate of Yasnaya Polyana should be given over to the\npeasants.\n\nTolstoi\u2019s first idea was that Chertkov should be one of the legal\ninheritors, together with the Countess Tolstoi, his wife. But\nChertkov refused for various personal reasons, he says, but mainly\nbecause he thought that the arrangement for the transfer of property\ncould be best facilitated and could be more delicately managed if\nsome one member of the Tolstoi family was designated instead of an\noutsider. Tolstoi, therefore, designated as his legal inheritor his\nyoungest daughter Alexandra, who stood in close sympathy with him\nin his spiritual ideas, and, in case of her death before his own,\nhis eldest daughter Tatiana. He hoped that his daughters, together\nwith the Countess Tolstoi, would fulfil his requests concerning the\ndisposal of his posthumous documents and the gift of the estate\naccording to his wishes.\n\nAfter Tolstoi\u2019s death the estate was given to the peasants by means\nof the sale of most of the posthumous documents which enabled his\ndaughter Alexandra to buy back the estate from the family and give\nit to the peasants as directed by Tolstoi, but in the matter of\nthe journals it was more difficult to arrange from the fact that\nthe Countess Tolstoi placed all these journals and notebooks in\nthe Moscow Historical Museum on the ground that they were a gift\nof Tolstoi to her during his lifetime and that therefore she had\na right to dispose of them as she thought best. The matter would\nhave taken only a legal process in the court to disentangle, a thing\nwhich the Countess Alexandra Tolstoi did not wish to undertake as\nbeing against the spirit of her father to use legal force to come\nto an agreement.\n\nChertkov, therefore, was forced to use only such copies of the\noriginal journals and notebooks which he happened to have in his\npossession. The present volume is made from a copy done by the hands\nof the Prince and Princess Obolensky, the son-in-law and daughter\nof Tolstoi, who also stood very near to Tolstoi spiritually, were\nconscientious in their fulfilment of such tasks for him, and who\nknew his handwriting very well. The original documents are still in\nthe Moscow Historical Museum, but Chertkov has promised to publish\nthe volumes and journals which he has from the years 1900 to 1910,\nand has already brought out a second volume of this series, which\ndates from Tolstoi\u2019s early years in the twenties.\n\nWhatever value this volume has as a historical and exact transcript\nof Tolstoi\u2019s original jottings-down as they came to him, it has much\nmore value as a transcript of the thoughts of a great Russian which\nhave so permeated his people that they are now being rewritten on the\npages of Russian history. It is because the blood of his brother\ncalls to him from under the ground, that the Russian has undertaken\nto advance one step nearer to the fulfilment of the great law--to\nlive together in harmony, to serve his brother and to do the one\nwork--which is the one work for all, to love.\n\nThe hundred-years readiness for sacrifice for the common good, the\nwillingness to go to exile and death of four generations of men and\nwomen, the red flag now flying over the Winter Palace in Petrograd\nwith the letters of gold, \u201cProletarians of all Nation Unite,\u201d the\ninsistent call to the peoples of the world to overthrow all oppressors\nand live together in mutual harmony, the trumpet calls of a democracy\nwhose tones are so strange and new, that we across the borders seem\nnot to hear or understand them, all have their spiritual counterpart\nin the pages of this book. It is Russia that speaks here.\n\nI must give my thanks to Mr. Alexander Gourevich who so carefully\ncompared the original text and English translation, and to Mr. Joseph\nPeroshnikoff who patiently revised the notes and assisted in the\ncompilation of the index.\n\n                                                 ROSE STRUNSKY.\n\n  New York, May, 1917.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n  Introduction--Rose Strunsky, v\n  Journal, 3\n    1895, October, 3\n      \u201c   November, 4\n      \u201c   December, 8\n    1896, January, 19\n      \u201c   February, 21\n      \u201c   March, 29\n      \u201c   May, 31\n      \u201c   June, 56\n      \u201c   July, 61\n      \u201c   September, 70\n      \u201c   October, 74\n      \u201c   November, 87\n      \u201c   December, 99\n    1897, January, 113\n      \u201c   February, 117\n      \u201c   March, 134\n      \u201c   April, 137\n      \u201c   May, 139\n      \u201c   July, 140\n      \u201c   August, 144\n      \u201c   September, 148\n      \u201c   October, 150\n      \u201c   November, 163\n      \u201c   December, 177\n    1898, January, 193\n      \u201c   February, 199\n      \u201c   March, 210\n      \u201c   April, 219\n      \u201c   May, 226\n      \u201c   June, 232\n      \u201c   July, 243\n      \u201c   August, 246\n      \u201c   November, 256\n    1899, January, 269\n      \u201c   February, 269\n      \u201c   June, 270\n      \u201c   July, 276\n      \u201c   September, 277\n      \u201c   October, 283\n      \u201c   November, 291\n      \u201c   December, 292\n  Explanatory Notes to Text, by V. G. Chertkov, 299\n  A short Sketch of the Life of Tolstoi at the End of the Nineties,\n      by C. Shokor-Trotsky, 387\n  Index, 409\n\n\n\n\nTHE JOURNAL OF LEO TOLSTOI\n\n_October\u2013December 1895_\n\n\n\n\nTHE JOURNAL OF LEO TOLSTOI\n\n\n\n\n_I continue[1][A] October 28. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nHave been thinking:\n\nHave been thinking one thing: that this life which we see around us\nis a movement of matter according to fixed, well-known laws; but\nthat in us we feel the presence of an altogether different law,\nhaving nothing in common with the others and requiring from us the\nfulfilment of its demands. It can be said that we see and recognise\nall the other laws only because we have in us this law. If we did\nnot recognise this law, we would not recognise the others.\n\nThis law is different from all the rest, principally in this, that\nthose other laws are outside of us and forces us to obey them; but\nthis law is in us--and more than in us; it is our very selves and\ntherefore it does not force us when we obey it, but on the contrary\nfrees us, because in following it we become ourselves. And for this\nreason we are drawn to fulfil this law and we sooner or later will\ninevitably fulfil it. In this then consists the freedom of the will.\nThis freedom consists in this, that we should recognise that which\nis--namely that this inner law is ourselves.\n\nThis inner law is what we call reason, conscience, love, the good,\nGod. These words have different meanings, but all from different\nangles mean one and the same thing. In our understanding of this inner\nlaw, the son of God, consists indeed the essence of the Christian\ndoctrine.\n\nThe world can be looked upon in this way: a world exists governed by\ncertain, well-known laws, and within this world are beings subject to\nthe same laws, but who at the same time bear in themselves another\nlaw not in accord with the former laws of the world, a higher law,\nand this law must inevitably triumph within these beings and defeat\nthe lower law. And in this struggle and in the gradual victory of\nthe higher law over the lower, in this only is life for man and the\nwhole world.\n\n_Oct. 29. Yasnaya Polyana. If I live._[2]\n\n[A] These superior figures refer to the editor\u2019s notes which begin\non page 299.\n\n\n\n_Nov. 5. Y. P._\n\nI have skipped 6 days. It seems to me, I thought little during this\ntime: I wrote a little, chopped wood and was indisposed--but lived\nthrough much. I lived through much, because in fulfilling a promise\nto S.[3], I read through all my journals for the past seven years.\n\nIt seems to me, I am approaching a simple and clear expression of that\nby which I live. How good that I didn\u2019t finish the Catechism![4] I\nthink I shall write it differently and better, if the Father wishes\nit. I understand why it is impossible to say it quickly. If it could\nbe said all at once, by what then would we live in the realm of\nthought? It will never be given me to go farther than this task.\n\nI just took a walk and understood clearly why I can\u2019t make\n_Resurrection_ go better: it was begun falsely. I understood this in\nthinking over again the story: _Who is Right?_[5] (about children).\nI understood that one must begin with the life of the peasants, that\nthey are the subject, they are positive, but that the other thing\nis shadow, the other thing is negative. And I understood the same\nthing about _Resurrection_. One must begin with her.[6] I want to\nbegin immediately.\n\nDuring this time there were letters: from Kenworthy,[7] a beautiful\none from Shkarvan,[8] and from a Dukhobor in Tiflis.[9]\n\nHave written to no one for a long time. General indisposition and no\nenergy. The stage manager and the decorator[10] were here, students\nfrom Kharkov against whom I think I did not sin, Ivan Ivanovich\nBochkarev,[11] Kolasha.[12]...\n\n_Nov. 6. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 7. Y. P._\n\nI wrote a little these two days on the new _Resurrection_. My\nconscience hurts when I remember how trivially I began it. So far,\nI rejoice when I think of the work as I am beginning it.\n\nI chopped a little. I went to Ovsiannikovo, had a good talk with\nMaria Alexandrovna[13] and Ivan Ivanovich.[14] Waltz\u2019s assistant\nwas here and a Frenchman with a poem....\n\n\n\n_November 8, 9. Y. P._\n\nHave written little on _Resurrection_. I was not disappointed, but\nI was weak.\n\nYesterday Dunaev[15] came. Chopped much yesterday, overtired myself.\nTo-day I walked. I went to Constantine Bieli\u2019s.[16] He is very much\nto be pitied. Then I walked in the village. It is good with them,\nbut with us it is shameful. Wrote letters. Wrote to Bazhenov[17]\nand three others. Thought:\n\n1) The confirmation of the fact, that reason liberates the latent love\nin man for justice is the proverb, \u201cComprendre c\u2019est tout pardoner.\u201d\nIf you forgive a man, you will love him. To forgive means to cease\nto condemn and to hate.\n\n2) If a man believes something at the word of another, he will lose\nhis belief in that which he would have inevitably believed in, had\nhe not trusted the other one. He who believes in ... etc., ceases\nto believe in reason. They even say straight out, one ought not to\nbelieve in reason.\n\n3) ...\n\nA very interesting letter from Holland, about what a youth is to do\nwho is called to military service, when he is the sole supporter of\nhis mother.[18]\n\n\n\n_November 10. Y. P._\n\nSlept with difficulty. Weakness both physical and intellectual\nand--for which I am at fault--also moral. Rode horseback. Posha[19]\narrived.... A wonderful French pamphlet about war.[20] Yes, 20 years\nare needed for that thought to become a general one. My head aches\nand seems to crackle and rumble. Father, help me when I am most weak\nthat I may not fall morally. It is possible.\n\n_Nov. 11. Y. P. If I live._\n\nI write and think: it is possible that I won\u2019t be. Every day I make\nattempts, and I get more accustomed to it.\n\n\n\n_To-day November 15._\n\nI have been so weak all the time I could write nothing except a\nfew letters. A letter to Shkarvan. There have been here, Dunaiev,\nPosha, Maria Vasilievna.[21] They left yesterday. Yesterday also I\nwent to see Maria Alexandrovna; she is ill. To-day Aunt Tanya[22]\nand Sonya came.\n\nI didn\u2019t sleep at night and therefore didn\u2019t work. But I wrote on\nthe girl _Konefsky_[23] and a little in my journal. I am reading\nSchopenhauer\u2019s[24] \u201cAphorisms.\u201d Very good. Only put \u201cThe service\nof God\u201d instead of \u201cThe recognition of the vanity of life,\u201d and we\nagree.\n\nNow 2 o\u2019clock, I shall write out later what I have noted down.[25]\n\n\n\n_December 7. Moscow._\n\nAlmost a month since I have made any entries. During this time\nwe moved to Moscow. The weakness has passed a little, and I am\nworking earnestly, though with little success, on the Declaration\nof Faith.[26] Yesterday I wrote a little article on whipping.[27] I\nlay down to sleep in the day and had just dozed off--I felt as if\nsome one jerked me; I got up, began to think about whipping, and\nwrote it out.\n\nDuring this time, I went to the theatre[28] for the rehearsals of\nthe Power of Darkness. Art, beginning as a game, has continued to\nbe the toy of adults. This is also proved by music, of which I have\nheard much. It is ineffectual. On the contrary, it detracts when\nthere is ascribed to it the unsuitable meaning which is ascribed\nto it. Realism, moreover, weakens its significance ...\n\nN. refused to serve in the military. I called on him.[29]\nPhilosophov[30] died.... Wrote several worthless letters.\n\nI have thought during this time much--in meaning. Much of it I could\nnot understand and have forgotten.\n\n1) I have often wanted to suffer, wanted persecution. That means\nthat I was lazy and didn\u2019t want to work, so that others should work\nfor me, torturing me, and I should only suffer.\n\n2) It is terrible, the perversions ... of the mind to which men\nexpose children for their own purposes during the time of their\neducation. The rule of conscious materialism is only explained by\nthis. The child is instilled with such nonsense that afterwards the\nmaterialistic, limited, false conception, which is not developed\nto the conclusions which would show its falsity, appears like an\nenormous conquest of the intellect.\n\n3) I made a note, \u201cViolence frees,\u201d and it was something very clear\nand important, and now I don\u2019t remember what it was at all.\n\n_I have remembered. December 23._ Violence is a temptation because it\nfrees us from the strain of attention, from the work of reasoning:\none must labour to undo a knot; to cut it, is shorter.\n\n4) A usual perversion of reason, which is made through a violently\nenforced faith, is to make men satisfied either with idolatry or with\nmaterialism, which at bottom is one and the same thing. Faith in the\nreality of our conceptions is faith in an idol, and the consequences\nare the same; one must bring sacrifices to it.\n\n5) I can imagine consciousness transferred to the life of the spirit\nto such a degree that the sufferings of the body would be met gladly.\n\n6) A beautiful woman smiles, and we think that because she smiles\nshe says something good and true when she smiles. But often the\nsmile seasons something entirely foul.\n\n7) Education. It is worth while occupying oneself with education, in\norder to find out all one\u2019s shortcomings. Seeing them, you will begin\nto correct them. But to correct oneself is indeed the best method\nof education for one\u2019s children and for others\u2019 and for grown-up\npeople.\n\nJust now I read a letter from Shkarvan[31] that medical help does\nnot appear to him like a boon, that the lengthening of many empty\nlives for many hundred years is much less important to him than the\nweakest _blowing_, as he writes, (a puff) on the spark of divine\nlove in the heart of another. Here then in this _blowing_, lies the\nwhole art of education. But to kindle it in others, one must kindle\nit in oneself.\n\n8) To love means to desire that which the beloved object desires.\nThe objects of love desire opposing things, and therefore, we can\nonly love that which desires one and the same thing. But that which\ndesires one and the same thing is God.\n\n9) Man beginning to live, loves only himself, and separates himself\nfrom other beings in that he constantly loves that which alone\nconstitutes his being. But as soon as he recognises himself as a\nseparate being, he recognises also his own love, and he is no longer\ncontent with this love for himself and he begins to love other\nbeings. And the more he lives a conscious life, the greater and\ngreater number of beings he will begin to love, though not with such\na stable and unceasing love as that with which he loves himself, but\nnevertheless, in such a way that he wishes good to everything he\nloves, and he rejoices at this good, and suffers at the evil which\ntries the beloved beings, and he unites into one all that he loves.\n\nAs life is love, why not suppose that my \u201cself,\u201d that which I consider\nto be myself and love with a special love, is perhaps the union I\nmade in a former life of things which I loved, just as I am making\na union of things now. The other has already taken place and this\none is taking place.\n\nLife is the enlargement of love, the widening of its borders, and\nthis widening is going on in various lives. In the present life,\nthis widening appears to me in the form of love. This widening is\nnecessary for my inner life and it is also necessary for the life of\nthis world. But my life can manifest itself not only in this form.\nIt manifests itself in an innumerable quantity of forms. Only this\none is apparent to me.\n\nBut in the meantime, the movement of life understood by me in this\nworld, through the enlargement of love in myself and through the union\nof beings through love, produces at the same time other effects, one\nor many, unseen by me. As for instance, I put together 8 toy cubes\nto make a picture on one side of them, not seeing the other sides\nof the constructed cubes, but on the other sides are being formed\npictures just as regular, though unseen by me.\n\n(All this was very clear when it came into my head, and now I have\nforgotten everything and the result is nonsense.)\n\n10) I have thought much about God, about the essence of my life, and\nit seemed I only doubted one and the other and believed in my own\nconclusions; and then, one time, not long ago, I simply had the desire\nto lean upon my faith in God and in the indestructibility of my soul,\nand to my astonishment I felt so firm and calm a confidence, as I\nhave never felt before. So that all my doubts and scrutinisings have\nevidently, not only not weakened my faith, but have strengthened\nit to an enormous degree.\n\n11) Reason is not given that we should recognise what we ought to\nlove; this it won\u2019t disclose; but only for this: to show what we\nought not to love.\n\n12) As in each piece of handiwork, the principal art lies not in the\nregular making of certain things anew, but in the ever bettering of\nthe inevitable faults of a wrong and ruined work, so even in the\nbusiness of life, the principal wisdom is not how to begin to act\nand how to lead life correctly, but how to better faults, how to\nliberate oneself from errors and seductions.\n\n13) Happiness is the satisfaction of the requirements of a man\u2019s\nbeing living from birth to death in this world only; but the good is\nthe satisfaction of the requirements of the eternal essence living\nin man.\n\n14) The essence of the teachings of Christ consists in this, that\nman ought to know who he is; that he should understand, like a bird\nwhich does not use its wings and runs on the land, that he is not a\nmortal animal, dependent on the conditions of the world, but like a\nbird which has understood that it has wings and has faith in them, he\nshould understand that he himself was never born and never died and\nalways is, and passes through this world in one of the innumerable\nforms of life to fulfil the will of Him who sent him into this life.\n\n_Dec. 8. Moscow. If I live._\n\nMascha[32] is with Ilia,[33] a loving letter from her to-day.\n\n\n\n_To-day December 23. Moscow._\n\nIt is long since I have made an entry. On the 30th, the Chertkovs[34]\ncame. It is two days since Kenworthy arrived. He is very pleasant....\n\nHave continued to write the Declaration--am progressing. Off and\non, I think out the drama,[35] and yesterday I raved about it all\nnight. I am not well; a bad cold in the head, influenza. Because of\nthe letter to the Englishman, I began also a letter on the collision\nbetween England and America.[36]\n\nHave been thinking during this time:\n\n1) I have been thinking especially clearly of that which I have\nalready said many times; that all the evil in the world comes\nonly from this, that people look upon themselves, upon their own\npersonality, as a worthy object of their conscious life--upon\nthemselves or upon a group of personalities, it is all the same.\n\nAs long as a man lives for himself unconsciously, he does no harm. If\nthere is a struggle, then the struggle is an unconscious one which\nis ended at once when the struggle with surroundings is ended; man\nadjusts himself to it or he goes under, and this struggle is neither\ncruel nor is it an evil one. The struggle begins to be cruel only\nwhen man directs his consciousness upon it, prepares it, strengthens\nand multiplies its energy tenfold and hundredfold.\n\nAs Pascal says: there are three kinds of people; one kind know\nnothing and sit quietly, and just as quiet are those who know; but\nthere are a middle kind who don\u2019t know but believe they do; from\nthem comes all the evil in the world. They are the people in whom\nconsciousness has awakened, but they don\u2019t know how to use it.\n\n2) The whole thing lies in this--that you should always remember\nwho you are. There is no situation so difficult, from which the way\nout would not immediately offer itself, if you only would remember\nthat you are not a temporary, material manifestation, but an eternal\nomnipresent being. \u201cI am the resurrection and the life: he that\nbelieveth in me shall never die, and though he were dead yet shall\nhe live. Believest thou this?\u201d\n\nI walked on the street. A wretched beggar approached me. I forgot\nwho I was and passed by. And then suddenly I remembered, and just\nas naturally as the hungry begin to eat and the tired sit down,\nI turned back and handed him something. It is the same with the\ntemptation to quarrel, to insult, to be vain.\n\n3) One can not voluntarily cease to remain awake, i. e. to fall\nasleep. Just as little can one voluntarily cease to live. Life is\nmore important than the will, than desire. (Unclear.)\n\n4) Receive with thankfulness the enjoyments of the flesh--all that\nyou meet on the way, if they are not sinful--in short, if they do\nnot go against your consciousness, if they do not make it suffer.\nBut use the efforts of your will, your liberty, only to serve God.\n\nI just wrote a letter to Crosby.[37] He is working in America.\n\n_Dec. 24. Moscow. If I live._\n\nYesterday I received the \u201cOpen Letter\u201d of Spielhagen, the Socialist,\nwhich appeared in the newspapers with regard to Drozhin.[38]\n\n\n\n\n1896\n\n\n\n\n_January 23. Moscow._\n\nJust a month that I made no entries. During this time I wrote a letter\nabout patriotism[39] and a letter to Crosby[40] and here now for two\nweeks I have been writing the drama. I wrote three acts abominably.\nI thought to make an outline so as to form a _charpente_. I have\nlittle hope of success.\n\nChertkov and Kenworthy went away the 7th. Sonya went to Tver to\nAndrusha.[41] To-day Nagornov[42] died. I am again a little indisposed.\n\nI jotted down during this time:\n\n1) A true work of art--a contagious one--is produced only when the\nartist seeks, strives. In poetry this passion for representing that\nwhich is, comes from the fact that the artist hopes that having\nseen clearly and having fixed that which is, he will understand the\nmeaning of that which is.\n\n2) In every art there are two departures from the way, vulgarity and\nartificiality. Between them both there is only a narrow path. And\nthis narrow path is outlined by impulse. If you have impulse and\ndirection, you pass by both dangers. Of the two, the more terrible\nis artificiality.\n\n3) It is impossible to compel reason to examine and clarify that\nwhich the heart does not wish.\n\n4) It is bad when reason wishes to give the meaning of virtue to\nselfish efforts.\n\nKudinenko[43] was here. A remarkable man. N. took the oath and is\nserving.[44] A letter from Makovitsky[45] with an article on the\nNazarenes.[46]\n\n_Jan. 24. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Jan. 25. Moscow._\n\nDuring these two days the chief event was the death of Nagornov.\nAlways new and full of meaning is death. It occurred to me: they\nrepresent death in the theatre. Does it produce 1/1,000,000 of that\nimpression which the nearness of a real death produces?\n\nI continue writing the drama. I have written four acts. All bad.\nBut it is beginning to resemble a real thing.\n\n_Jan. 26. Mosc. If I live._\n\n\n\n_January 26. Moscow._\n\nI am alive, but I don\u2019t live. Strakhov--to-day I heard of his\ndeath.[47] To-day they buried Nagornov--and that is news. I lay\ndown to sleep, but could not sleep, and there appeared before me\nso clearly and brightly, an understanding of life whereby we would\nfeel ourselves to be travellers. Before us lies a stage of the road\nwith the same well-known conditions. How can one walk along that\nroad otherwise than eagerly, gaily, friendly, and actively together,\nnot grieving over the fact that you yourself are going away or that\nothers are going ahead of you thither, where we shall again be still\nmore together.\n\nTo-day I wrote a postscript to the letter to Crosby. A good letter\nfrom Kenworthy. Unpleasantness with N. He is a journalist.\n\n_Jan. 26 [27?]. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\nAlmost a month that I have made no entries. To-day, _Feb. 13, Moscow_.\n\nI wanted to go to the Olsuphievs.[48].... There is much bustle here\nand it takes up much time. I sit down late to my work and therefore\nwrite little. I finished somehow the fifth act of the drama and took\nup _Resurrection_. I read over eleven chapters and am gradually\nadvancing. I corrected the letter to Crosby.\n\nAn event--an important one--Strakhov\u2019s death, and something\nelse--Davydov\u2019s conversation with the Emperor.[49]......\n\nThe article by Ertel[50] that the efforts of the liberals are useful,\nand also the letter by Spielhagen on the same theme,[51] provoke\nme. But I can not, I must not write. I have no time. The letters\nfrom Sopotsko[52] and Zdziekhovsky[53] on the Orthodox Church and on\nthe Catholic, provoke me on the other hand. However, I shall hardly\nwrite. But here yesterday I received a letter from Grinevich\u2019s[54]\nmother on the religious bringing up of children. That I must do. At\nleast I must use all my strength to do this.\n\nVery much music--it is useless.... As regards religion, I am very\ncool at present.\n\nThought during this time (much I have forgotten and have not written\ndown):\n\n1) Oh, not to forget death for a moment, into which at any moment you\ncan fall! If we would only remember that we are not standing upon\nan even plain (if you think we are standing so, then you are only\nimagining that those who have gone away have fallen overboard and\nyou yourself are afraid that you will fall overboard), but that we\nare rolling on, without stopping, running into each other, getting\nahead and being got ahead of, yonder behind the curtain which hides\nfrom us those who are going away, and will hide us from those who\nremain. If we remember that always, then, how easy and joyous it\nis to live and roll together, yonder down the same incline, in the\npower of God, with Whom we have been and in Whose power we are now\nand will be afterwards and forever. I have been feeling this very\nkeenly.\n\n2) There is no more convincing proof of the existence of God, than\nthe faculty of the soul by which we can transport ourselves into\nother beings. Out of this faculty flows both love and reason, but\nneither one nor the other is in us, but they are outside of us and\nwe only coincide with them. (Unclear.)\n\n3) The power to kill oneself is free play given to people. God did\nnot want slaves in this life, but free workers. If you remain in\nthis life, then it means that its conditions are advantageous to\nyou. If advantageous--then work. If you go away from the conditions\nhere, if you kill yourself, then the same thing will be put before\nyou again there. So there is nowhere to go.\n\nIt would be good to write the history of what a man lives through\nin this life who committed suicide in a past life; how, coming up\nagainst the same requirements which were placed before him in the\nother life, he comes to the realisation that he must fulfil them. And\nin this life he is more intelligent than in the others, remembering\nthe lesson given him.\n\n4) How does it happen that a clever, educated man believes in the\nnonsensical? Man thinks that which his heart desires. Only if his\nheart desires the truth, and only if it does, will he think the\ntruth. But if his heart desires earthly pleasures and peace, he will\nthink of that which will bring him earthly pleasures and peace or\nstill something else. But as it is not an attribute of man to have\nearthly pleasures and peace, he will think falsely; and to be able\nto think falsely he will hypnotise himself.\n\n(Unclear, not good.)\n\n_Feb. 14. M. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day February 22. Nicholskoe, at the Olsuphievs._[55]\n\nIt is already more than a week that I feel depressed in spirit.\nNo life; I can not work on anything. Father of my life and of all\nlife! If my work is already finished here, as I am beginning to\nthink, and the ending of my spiritual life, which I am beginning\nto feel, means a transfer into that other life--that I am already\nbeginning to live there and that here these remnants are being taken\naway little by little--then show it to me more clearly that I may\nnot seek and weary myself. Otherwise it seems to me that I have\nmany well-thought plans, yet I have no means, not only for carrying\nthem through--this I know, I ought not to think of--but even to do\nsomething good, something pleasing to Thee as long as I live here.\nOr give me strength to work with the consciousness of serving Thee.\nStill, Thy will be done. If only I always felt that life consisted\nonly in the fulfilment of Thy will, I would not doubt. But doubt\ncomes because I bite the bit and don\u2019t feel the reins.\n\nIt is now 2 o\u2019clock. I am going to dinner. I took a walk, slept in\nthe morning, read _Trilby_. And I want to sleep all the time.\n\nDuring this time, what has happened? Almost nothing. I thought on\nthe Declaration of Faith.\n\n_If I live. February 23. Nicholskoe._\n\n\n\n_To-day February 27. Nicholskoe._\n\nAm writing the drama, it moves very stiffly. Indeed I don\u2019t even\nknow if I am progressing or not.... I am very comfortable here; the\nimportant thing--it is quiet.\n\nRead _Trilby_--poor. Wrote letters to Chertkov, Schmidt,[56]\nKenworthy. Read Corneille--instructive.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) I made a note that there are two arts. Now thinking it over, I\ndon\u2019t find a clear expression of my thought. Then I thought that\nthere was an art, as they rightly characterise it, which grew from\nplay, from the need of every creature to play. The play of the calf\nis jumping, the play of man is a symphony, a picture, a poem, a\nnovel.\n\nThis is one kind of art, the art of play, of thinking out new plays,\nproducing old ones and inventing new. That is a good thing, useful\nand valuable because it increases man\u2019s joys. But it is clear that\nit is possible to occupy oneself with play only when sated. Thus\nsociety can only occupy itself with art, when all its members are\nsated. But as long as all its members are not sated, there can not be\nreal art, there will be an art of the overfed, a deformed one, and\nan art of the hungry ones--rough and poor, just as it is now. And\ntherefore, in the first kind of art--of play--only that part is of\nvalue which is attainable to all, which increases the joys of all.\n\nIf it is like this, then it is not a bad thing, especially if it\ndoes not demand an increase of toil on the part of the oppressed,\nas happens now.\n\n(This could and should be expressed better.)\n\nBut there is yet another art which _calls forth in man better and\nhigher feelings_. I wrote this just now--something I have said many\ntimes--and I think it isn\u2019t true. Art is only one and consists in\nthis: to increase the sinless general joys accessible to all--the\ngood of man. A nice building, a gay picture, a song, a story give\na little good; the awakening of religious feelings, of the love of\ngood brought forth by a drama, a picture, a song--give great good.\n\nThe 2nd thing that I have been thinking about art, is that nowhere is\nconservatism so harmful as in art. Art is one of the manifestations\nof the spiritual life of man, and therefore, as when an animal is\nalive, it breathes and discharges the products of its breathing, so\nwhen humanity is alive, it manifests activity in art. And therefore,\nat every given moment it must be contemporaneous--the art of our\ntime. One ought only to know where it is (not in the decadence of\nmusic, poetry, or the novel); and one must seek it not in the past,\nbut in the present. People who wish to show themselves connoisseurs\nof art and who therefore praise the past classic art and insult the\npresent, only show by this, that they have no feeling for art.\n\n3) Rachinsky[57] says: \u201cNotice that contemporaneous with the spread\nof the use of narcotics, since the 17th century, the astounding\nprogress of science began, and especially of the natural ones.\u201d Is\nit not because of this, I say to him, that the false direction of\nscience has come, the studying of that which is not necessary to man,\nbut is only an object for idle curiosity, or when useful, is not the\nonly thing really necessary? Is it not because of this that from\nthat time on there was neglected the one thing that was necessary,\ni.e. the settling of moral questions and their application to life?\n\n4) What is the good? I only know a word in Russian which defines this\nidea. The good is the real good, the good for all, _le veritable\nbien, le bien de tous_, _what is good for everybody_.[58]\n\n5) Men, in struggling with untruth and superstition, often console\nthemselves with the quantity of superstition they have destroyed.\nThis is not right. It is not right to calm oneself until all that\nis contradictory to reason and demands credulence is destroyed.\nSuperstition is like a cancer. Everything must be cleaned out if one\nundertakes an operation. But if a little bit is left, everything\nwill grow from it again.\n\n6) The historic knowledge of how different myths and beliefs arose\namong peoples in different places and in different times ought to,\nit seems, destroy the faith that these myths and beliefs which have\nbeen inoculated in us from our infancy, constitute the absolute\ntruth; but nevertheless, so-called educated people believe in them.\nHow superficial then, is the education of so-called educated people!\n\n7) To-day at dinner there was talk about a boy with vicious\ninclinations who was expelled from school, and about how good it\nwould be to give him over to a reformatory.\n\nIt is exactly what a man does who lives a bad life, harmful to his\nhealth, and who, when he becomes ill, turns to the doctor so that\nthe latter may cure him, but has no idea that the illness was given\nto him as a beneficial indicator that his whole life is bad and that\nhe ought to change it. The same thing is true with the illnesses\nin our society; every ill member of society does not remind us that\nthe whole life of our society is irregular and that we ought to\nchange it. But we think that for every such ill member, there is\nor ought to be, an institution freeing us from this member or even\nbettering him.\n\nNothing hampers the progress of humanity so much as this false\nconviction. The more ill the society, the more institutions there\nare for the healing of symptoms and the less anxiety for changing\nthe entire life.\n\nIt is now 10 o\u2019clock in the evening. I am going to supper. I want to\nwork very much, but am without intellectual energy; a great weakness,\nyet I want to work terribly. If God would only give it to-morrow.\n\n_Feb. 28. Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day March 6. Nicholskoe._\n\nAll this time I have felt weakness and intellectual apathy. I am\nworking on the drama very slowly. Much has become clear. But there\nisn\u2019t one scene with which I am fully satisfied.\n\nTo-day I was about to plan something silly: to write out an outline\nof the Declaration of Faith. Of course it didn\u2019t go. In the same\nway I began and dropped a letter to the Italians.[59]\n\nDuring this time I jotted down:\n\n1) Corneille writes in his _Pr\u00e9face_ to Menteur on art, that its\naim is a diversion, \u201c_divertir_,\u201d but that it must not be harmful,\nand if possible, it ought to be educationally enlightening.\n\n2) At supper there was a discussion on heredity: they say vicious\npeople are born from an alcoholic ... (I can\u2019t clearly express my\nthought and will put it by.)\n\n3) Something very important. I lay and was almost asleep, suddenly\nsomething seemed to tear in my heart. It occurred to me: that is\nthe way death comes from heart failure; and I remained calm--I felt\nneither grief nor joy, but blessedly calm--whether here or there, I\nknow that it is well with me, that things are as they ought to be,\njust like a child, tossed in the arms of its mother, does not stop\nsmiling from joy for it knows that it is in her loving arms.\n\nAnd the thought came to me: why is it so now and was not so before?\nBecause before, I did not live the whole of life, but lived only an\nearthly life. In order to believe in immortality, one must live an\nimmortal life here. One can walk with one\u2019s feet and not see the\nprecipice before one, over which it is impossible to cross, and one\ncan rise on one\u2019s wings....[60]\n\n(It isn\u2019t going and I don\u2019t feel like thinking.)\n\n_March 7, 1896. Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day May 2. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nIt is almost two months since I have made an entry. All this time I\nlived in Moscow. Of important events there were: a getting closer to\nthe scribe Novikov[61] who changed his life on account of my books\nwhich his brother, a lackey, received from his mistress abroad. A\nhot-blooded youth. Also his brother, a working man, asked for \u201cWhat\nis my Faith?\u201d and Tania[62] sent him to Mme. Kholevinsky.[63] They\ntook Mme. Kholevinsky to prison. The prosecuting attorney said that\nthey ought to go after me. All this together made me write a letter\nto the ministers of Justice and the Interior in which I begged them\nto transfer their prosecution to me.[64]\n\nAll this time I wrote on the Declaration of Faith. I made little\nprogress. Chertkov, Posha Biriukov were here and went away. My\nrelations with people are good. I have stopped riding the bicycle.\nI wonder how I could have been so infatuated.\n\nI heard Wagner\u2019s Siegfried.[65] I have many thoughts in connection\nwith this and other things. In all I have jotted down 20 thoughts\nin my notebook.\n\nStill another important event--the work of African Spier.[66] I just\nread through what I wrote in the beginning of this notebook. At\nbottom, it is nothing else than a short summary of all of Spier\u2019s\nphilosophy which I not only had not read at that time, but about\nwhich I had not the slightest idea. This work clarified my ideas on\nthe meaning of life remarkably, and in some ways strengthened them.\nThe essence of his doctrine is that things do not exist, but only\nour impressions which appear to us in our conception as objects.\nConception (Vorstellung) has the quality of believing in the existence\nof objects. This comes from the fact that the quality of thinking\nconsists in attributing an objectivity to impressions, a substance,\nand a projecting of them into space.\n\n\n\n_May 3. Y. P._\n\nLet me write down anything. Am indisposed. Weakness and physical\napathy. But think and feel keenly. Yesterday at least, I wrote a few\nletters: to Spier,[67] Shkarvan, Myasoyedov,[68] Perer, Sverbeev.[69]\n\nI am reading Spier all the time, and the reading provokes a mass of\nthoughts.\n\nLet me write out something at least from my 21 notes.\n\nTo-day I worked on the Declaration of Faith.\n\n1) \u201cCome and dwell in us and cleanse us of all evil\u201d ... On the\ncontrary: Cleanse thy soul of evil thyself and He will come and dwell\nin thee. He only waits for this. Like water he flows into thee in\nthe measure as room is freed. \u201cDwell in us.\u201d How agonisingly lonely\nit is without Thee--this I experienced these days and how peaceful,\nfirm and joyous, needing nothing and no one when with Thee. Do not\nleave me!\n\nI can not pray. His tongue is different from that which I speak, but\nHe will understand and translate it into His own when I say: \u201cHelp\nme, come to me, do not leave me!\u201d\n\nAnd here I have fallen into a contradiction. I say you have to\ncleanse yourself, then He will come. But I, not yet having cleansed\nmyself, call upon Him.\n\n_May 4. If I still live here, Y. P._\n\n\n\n_May 5. Y. P._\n\nThe same general despair. And I am sad. There is one cause; the higher\nmoral requirement that I put forward. In its name I have rejected\neverything that is beneath it. But it was not followed. Fifteen years\nago I proposed giving away the greater part of the property and to\nlive in four rooms. Then they would have an ideal....\n\nTo-day I rode past Gill.[70] I thought: no undertaking is profitable\nwith a small amount of capital. The more capital, the more profits;\nthe less expenses. But from this it in no way follows that, as Marx\nsays, capitalism will lead to socialism. Perhaps it will lead to\nit, but to one with force. The workingmen will be compelled to work\ntogether, and they will work less and the pay will be more, but there\nwill be the same slavery. It is necessary that people work freely\nin common, that they learn to work for each other, but capitalism\ndoesn\u2019t teach them that; on the contrary, it teaches them envy, greed,\nselfishness. Therefore, through a forced uniting brought about by\ncapitalism, the material condition of the workers can be bettered, but\ntheir contentment can in no way be established. Contentment can only\nbe established through the free union of the workers. And for this\nit is necessary to learn how to unite, to perfect oneself morally,\nto willingly serve others without being hurt when not receiving a\nreturn. And this can\u2019t in any way be learned under the capitalistic,\ncompetitive system, but under an entirely different one.\n\nI sleep alone downstairs.\n\n_To-morrow, May 6th, Y. P._\n\n\n\n_To-day, May 9, Y. P._\n\nUp to now, I haven\u2019t yet written out all that I had to. Have been\ncontinually indisposed. Notwithstanding this, I work in the mornings.\nTo-day, it seemed to me I advanced very much. Our people have gone\naway, some to the coronation, others to Sweden.[71] I am alone with\nMasha; she has a sore throat. I am well.\n\n_May 10, If I live. Y. P._\n\n\n\n_To-day, May 11, Y. P._\n\nSonya arrived from Moscow. I continue to write the Declaration of\nFaith. It seems as if I were weakening. To-day I received a letter\nfrom N, a tangled up revolutionist. In the evening I rode horseback\nto Yasenki[72] and thought:\n\nI have not yet written out everything from my notebooks. I will jot\ndown at least this, the more so since, when it came into my head it\nseemed to me very important. Namely:\n\n1) Spier says we know only sensations. It is true, the material of\nour knowledge is sensations. But one must ask; why variation of\nsensations (even of one and the same sense of sight or touch). He\n(Spier) insists too much that corporeality is an illusion, and does\nnot answer the question: why variation of sensations? It is not\nbodies that make variation of sensations, I agree to this, but it is\njust such beings as we, who must be the cause of these sensations.\n\nI know that what he recognises as our being he recognises as a unit.\nGood. Admitting it is a unit, then it is a divided off, broken off\nunit, and I am a unit being only within certain limits. And these\nlimits of my being are the limits of other beings. Or, one being is\noutlined by limits and these limits create sensations, i. e., the\nmaterial of knowledge. There are no bodies, bodies are illusions,\nbut other beings are not illusions and I recognise them through\nsensations. Their activity produces sensations in me and I conclude\nthat the same effect is produced in them by my activity. When I\nreceive sensations from a man with whom I come in contact, it can\nbe understood; but when I receive sensations from the earth upon\nwhich I fall, from the sun which warms me, what is it that produces\nthese sensations in me? Probably the activities of beings whose life\nI do not understand; but I recognise only a part of them like the\nflea on my body. Touching the earth, feeling the warmth of the sun,\nmy limits come in contact with the limits of the sun. I am in the\nworld (I project this into space. I can not do it otherwise though\nit is not so in reality) like a cell, not an immovable one, but one\nwandering and touching by his limits, not only the limits of other\ncells of the same kind, but other enormous bodies.\n\nBetter still, not to project this into space; I act and am acted\nupon by the greatest variety of beings; or, my division of a unit\nbeing associates with other divisions of the most various kinds.\n\n(What a lot of nonsense!)\n\n_May 12, Y. P. If I live._\n\nPentecost. It is cold, damp, and not a leaf on the trees.\n\n\n\n_To-day already, May 16, Y. P. Morning._\n\nI can not write my Declaration of Faith. It is unclear, metaphysical,\nand whatever good there is in it, I spoil. I am thinking of beginning\nit all from the beginning again or to call a stop and get to work\non a novel or a drama.\n\nN.[73] was here; it was a difficult love test. I passed it only\noutwardly and even then badly. If the examiner had gone along\nthoroughly, skipping about, I would have failed shamefully.\n\nA beautiful article by Menshikov, \u201cThe Blunders of Fear.\u201d[74] How\njoyous! I can almost die, even absolutely, and yet it always seems\nas if there is something still to be done. Do it and the end will\ntake care of itself. If you are no longer fit for the work, you\nwill be changed and a new one will be sent and you will be sent to\nanother work. If only one rises in work!\n\nStrakhov Th. A.[75] was here. The other one, N.,[76] came to me in\nmy sleep. I had a talk with him[77] about the Declaration of Faith.\nIn speaking to him I felt how hazy was the desire for the good in\nitself. And I corrected it this way:\n\n1) A man at a certain period of his development awakens to a\nconsciousness of his life. He sees that everything about him lives\n(and he himself lived like that before the awakening of his reason)\nwithout knowing its life. Now that he has learned that he lives, he\nunderstands that force which gives life to the whole world and in\nhis consciousness he coincides with it, but being limited by his\nseparate being (his organism), it seems to him that the purpose of\nthis force which gives life to the world, is the life of his separate\nbeing.\n\n(_I thought that I would write it clearly and again I am\nconfused;--evidently I am not ready._)\n\nLife is the desire for the good. (Everything that lives, lives only\nbecause it desires the good; that which does not desire the good,\ndoes not live.)\n\nMan, when awakened to a reasoning consciousness, is conscious of\nlife in himself, i. e. of the desire for the good. But since this\nconsciousness is engendered in the separate bodily being of man,\nsince man learns that life is the desire for the good when he is\nalready separated from others by his bodily being, therefore, in\nthe first awakening of man to a reasoning consciousness, it seems\nto him that life, i. e. the desire for the good which he recognises\nin himself, has for its object his separate bodily being. And man\nbegins to live consciously for the good of his separate being, begins\nto use that reason of his which revealed to him the essence of all\nlife; the desire for the good, in order to secure the good for his\nown separate being.\n\nBut the longer a man lives, the more obvious it becomes to him that\nhis purpose is unattainable. And therefore, while he has not yet made\nclear to himself his error, even before he recognises by reason the\nimpossibility of the good for a separate personality, man knows by\nexperience and feeling the error of activity which is directed to\nthe good of his own separate personality and he naturally strives\nthat his life, his desire for the good, be drawn away from his own\npersonality and brought over to other things; to comrades, friends,\nfamily, society.\n\nThis same reason which he desires to use for the attainment of\nthe good for his own separate being, shows man that this good is\nunattainable, that it becomes destroyed by the struggle between the\nseparate beings for the desired good, destroyed by the unpreventable,\ninnumerable disasters and sufferings which threaten man, and above\nall, by the unavoidable illnesses, sufferings, old age and death\nwhich occur in the individual life of man. No matter how man might\nexpand his desire for the good to other beings, he can not but see\nthat all these separate beings are like him, subject to unavoidable\nsufferings and death and therefore, they, just as he, can not have\nreal life by themselves.\n\nAnd it is just this error of men who have awakened to the consciousness\nof life that the Christian teaching dissipates, in showing to man\nthat as soon as a consciousness of life has awakened in him, i. e.\nthe desire for the good, then his being, his \u201cself\u201d is no longer\nhis separate bodily being, but that same consciousness of life, the\ndesire for the good not for himself, which was born in his separate\nbeing. The consciousness, therefore, of the desire for the good,\nis the desire for the good for everything existent. And the desire\nfor the good for everything existent, is God.\n\nThe Christian teaching teaches just this, that His son, who resembles\nGod, and who was sent by the Father into the world that the will\nof the Father be fulfilled in him, lives in man with an awakened\nconsciousness (the conversation with Nicodemus.)\n\nThe Christian teaching reveals to man with an awakened consciousness,\nthat the meaning and the aim of his life does not consist, as it\nseemed to him before, in the acquiring of the greater good for his\nown separate personality or for other such personalities like him,\nno matter how many they are, but only in the fulfilment in this\nworld of the will of the Father who has sent man into the world--it\nreveals also to man the will of the Father in regard to the son.\nThe will of the Father in regard to the son is that there should be\nmanifested in this world that desire for the good which forms the\nessence of his life, so that man living in this world should wish\nthe good to a greater and greater number of beings and consequently\nhe should serve them as he serves his own good.\n\n(Confused.)\n\n\n\n_May 17, Y. P._\n\nAgain I am dissatisfied with what I wrote yesterday and which seemed\nto me true and full. Last night and this morning I thought about the\nsame thing. Here are the new things which have become clear to me:\n\n1) That the desire for the good is not God, but only one of His\nmanifestations, one of the sides from which we see God. God in me\nis manifested by the desire for the good;\n\n2) That this God which is enclosed in man, begins to strive to free\nHimself in broadening and enlarging the being in whom He dwells;\nthen, seeing the impassable limits of this being, He tries to free\nHimself by going outside of this being and embracing other beings;\n\n3) That a reasoning being cannot find room for himself in the life\nof an individual, and that as soon as he becomes reasoning he tries\nto go out of it;\n\n4) That the Christian teaching reveals to man that the essence of\nhis life is not his separate being, but God, which is enclosed in\nhis being. This God, therefore, becomes known to man through reason\nand love ...\n\nI can not write any farther; weak, sleepy.\n\n5) And above all, that the desire for the good for oneself, love for\noneself, could exist in man only up to the time when reason had not\nyet awakened in him. But as soon as reason had wakened in him, then\nit became clear to man that the desire for the good for himself--a\nseparate being--was futile, because the good is not realisable\nfor a separate and mortal being. Just as soon as reason appeared,\nthen there became possible only one kind of desire for the good;\nthe desire for the good for all, because with the desire for the\ngood for all, there is no struggle but union, and no death but the\ntransmission of life. God is not love, but in living, unreasoning\nbeings He is manifested through a love for oneself, and in living,\nreasoning beings, through love for everything that exists.\n\nI am now going to write out the 21 points from my notebooks.\n\n1) In order to believe in immortality one has to live an immortal\nlife here, i. e. to live not towards oneself but towards God, not\nfor oneself, but for God. Man, in this life, seems to be standing\nwith one foot on a board and the other on the earth; and as soon\nas his reason has awakened, he sees that that board upon which he\nwas just about to step lies over an abyss and it not only bends and\ncreaks, but is already falling and man transfers his weight to that\nfoot which stands on the earth. How not be afraid if one stands on\nthat which bends and creaks and falls; and how be afraid, and of\nwhat to be afraid, if you stand on that upon which everything falls\nand below which it is impossible to fall?\n\n2) Read about Granovsky.[78] In our literature it is customary to\nsay, that during the reign of Nicholas conditions were such that it\nwas impossible to express great thoughts. (Granovsky complains of\nthis and others too.) But the thoughts there were not real. It is all\nself-deception. If all those Granovskys, Bielinskys,[79] and others\nhad anything to say, they would have said it, no matter what the\nobstacles. The proof is Herzen.[80] He went away abroad and despite\nhis enormous talent, what did he say that was new, necessary? All\nthose Granovskys, Bielinskys, Chernishevskys,[81] Dobroliubovs, who\nwere raised to great men, ought to be grateful to the government\nand the censorship without which they would have been the most\nunnoticed of sketch-writers.\n\nPerhaps the Bielinskys, Granovskys, and the other unimportant ones\nmight have had something real within them, but they stifled it,\nimagining they had to serve society with the forms of social life and\nnot to serve God by professing the truth and by preaching it without\nany care about the forms of social life. Let there be contents and\nthe forms will shape themselves.\n\nPeople acting thus, i. e. adapting their striving for truth to the\nexisting forms of society, are like a being to whom wings have been\ngiven to fly, without knowing obstacles, and who used these wings\nin order to help itself in walking. Such a being would not attain\nits ends--every obstacle would stop it and it would spoil its wings.\nAnd then this being would complain that it had been held back and\nwould tell with sorrow (like Granovsky) that it would have gone far\nif obstacles had not held it back.\n\nThe quality of real spiritual activity is such, that it is impossible\nto hold it back. If it is held back, then it means only one thing:\nit is not real.\n\n3) Man dying little by little (growing old) experiences that which a\nsprouting seed ought to experience which has not yet transferred its\nconsciousness from the seed to the plant. He feels that he grows\nless, but he is not conscious of himself there where he increases;\nin another life.\n\nI am beginning to experience this.\n\n4) I wrote down: \u201cReason is a tool for the recognition of truth,\nverification, criticism.\u201d I can\u2019t remember very well. It seems to\nme, and I am even certain of it, that it is this:\n\nUnder reason is understood many different intellectual activities and\nvery complex ones, and therefore the correctness of the solutions\nof reason is often doubted. As an answer to this doubt, I say, that\nthere is an activity of the reason which is not to be doubted, namely,\nthe critical activity, the activity of verifying what is told me.\nThey tell me that God ... etc. I submit this to the verification of\nreason and decide without doubt that that which is not reasonable\ndoes not exist for me. It is wrong to say that everything which\nexists is reasonable, or that everything which is reasonable exists,\nbut it is wrong not to say that that which is unreasonable does not\nexist for me.\n\n5) It seems to man that his animal life is his real essence and that\nthe spiritual life is the product of his animal one, just as it\nseems to a man rowing in a boat that he is standing still and that\nthe banks, and the whole earth, are running past him.\n\n6) There is a goodness which wants to make use of the advantages\nof goodness and does not want to bear the disadvantages of it. That\nis animal goodness.\n\n7) Christian truth, they say, can not be proved; it must be believed.\nAs if it were easier to become convinced of the truth of the\nnonsensical than of the reasonable. Why deprive Christianity of the\npower of convincing? Why?\n\n8) Nature, they say, is economical of its own forces; by the least\neffort, it attains the greatest results. So is God. To establish the\nKingdom of God on earth, of union, of serving one another--and to\ndestroy hostility, God does not have to do it himself. He has placed\nHis reason in man, which frees love in man and everything which He\ndesires will be done by man. God does His work through us. And there\nis no time for God--or there is infinite time. When he has placed\nreasoning love in man, he has already done everything.\n\nWhy has He done this in this way through man, and not by Himself?\nThe question is stupid and one which never would have entered one\u2019s\nhead if we were all not spoilt by absurd superstition....\n\n9) One of the most torturing spiritual sufferings is the not being\nunderstood by people when you feel yourself hopelessly alone in your\nthoughts. There is consolation in this, that you know that that\nvery thing which people do not understand in you, God understands.\n\n10) To carry over one\u2019s \u201cself\u201d from the bodily to the spiritual,\nthat means to consciously wish only the spiritual. My body can\nunconsciously strive for the fleshly, but I consciously desire\nnothing of the fleshly, as when I do not desire to fall, but can\nnot but submit to the law of gravitation.\n\n11) If you have transferred your \u201cself\u201d to your spiritual being, you\nwill feel the same pain in violating love as you will feel physical\npain when you violate the good of the body. The indicator is just\nas direct and true. And I already feel it.\n\n12) Sin is the strengthening of the consciousness of life in one\u2019s\nseparate being, or the weakening of one\u2019s reasoning consciousness,\nwhich shows the inconsistency of animal life. For the first end, the\nactivity of reason is directed to the strengthening of the delusion\nof a separate life: 1, food; 2, lust; 3, vanity, strengthened by\nreason. For the second end, are used the means of weakening reason:\ntobacco, opium, wine.\n\n13) Temptation is the assertion that it is permitted to violate love\nfor the greater good: 1, to oneself; it is necessary to feed, cure,\neducate, calm oneself, in order to be in condition to serve men,\nand for this it is permitted to violate love; 2, one must secure,\npreserve, and educate the family, and for this it is permitted to\nviolate love; 3, one has to organise, secure, protect the community,\nthe state, and for this it is permitted to violate love; 4, one has\nto contribute to the salvation of the souls of people by violent\nsuggestion, through education, and for this it is permitted to\nviolate love.\n\n14) The essay on art has to be begun with a discussion of the\nfact, that for the picture here, which it has cost the master 1000\nworking days, he is given 40 thousand working days: for an opera,\na novel, still more. And then, some say of these works, that they\nare beautiful; others, that they are absolutely bad. And there is\nno incontestable criterion. There is no such argument about water,\nfood, and good works. Why is that so?\n\n15) What is the result of a man recognising as his \u201cself\u201d not his\nown separate being, but God living in him? In the first place, not\nconsciously desiring the good for his own separate being, that man\nwill not, or will less eagerly, take the good away from others; in\nthe second place, having recognised as his \u201cself\u201d God, who desires\nthe good for all that exists, man also will desire it.\n\n16) Why do people hold on so passionately to the principle of family,\nthe producing and bringing up of children? Because to a man who has\nnot yet transferred his consciousness from his separate being to\nthat of God, it is the only seemingly satisfactory explanation of\nthe meaning of life.\n\n17) The meaning of life becomes clear to man when he recognises\nas himself, his divine essence which is enclosed in his bodily\nenvelope. The meaning of this lies in the fact that this being,\nstriving for its emancipation, for the broadening of the realm of\nlove, accomplishes through this broadening the work of God, which\nconsists in the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth.\n\n18) Violence can neither weaken nor strengthen a spiritual movement.\nTo act on spiritual activity by force is just like catching the\nrays of the sun--no matter how you cover them, they will always be\non top.\n\n19) I have noted down: \u201cDo you imagine your life in the wood which\nis being burned down or in the fire which burns?\u201d\n\nIt is this way: you get the wood ready, and then you are sorry to\nuse it; in the same way you get yourself ready and then you are\nsorry. But the comparison is not good, because fire comes to an end.\nA better comparison would be with food; do you imagine your life in\nfood or in that which is being fed? Is not that the meaning of the\nwords of St. John about \u201cmy body\u201d, which ought to be food? Man is\nfood for God if he gives himself to God.\n\n(Unclear; nonsense.)\n\n20) The principal aim of art, if there is art, and if it has an aim,\nis to manifest and to express the truth about man\u2019s soul, to express\nthose mysteries which it is impossible to express simply by speech.\nFrom this springs art. Art is a microscope which the artist fixes\non the mysteries of his soul and shows to people those mysteries\nwhich are common to all.\n\n21) Love, enclosed in man and freed by reason, manifests itself in\ntwo ways: 1, by its expansion, and 2, by the establishment of the\nKingdom of God. It is steam which, in spreading, works.\n\n22) Lately, I have begun to feel such firmness and strength, not my\nown, but that of that God\u2019s work which I wish to serve, that the\nirritation, the reproaches, the mocking people hostile to the work\nof God, is strange to me; they are pitiable, touching.\n\n23) The world, living unconsciously, and man, in the period of his\nchildhood, performed unconsciously the work of God. Having awakened\nto consciousness, he does it consciously. In the collision between\nthe two methods of serving, man ought to know that the unconscious\npasses and will pass into the conscious and not the opposite and\nthat therefore it is necessary to give oneself over to the future\nand not to the past. (Stupid.)\n\n24) The delusion of man who has awakened to consciousness and who\ncontinues to consider his own separate being as himself, is that he\nconsiders a tool as himself. If you feel pain at the disturbing of\nthe good of your separate being, it is as if you felt on your hand\nthe blows on the tool with which you work. The tool has to be taken\ncare of, ground, but not to be considered as oneself.\n\n25) God Himself is economical. He has to penetrate all with love. He\nhas fired man alone with love and has placed him in the necessity\nof firing all the rest.\n\n26) Nothing affects the religious outlook so much as the way we\nlook upon the world; whether with a beginning and an end, as it was\nlooked upon in antiquity, or infinite as it is looked upon now. In\na finite world, one can construct a reasonable r\u00f4le for separate\nmortal man, but in an infinite world the life of such a being has\nno meaning.\n\n27) (_For Konevsky_) It happens to Katiusha after her resurrection,\nthat she has certain periods in which she smiles slyly and lazily\nas if she had forgotten all which she considered true before; she\nis merely joyous and wants to live.\n\n28) To him who lives a spiritual life entirely, life here becomes\nso uninteresting and burdensome that he can part with it easily.\n\n29) Natasha Strakhov[82] asks her father, when he speaks of something\nwhich happened when she was not yet born: \u201cWhere was I then?\u201d I would\nhave answered: \u201cYou were asleep and had not yet waked up here.\u201d\nConception, birth, childhood are only a preparation to an awakening,\nwhich we see, but not the sleeping ones.\n\n30) The error in which we find ourselves when we consider our separate\nbeings as ourselves is the same as when a traveller counts only one\nstage as the whole road, or a man, one day as his whole life.\n\n31) Read about ... and was horrified at the conscious deception of\nmen ...\n\n32) \u201cAn eraser.\u201d I have forgotten. I shall recall it.\n\nHave written up to dinner. It is now 2 o\u2019clock and I am going to\ndine.\n\n\n\n_May 28, Ysn. Pol. 12 o\u2019c. noon._\n\nIt is already several days that I am struggling with my work[83]\nand am making no progress. I sleep. I wanted to scribble it somehow\nto the very end, but I can\u2019t possibly do it. Am in a wretched mood,\naggravated by the emptiness, by the poor, self-satisfied, cold\nemptiness of my surrounding life.\n\nIn the meantime I have been to Pirogovo.[84] I have a most joyous\nimpression; my brother Sergei[85] has undoubtedly had a spiritual\ntransformation. He himself has formulated the essence of my faith (and\nhe evidently recognises it as true for himself); to raise in oneself\nthe spiritual essence and to subject to it the animal element. He has\na miraculous ikon and he was tortured by his undefined attitude to\nit. The little girls[86] are very good and live seriously. Masha has\nbeen infected by them. Later there were at our house: Salamon,[87]\nTanyee.[88]...\n\nA terrible event in Moscow--the death of three thousand[89]--I\nsomehow can not express myself as I ought to. I am indisposed all the\ntime, getting weaker. In Pirogovo, there was the harnessmaker, an\nintelligent man. Yesterday a working-man came from Tula, intelligent.\nI think a revolutionist. To-day a seminary student, a touching case.\n\nI am advancing very, very badly in my work. Rather boring letters\nbecause they demand polite answers. I have written to Bondarev,[90]\nPosha, and to some one else. O yes; Officer N. was here too. I think\nI was useful to him. Splendid notes by Shkarvan.[91]\n\nYesterday there was a letter from poor N.[92], whom they have driven\noff to the Persian frontier, hoping to kill him. God help him. And\ndon\u2019t forget me. Give me life, life, i. e. a conscious, joyful\nserving of Thee.\n\nIn the meantime, I thought,\n\n1) It is remarkable how many people see some insoluble problem in\nevil. I have never seen any problem in it. For me it is now altogether\nclear that that which we call evil is that good, the action of which\nwe don\u2019t yet see.\n\n2) The poetry of Mallarm\u00e9,[93] and others. We who don\u2019t understand\nit, say boldly that it is humbug, that it is poetry striking an\n_impasse_. Why is it that when we hear music which we don\u2019t understand\nand which is just as nonsensical, we don\u2019t say that boldly, but say\ntimidly: yes, perhaps one ought to understand it or prepare oneself\nfor it, etc. That is silly. Every work of art is only a work of art\nwhen it is understandable, I do not say for all, but for people\nstanding on a certain level of education, on the same level as the\nman who reads poetry and who judges it.\n\nThis reasoning leads me to an absolutely certain conclusion that music\nbefore any other art (decadence in poetry and symbolism and other\nthings in painting) has lost its way and struck an _impasse_. And he\nwho has turned it from the road was that musical genius Beethoven.\nThe principal factors are the authorities and people deprived of\n\u00e6sthetic feeling who judge art.\n\nGoethe? Shakespeare?[94] Everything that goes under their names\nis supposed to be good and on _se b\u00e2t les flancs_ in order to\nfind something beautiful in the stupid and the unsuccessful, and\ntaste is entirely perverted. And all these great talents--Goethe,\nShakespeare, Beethoven, Michael-Angelo--side by side with exquisite\nthings, produced not only mediocre ones, but disgusting ones. The\nmediocre artists produce a mediocrity as regards value and never\nanything very bad. But recognised geniuses create either really\ngreat works or absolute stuff and nonsense; Shakespeare, Goethe,\nBeethoven, Bach, and others.\n\n3) To place before myself the most complex and confused thing which\ndemands my participation. On all sides it seems there exist insoluble\ndilemmas; it is bad one way and worse the other. And it is only\nnecessary to carry over the problem from the outer realm into the\ninner, into one\u2019s own life, to understand that this is only an arena\nfor my inner perfection, that it is a test, a measure of my moral\ndevelopment, an experiment as to how much I can and want to do the\nwork of God, the enlargement of love, and everything resolves itself\nso easily, simply, joyously.\n\n4) A mistake (sin) is the use of reason, given me to recognise my\nessence in the love for everything which exists, in acquiring the\ngood for my separate being. As long as man lived without a reasoning\nconsciousness, he fulfilled the will of God in acquiring the good\nfor himself and in struggling for it and there was no sin; but as\nsoon as reason had awakened, then there was sin.\n\n5) The harness-maker, Mikhailo, says to me that he does not believe\nin a future life, that he thinks that when a man dies, his spirit\nwill leave him and will go away. But I say to him: \u201cWell, go off\nthen with this spirit; then you won\u2019t die.\u201d\n\n_May 29, Ysn. Pol. If I live._\n\n\n\nIt seems to me, _June 6, Ysn. Pol._\n\nThe principal thing is that during this time I have advanced in my\nwork,[95] and am advancing. I write on sins and the whole work is\nclear to the end.\n\nFinished Spier--splendid.\n\nThe economic movement of humanity by three means: the destruction\nof ownership of land according to Henry George[96]; the inheritance\nwhich would give over accumulated wealth to society, if not in the\nfirst generation, then in the second; and a similar tax on wealth\non an excess of over 1000 rubles income for a family or 200 for\neach man.\n\nTo-day the Chertkovs arrived. Galia[97] is very good.\n\nThe day before yesterday a gendarme came, a spy, who confessed that\nhe was sent after me. It was both pleasant and nasty.[98]\n\nDuring this time have thought principally the following:\n\n1) When a man lives an animal life, he does not know that God lives\nthrough him. When reason awakens in him, then he knows it. And\nknowing it, he becomes united with God.\n\n2) Man in his animal life has to be guided by instinct; reason\ndirected to that which is not subject to it, will spoil everything.\n\n3) Is not luxury a preparing for something better, when there is\nalready a sufficiency?\n\n\n\nYesterday was not the 6th, but the 8th. To-day, _June 9, Y. P._\n\nI have written little and not very well. It seems to me that it\nis getting clearer. In the morning I had a conversation with the\nworkingmen who came for books. I remembered the woman who asked to\nwrite to John of Kronstad.[99]\n\nThe religion of the people is this: there is a God and there are\ngods and saints. (Christ came on earth, as a peasant told me to-day,\nto teach people how and to whom to pray.) The gods and the saints\nperform miracles, have power over the flesh and perform heroic deeds\nand good works, and the people have only to pray, to know how and\nto whom to pray. But people can not perform good works, they can\nonly pray. Here is their whole faith.\n\nI bathed and don\u2019t feel well.\n\n\n\n_June 19, Y. P._\n\nHave been feeling weak all this time and sleep badly. Posha came\nyesterday. He spoke about the Khodinka accident well, but wrote\nit badly. Our very idle, luxurious life oppresses me. N. came. A\nstranger. He is young and he does not understand in the same way as\nI do, that which he understands, although he agrees with everything.\nFinished the first draft[100] on the 13th of June. Now I am revising\nit, but am working very little.\n\n... Struggled with myself twice and successfully. Oh, if it were\nalways so!\n\nOnce I passed beyond Zakaz[101] at night and wept for joy, being\ngrateful for life. The pictures of life in Samara stand out very\nclearly before me; the steppes, the fight of the nomadic, patriarchic\nprinciple with the agricultural civilised one.[102] It draws me\nvery much. _Konefsky_ was not born in me; that is why it moves so\nawkwardly.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) Something very important about art: what is beauty? Beauty is\nthat which we love. \u201cHe is not dear because he is good, but good\nbecause he is dear.\u201d Here is the problem; why dear? Why do we love?\nAnd to say that we love, because a thing is beautiful, is just the\nsame as saying that we breathe because the air is pleasant. We find\nthe air pleasant, because we have to breathe; and in the same way we\ndiscover beauty, because we have to love. And he who hasn\u2019t the power\nto see spiritual beauty, sees at least a bodily one and loves it.\n\n\n\n_June 26, Y. P. Morning._\n\nAll night I did not sleep. My heart aches without stopping. I continue\nto suffer and can not subject myself to God.... I have not mastered\npride and rebellion and the pain in my heart does not stop. One thing\nconsoles me; I am not alone but with God, and therefore no matter\nhow painful it is, yet I feel that something is taking place within\nme. Help me, Father.\n\nYesterday I walked to Baburino[103] and unwillingly (I rather would\nhave avoided than sought it), I met the 80-year-old Akime ploughing,\nthe woman Yaremichov who hasn\u2019t a coat to her household and only\none jacket, then Maria whose husband was frozen and who has no\none to gather her rye and who is starving her child, and Trophime\nand Khaliavka, and the husband and wife were dying as well as the\nchildren. And we study Beethoven. And I pray that He release me\nfrom this life. And again I pray and cry from pain. I am entrapped,\nsinking, I cannot alone, only I hate myself and my life.\n\n\n\n_June 30, Ysn. Pol._\n\nContinued to suffer and struggle much, and have conquered neither\none nor the other. But it is better. Mme. Annenkov[104] was here and\nput it very well ...[105] They have spoiled for me even my diary\nwhich I write with the point of view of the possibility of its being\nread by the living[106] ...\n\nJust now upstairs they began to speak about the New Testament and\nN. _en ricanant_ proved that Christ advised castration. I became\nangry,--shameful.\n\nTwo days ago I went to those who had been burned out; had not dined,\nwas tired and felt well.... Yesterday I visited the lawyer who wanted\nto snatch a hundred rubles from a beggar-woman to decorate his own\nhouse with. It is the same everywhere.\n\nDuring this time I have been in Pirogovo. My brother Serezha has\nentirely come over to us. The journey with Tania and Chertkov was\njoyous. To-day in Demenka[107] I gave the last words for his journey\nto a dying peasant.\n\nI am advancing much on the work.[108] I will try to write out now\nwhat I have jotted down in the book.\n\n\n\n_To-day, July 19._[109]\n\nI am in Pirogovo. I arrived the day before yesterday with Tania and\nChertkov. In Serezha[110] there has certainly taken place a spiritual\nchange; he admits it himself saying that he was born several months\nago. I am very happy with him.\n\nAt home, during this time, I lived through much difficulty. Lord,\nFather, release me from my base body. Cleanse me and do not let your\nspirit perish in me and become overgrown. I prayed twice beseechingly;\nonce that He let me be His tool; and second that He save me from my\nanimal \u201cself.\u201d\n\nDuring this time I progressed on the Declaration of Faith. It is far\nfrom what has to be said and from what I want to say. It is entirely\ninaccessible to the plain man and the child, but, nevertheless I\nhave said all that I know coherently and logically.\n\nIn this time also I wrote the preface to the reading of the\nGospels[111] and annotated the Gospels. Had visitors. Englishmen,\nAmericans--no one of importance.\n\nI will write out all that I jotted down:\n\n1) Yesterday I walked through a twice ploughed, black-earth fallow\nfield. As far as the eye could see, there was nothing but black\nearth--not one green blade of grass, and there on the edge of the\ndusty grey road there grew a bush of burdock. There were three\noff-shoots. One was broken and its white soiled flower hung; the\nother also broken, was bespattered with black dirt, its stem bent\nand soiled; the third shoot stuck out to the side, also black from\ndust, but still alive and red in the centre. It reminded me of\nHadji-Murad.[112] It makes me want to write. It asserts life to the\nend, and alone in the midst of the whole field, somehow or other\nhas asserted it.\n\n2) He has a capacity for languages, for mathematics, is quick to\ncomprehend and to answer, can sing, draw correctly, beautifully, and\ncan write in the same way; but he has no moral or artistic feeling\nand therefore nothing of his own.\n\n3) Love towards enemies. It is difficult, seldom does it succeed--as\nwith everything absolutely beautiful. But then what happiness when\nyou attain it! There is an exquisite sweetness in this love, even\nin the foretaste of it. And this sweetness is just in the inverse\nratio to the attractiveness of the object of love. Yes, the spiritual\nvoluptuousness of love towards enemies.\n\n4) Some one makes me suffer. As soon as I think about myself, about my\nown suffering, the suffering continues to grow and grow and terror\novercomes me at the thought to where it might lead. It suffices to\nthink of the man on account of whom you are suffering, to think about\nhis suffering--and instantly you are healed. Sometimes it is easy\nwhen you already love your torturer; but even when it is difficult,\nit is always possible.\n\n5) Yesterday in walking I thought what are those boundaries which\nseparate us, one being from another? And it occurred to me. Are not\nspace and time the conditions of these divisions, or rather, the\nconsequences of these divisions? If I were not a separated part,\nthere would be neither space nor time for me, as there is not for\nGod. But since I am not the whole, I can understand myself and other\nbeings through space and time only.\n\n(I feel that there is something in this, but I can not yet express\nit clearly.)\n\n6) There was an argument about whether being in love was good. For me\nthe conclusion was clear; if a man already lives a human, spiritual\nlife, then being in love--love, marriage--would be a downfall for\nhim, he would have to give a part of his strength to his wife, to\nhis family, or even at least to the object of his love. But if he\nis on the animal plane, if he eats, drinks, labours, holds a post,\nwrites, plays--then to be in love would be an uplift for him as for\nanimals, for insects, in the time of ...[113]\n\n7) To pray? They say that prayer is necessary, that it is necessary\nto have the sweet feeling of prayer which is called forth by\nservice, singing, reading, exclamations, ikons. But what is prayer?\nA communion with God, a recognition of one\u2019s relation to God, the\nhighest state of the soul. Is it possible that this state of the\nsoul can be attained by an action upon the outer senses.... Is it\nnot more probable that the prayerful state might be reached only\nin rare exceptional moments and necessarily in isolation, as even\nChrist said and as Elijah saw God, not in a storm but in a tender\nbreeze?\n\n8) Yesterday I looked through the romances, novels, and poems of\nFet.[114] I recalled our incessant music on 4 grand-pianos in Yasnaya\nPolyana and it became clear to me that all this--the romances, the\npoems, the music--was not art, something important and necessary to\npeople in general, but a self-indulgence of robbers, parasites, who\nhave nothing in common with life; romances, novels about how one falls\nin love disgustingly, poetry about this or about how one languishes\nfrom boredom. And music about the same theme. But life, all life,\nseethes with its own problems of food, distribution, labour, about\nfaith, about the relations of men ... It is shameful, nasty. Help\nme, Father, to serve Thee by showing up this lie.\n\n9) I was going from the Chertkovs on the 5th of July. It was\nevening, and beauty, happiness, blessedness, lay on everything. But\nin the world of men? There was greed, malice, envy, cruelty, lust,\ndebauchery. When will it be among men as it is in Nature? Here there\nis a struggle, but it is honest, simple, beautiful. But there it is\nbase. I know it and I hate it, because I myself am a man.\n\n(I have not succeeded.)\n\n10) When I suffered in my soul, I tried to calm myself with the\nconsciousness of serving. And that used to calm me, but only then\nwhen there happened to be an obvious instance of serving, i. e. when\nit was unquestionably required and I was drawn to it. But what is to\nbe done when it happens neither one way nor the other? Give myself\nto God, negate myself. Do as Thou wilt, I consent.\n\n(Again, not what I want to say.)\n\nI am going to dinner.\n\n11) Kant,[115] they tell us, made a revolution in the thought of\nmen. He was the first to show that a thing in itself is inaccessible\nto knowledge, that the source of knowledge and life is spiritual.\nBut is not that the same which Christ said two thousand years ago,\nonly in a way understandable to men? Bow in spirit and in truth;\nthe spirit is life creating, the letter, the flesh, is beneficial\nin no way.\n\n12) Balls, feasts, spectacles, parades, pleasure-gardens, etc., are\na dreadful tool in the hands of the organisers. They can have a\nterrible influence. And if anything has to be subjected to control,\nit is this.\n\n13) I walked along the road and thought, looking at the forests,\nthe earth, the grass, what a funny mistake it is to think that the\nworld is such as it appears to me. To think that the world is such\nas it appears to me, means to think that there can be no other being\ncapable of knowledge except myself with my six senses.[116] I stopped\nand was writing that down. Sergei Ivanovich[117] approached me. I\ntold him what I was thinking. He said:\n\n\u201cYes, one thing is true, that the world is not such as we see it\nand we don\u2019t know anything as it is.\u201d\n\nI said:\n\n\u201cYes, we know something exactly as it is.\u201d\n\n\u201cWhat is it?\u201d\n\n\u201cThat which knows. It is exactly such as we know it.\u201d\n\n14) One is often surprised that people are ungrateful. One ought\nto be surprised at how they could be grateful for good done them.\nHowever little good people do, they know with certainty that the\ndoing of good is the greatest happiness. How then can people be\ngrateful to others that these others have drunk themselves full,\nwhen that is the greatest enjoyment?\n\n15) Only he is free whom nothing and nobody can hinder from doing\nwhat he wants. There is only one such work to do--to love.\n\n16) Prayer is directed to a personal God, not because God is personal\n(I even know as a matter of fact that He is not personal, because the\npersonal is finite and God is infinite), but because I am a personal\nbeing. I have a little green glass in my eye and I see everything\ngreen. I can not help but see the world green, although I know that\nit is not like that.\n\n17) The \u00e6sthetic pleasure is a pleasure of a lower order. And\ntherefore the highest \u00e6sthetic pleasure leaves one unsatisfied. In\nfact, the higher the \u00e6sthetic pleasure, the more unsatisfied it\nleaves one. It always makes one want something more and more. And\nso without end. Only moral good gives full satisfaction. Here there\nis full satisfaction. Nothing further is wished for or needed.\n\n18) A lie to others is by far neither as important nor as harmful\nas a lie to oneself. A lie to others is often an innocent play, a\nsatisfying of vanity. A lie to oneself is always a perversion of\nthe truth, a turning aside from the demands of life.\n\n19) Although seldom, yet it has happened to me that I have done good\nfrom pity, a real good. In that case you never remember what you\nreally have done and under what circumstances. You remember only that\nyou were with God (this occurred to me in regard to my favourite\nboots which I remember I gave away out of pity and for a long time\nI could not remember where they had gone). It is the same way with\nall those moments when I was with God, whether in prayer or in the\nbusiness of life. Memory is a fleshly affair, but here, the thing\nis spiritual.\n\n20) Man can not live a fleshly life, if he does not consider himself\nin the right and he can not live a spiritual life if he does not\nconsider himself sinful.\n\n21) ...\n\nI am going to sleep. It is 12:30 in the morning, July 30th.\n\n_July 31, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_July 31, Y. P._\n\nI am alive. It is evening now. It is past four. I am lying down and\ncan not fall asleep. My heart aches. I am tired out. I hear through\nthe window--they play tennis and are laughing. S. went away to the\nShenshins.[118] Every one is well, but I am sad and can not master\nmyself. It is like the feeling I had when St. Thomas[119] locked\nme in and I heard through my prison how every one was gay and was\nlaughing. But I don\u2019t want to. One must suffer humiliation and be\ngood. I can do it.\n\nI continue to copy:\n\n1) The disbelief in reason is the source of all evil. This disbelief\nis reached by the teaching of a distorted faith from childhood.\nBelieve in one miracle and the trust in reason is destroyed.\n\n2) ...\n\n3) Christianity does not give happiness but safety; it lets you down\nto the bottom from which there is no place to fall.\n\n4) I rode horseback from Tula and thought about this; that I am a\npart of Him, separated in a certain way from other such parts, and\nHe is everything, the Father, and I felt love, just love, for Him.\nNow, especially now, I not only can not reproduce this feeling,\nbut not even recall it. But I was so joyful that I said to myself:\nHere I was thinking that I can not learn anything new and suddenly\nI acquired a wonderful blessed new feeling, a real feeling.\n\n5) What humbug[120]--beauty, truth, goodness! Beauty is one of those\nattributes of outer objects, like health, an attribute of the living\nbody. Truth is not the ideal of science. The ideal of science is\nknowledge, not truth. The good can not be placed on the plane with\neither of these, because it is the goal of life.\n\n(It is unclear, but it was clear and will be.)\n\n6) I do not remember good works, because they are outside of the\nmaterial man--of memory.\n\n_August 1, Ysn. Pol. If I live._--which is doubtful. My heart aches\nvery much....\n\n\n\nIt is dreadful to think how much time has elapsed; a month and a\nhalf. _To-day, Sept. 14, Y. P._\n\nDuring this time I took a trip to the monastery with Sonya.[121]...\nI wrote on _Hadji-Murad_[122] very poorly, a first draft. I have\ncontinued my work on the Declaration of Faith. The Chertkovs have\ngone away.... All three sons are here now with their wives.[123]\n\nThere was a letter from the Hollander who has refused to serve.[124]\nI wrote a preface to the letter.[125] I wrote a letter also to\nMme. Kalmikov[126] with very sharp statements about the Government.\nThe whole month and a half has been condensed in this. Oh, yes; I\nhave also been ill from my usual sickness and my stomach is still\nnot strong.\n\nOne thing more. During this time there was a letter from the Hindu\nTod and an exquisite book of Hindu wisdom, _Ioga\u2019s Philosophy_.[127]\n\nIn the meantime I thought:\n\n1) There are many people, especially Europeans and especially women,\nwho not only talk but who write things that appear intelligent, in\nthe same way as dumb people speak; as a matter of fact, it isn\u2019t\nany more natural for them to think than for a dumb person to speak,\nbut both one and the other, both the stupid and the dumb, have been\ntaught.\n\n2) To love an individual man, one has to be blinded. Without being\nblinded one can love only God, but people can be pitied, which means\nto love in a Godly way.\n\n3) To get rid of an enemy, one must love him, as it is also said in\nthe \u201cTeaching of the twelve apostles.\u201d[128] But to love one has to\nput to oneself the task for all one\u2019s life of love towards an enemy,\nto do him good through love and to perfect oneself in love for him.\n\n4) At first, one is surprised that stupid people should have within\nthem such an assertive convincing intonation. But it is as it should\nbe. Otherwise no one would listen to them.\n\n5) I find this note: \u201cA decoration for peasants, our happiness\u201d--I\ncan not remember what that means, but it is something that pleased\nme. I think it means that to a poor man looking on the life of\nthe rich, it appears as happiness. But this happiness is as much\nhappiness, as cardboard made into a tree or a castle--is a tree or\na castle.\n\n6) We are all attracted to the Whole and one to another, like\nparticles of one body. Only our _roughness_, the lack of smoothness,\nour angles, interfere with our uniting. There is already an\nattraction, there is no need of making it, but one must plane oneself,\nwipe out one\u2019s angles.\n\n7) One of the strongest means of hypnotism, of exterior action on the\nspiritual state of man, is his dress. People know that very well;\nthat is why there is a monastic garb in monasteries and a uniform\nin the army.\n\n8) I was trying to recall two excellent subjects for novels, the\nsuicide of old Persianninov and the substitution of a child in an\norphan asylum.\n\n9) When my weakness tortured me, I sought means of salvation, and\nI found one in the thought that there is nothing stationary, that\neverything flows, changes, that all this is for a _while_, and that\nit is only necessary to suffer the _while_ while we live--I and the\nothers. And some one of us will go away first. (The _while_ does\nnot mean to live in any way, but means, not to despair, to suffer\nit through to the end.)\n\n10) I wanted to say that I was grateful, so as to make the other\none well disposed, and later to tell the truth. No, I thought, that\nis not permitted. He will ascribe it to his virtues and the truth\nwill be accepted even less. Man, not acknowledging his sins, is a\nvessel hermetically closed with a cover which lets nothing enter.\nTo humble oneself, to repent, that means to take off the cover and\nto make oneself capable of perfection, of the good.\n\n11) Barbarism interferes with the union of people, but the same\nthing is done by a too great refinement without a religious basis.\nIn the other, the physical disunites, and in this, the spiritual.\n\n12) Man is a tool of God. At first I thought that it was a tool with\nwhich man himself was called to work; now I have understood that\nit is not man who works, but God. The business of man is only to\nkeep himself in order. Like an axe, which would have to keep itself\nalways clean and sharp.\n\n13) Why is it that scoundrels stand for despotism? Because under\nan ideal order which pays according to merit, they are badly off.\nUnder despotism everything can happen.\n\n14) I often meet people who recognise no God except one which we\nourselves recognise in ourselves. And I am astonished; God in me.\nBut God is an infinite principle; how then, why then, should He\nhappen to be in me? It is impossible not to question oneself about\nthis. And as soon as you question yourself, you have to acknowledge\nan exterior cause. Why do people not feel themselves in need of\nanswering this question? Because for them, the answer to this\nquestion is in the reality of the existing world, whether according\nto Moses or to Darwin--it is all the same. And therefore, to have\na conception of an exterior God, one has to understand that that\nwhich is actually real, is only the impression of our senses, i. e.\nit is we ourselves, our spiritual \u201cself.\u201d\n\n15) In moments of passion, infatuation, in order to conquer, one\nthing is necessary, to destroy the illusion that it is the \u201cself\u201d\nwho suffers, who desires, and to separate one\u2019s true \u201cself\u201d from\nthe troubled waters of passion.\n\n_Sept. 15. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day October 10. Y. P._\n\nIt is almost a month that I have made no entries and it seemed to me\nit was only yesterday. During this time, though in very poor form,\nI finished the Declaration of Faith. During this time there were\nsome Japanese with a letter from Konissi.[129] They, the Japanese,\nare undoubtedly nearer Christianity than our church Christians. I\nhave learned to love them very much....\n\nI want to write out the whole Declaration of Faith from the beginning\nagain. Yesterday there was a good letter from Verigin, Peter.[130]\n\nAll last night I thought about the meaning of life and though there\nare other things to note down, I want to note down this:\n\nThe whole world is nothing else than an infinite space filled with\ninfinitely small, colourless, silently moving particles of matter.\nAt bottom, even this is not so; I know that they are particles of\nmatter only through their impenetrability, but the impenetrability\nI know only through my sense of touch and my muscle sense. If I did\nnot have this sense, I would not know about impenetrability or about\nmatter. As to motion, also, I, strictly speaking, have no right to\nspeak, because if I did not have the sense of sight or again muscle\nsense, I would not know anything about motion either.\n\nSo that all that I have the right to assert about the outer world\nis that something exists, something entirely unknown to me, as it\nwas said long ago both by the Brahmins and by Kant and by Berkeley.\nThere is some kind of occasion, some kind of grain of sand which\ncauses irritation in the shell of the snail and produces a pearl\n(_s\u00e9cr\u00e9tion_, secretion in the snail). This is our whole outside\nworld.\n\nWhat is there then? There is myself with my representations of\nmyself, of the sun, trees, animals, stones. But what then is it that\nI call myself? Is it something arbitrary depending on myself? No,\nit is something independent of myself, predetermined. I can not not\nbe myself, and not have that representation which I have, namely,\nthat I include in myself a small part of these moving atoms and call\nthem myself. And all the other remaining atoms I see in the form of\nbeings more or less like myself. The world appears to me to consist\nentirely of beings which are like me or resemble me.[131]\n\n(I have become confused, yet have something to say. I am going to\ntry when I have the strength.)\n\nI am continuing to write out what I had to say and what I dreamt of\nall night, namely:\n\nPeople think that their life is in the body, that from that which\ntakes place in the body; from breathing, nutrition, circulation of\nthe blood, etc., life flows. And this seems unquestionable; let\nnutrition, breathing, circulation of the blood cease and life will\nend. But what ends is the life of the body, life in this body....\n\nAnd in fact if you consider that life comes from the process of\nthe body and only in the body then as soon as the processes of the\nbody are ended, then life ought to be ended. But certainly this\nis an arbitrary assertion. No one has proven and can prove that\nlife is only in the body and can not be without the body. To assert\nthis, is all the same as asserting that when the sun has set then\nthe sun has come to an end. One must first decide what is life. Is\nit that which I see in the others as it begins and stops, or is it\nwhat I know in myself? If it is what I know in myself, then it is\nthe only thing that is and therefore it can not be destroyed. And\nthe fact that in bodies before me processes end which are connected\nwith life in me and in other beings, shows me only this, that life\ngoes away somewhere from my sensual eyes. To go away entirely, to\nbe destroyed, it absolutely can not be, because outside of it there\nis nothing in the world. The problem, then, might be this: Will my\nlife be destroyed, can it be destroyed? And the destruction of the\nbody of a man, is that a sign of the destruction of his life? In\norder to answer this question one must first decide what is life?\n\nLife is the consciousness of my separateness from other beings, of\nthe existence of other beings and of those limits which separate\nme from them. My life is not bound up with my body. There may be a\nbody, but no consciousness of separateness like for a sleeping one,\nan idiot, an embryo or for those who have fits.\n\nIt is true that there can be no life without the consciousness of\nthe body; but that is because life is the consciousness of one\u2019s\nown separateness and of one\u2019s own boundaries. But the consciousness\nof one\u2019s own separateness and of one\u2019s own boundaries happens in\nour life in time and space, but it can happen in any other way\nand therefore the destruction of the body is not the sign of the\ndestruction of life.\n\n(Not clear and not what I want to say.)\n\n_Oct. 11. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day October 20. Y. P. Morning._\n\nI feel like writing down three things.\n\n1) In a work of art the principal thing is the soul of the author.\nTherefore among medium productions the feminine ones are the better,\nthe more interesting. A woman will push herself through now and\nthen, speak out the most inner mysteries of her soul; and that is\nwhat is needed. You see what she really loves, although she pretends\nthat she loves something else. When an author writes, we the readers\nplace our ears to his breast and we listen and say, \u201cBreathe. If you\nhave rumblings, they will appear.\u201d And women haven\u2019t the capacity\nof hiding. Men have learned literary methods and you can no longer\nsee him behind his manner, except that you know he is stupid. But\nwhat is in his soul, you don\u2019t see.\n\n(Not good; malicious.)\n\nThe 2nd thing I wanted to write was that yesterday, in blowing out\nmy candle, I began to feel for matches and did not find them, and an\nuneasiness came over me. \u201cAnd you are getting ready to die! What,\nthen, are you also going to die with matches?\u201d I said to myself.\nAnd I at once saw in the dark my real life and became calm.\n\nWhat is this fear of the dark? Besides the fear at the incapability\nof meeting whatever accident might happen, it is the fear at the\nabsence of the delusion of our most important sense, that of sight.\nIt is fear before the contemplation of our true life. I now no\nlonger have that fear--on the contrary, that which had been fear is\nnow peace; there only has remained the habit of fear; but to the\nmajority of people the fear is exactly of that which alone can give\nthem peace.\n\nThe 3rd thing I wanted to write was that when a man is put in the\nnecessity of choosing between an act which is clearly beneficial to\nothers, but with the thwarting of the demands of conscience (the\nwill of God), then the problem is only one of short-sightedness,\nbecause the man sees in the immediate future the good which will\narise from his act, if he thwarts the will of God, but he does not\nsee in the more remote future the other good, which is an infinite\nnumber of times greater, which will come from the abstention of\nthis act and the fulfilment of the will of God. It is the same kind\nof thing that children do, destroying the general order of a house\nwhich is necessary for their own happiness, for the sake of the\nimmediate pleasure of play.\n\nThe fact is that for the work of God and for man accomplishing the\nwork of God, time does not exist. Man can not but represent to himself\neverything in time, and therefore in order to correctly judge of the\nimportance of the work of God, he has to represent it to himself in\nthe very remote future, even in infinite time. The fact, that I will\nnot kill the murderer and will forgive him, that I shall die unseen\nby any one, fulfilling the will of God, will bear its own fruit ...\nif I insist upon thinking in terms of time--in infinite time. But\nit will bear its fruit surely.\n\nI have to finish the former:\n\n4) Refinement and power in art are almost always diametrically\nopposed.\n\n5) Is it true that works of art are obtained by assiduous work? That\nwhich we call a work of art--yes. But is it real art?\n\n6) The Japanese sang and we could not restrain ourselves from\nlaughter. If we had sung before the Japanese they would have laughed.\nThe more so had Beethoven been played for them. Indian and Greek\ntemples are understood by all. And Greek statues are understood\nby all. And our best painting is also understandable. So that\narchitecture, sculpture, painting, having reached their perfection,\nhave reached also cosmopolitanism, accessibility to all. To the same\npoint in some of its manifestations has the art of speech reached;\nin the teaching of Buddha, of Christ, in the poetry of Sakia-Muni,\nJacob, Joseph. In dramatic art; Sophocles, Aristophanes did not\nreach it. It is being reached in the new ones. But in music they\nhave been lagging behind entirely. The ideal of all art to which\nit should strive is accessibility to all--but it, especially music\nto-day, noses its way into refinement.\n\n7) The principal thing which I wanted to say about art, is that it\ndoes not exist in the sense of some great manifestation of the human\nspirit as it is understood now. There is play, consisting in the\nbeauty of construction, in sculpting figures, or in representing\nobjects, in dancing, in singing, in playing on various instruments,\nin poetry, in fables, in stories, but all this is only play and\nnot an important matter to which one could consciously devote his\nstrength.\n\nAnd so it was always understood and is understood by the working,\nunspoiled people and every man who has not gone away from labour,\nfrom life, can not look upon it in any other way. It is necessary,\none _must_, say it out loud--how much evil has come from this\nimportance attributed by the parasites of society to their plays!\n\n8) The whole outer world is formed by us, by our senses. We know\nnothing and can know nothing about it. All that we can know, in\nstudying the outer world is the relation of our senses (_sens_) among\nthemselves and the laws of these relations. There is no question\nbut that this is very interesting, and from the study of these\nrelations are opened many new situations which we can make use of\nand which increase the comforts of our life, but this is not only\nnot everything, not all of science as people busying themselves with\nthis study are now asserting, but it is only one minute particle of\nscience.\n\nScience is the study of the relation of our spiritual \u201cself\u201d--that\nwhich masters the outer senses and uses them--to our outer senses or\nto the outer world, which is the same thing. This relation has to be\nstudied, because in this relation is accomplished the movement of\nhumanity as a whole to perfection and the good, and the movement of\neach individual man to the same goal. This relation is the object\nof every science; but to-day the study of this relation is called\nEthics by our present-day scholars, and is considered as a science by\nitself, and a very unimportant one from out the great mass of other\nsciences. It is all topsy-turvy; the whole of science is considered\nas a small part and a small part is considered as the whole. From\nthis comes the brutalisation of men.\n\nThis arises out of the astonishing ignorance of most of the so-called\nlearned. They are na\u00efvely convinced that the outer world is an actual\nreality, just in the same way as the peasants are convinced that\nthe sun and the stars move around the earth. Just as the peasants\nknow nothing of the work of Galileo, Copernicus and Newton, or if\nthey have heard of it--do not believe--so the materialist scholars\nhave never heard, do not know or do not believe what has been done\nas to criticism of knowledge by Descartes, Kant, Berkeley and even\nbefore, by the Hindus and by all religious doctrines.\n\n9) When you suffer, you must enter into yourself--not seek matches,\nbut put out that light which is there, and which interferes with the\nseeing of your true \u201cself.\u201d You must turn upside down the toy which\nstood on the cork and place it on the lead and then everything will\nbecome clear and the greatest part of your suffering will cease--all\nthat part which is not physical.\n\n10) When you suffer from passion, here are some palliative\nprescriptions:\n\n(a) Remember how many times you have suffered before because in your\nconsciousness you have connected yourself to your passion; lust,\ngreed, desire, vanity, and remember how everything passed away and\nyou have still not found that \u201cself\u201d which suffered then. And so it\nis now. It is not you who are suffering, but that passion which you\nwrongly joined to yourself.\n\n(b) Again, when you suffer, remember that the suffering is not\nsomething disagreeable which you can wish to get rid of, but it is\nthe very work of life, that very task which you have been designated\nto do. In wanting to get rid of it, you are doing that which a man\nwould do who lifts the plough there where the earth is hard, just\nwhere, in fact, it has to be ploughed up.\n\n(c) Then remember, at the moment when you suffer, that if there is\nanger in the feelings you have, the suffering is in you. Replace\nthe anger with love, and the suffering will end.\n\n(d) Also this is possible; love towards enemies, which is indeed the\none real love. You must struggle for it, struggle with toil, with\nthe consciousness that in it is life. But when you have attained\nit, what relief!\n\n(e) The principal thing is to turn the toy upside down, find your\ntrue \u201cself\u201d which is only visible without matches, and then anger\nwill vanish by itself. That \u201cself\u201d is incapable of, cannot, and has\nno one to be angry with--loving, it can only pity.\n\nDuring these latter days I didn\u2019t feel like writing. I merely wrote\nletters to every one and sent to Schmidt an addition to the letter\nabout the incompatibility ... with Christianity.[132] I have begun\nthe Declaration of Faith anew. I am going to continue.\n\nWent to Pirogovo with Masha. Serezha[133] is very good....\n\n_October 21. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day probably October 23. Y. P._\n\nAll these days I have been out of tune with my work. Wrote a letter\nyesterday to the commander of the disciplinary battalion in Irkutsk\nabout Olkhovik.[134]\n\nIt is evening now, I am sitting down to write because I feel the\nspecial importance and seriousness of the hours of life which are\nleft to me. And I do not know what I have to do, but I feel that\nthere has ripened in me an expression of God\u2019s will which asks to\nbe let out.\n\nHave re-read _Hadji Murad_--it isn\u2019t what I want to say. As to\n_Resurrection_ I can\u2019t even get hold of it. The drama interests me.\n\nA splendid article by Carpenter on science.[135] All of us walk near\nthe truth and uncover it from various sides.\n\n\n\n_October 26. Y. P._\n\nI am still just as indisposed and don\u2019t feel like writing. My head\naches. Serezha came yesterday.[136] Wrote a letter to Sonya and to\nAndrusha.\n\nBut it seems to me that during this time of doubt, I arrived at two\nvery important conclusions:\n\n1) That, which I also thought before and wrote down; that _art_\nis an invention, is a temptation for amusement with dolls, with\npictures, with songs, with _play_, with stories--and nothing more.\nBut to place art as they do (and they do the same with science), on\nthe same level with the good is a horrible _sacril\u00e8ge_. The proof\nthat it is not so, is that about truth also (the right) I can say\nthat truth is a good (as God said, great good, _teib_, i.e., good),\nand about beauty one can say that it is good; but it is impossible\nto say about good that it is beautiful (at times it is homely), or\nthat it is true (it is always true).\n\nThere is only one good; good and bad; but truth and beauty are good\nqualities of certain objects.\n\nThe other very important thing, is that reason is the only means\nof manifesting, and freeing love. It seems to me that this is an\nimportant thought, omitted in my Declaration of Faith.\n\n\n\n_To-day November 1. Y. P._\n\nAll this time I have felt neither well nor like working. I have\nwritten letters only, among the number was one to the Caucasian\ndisciplinary battalion.[137] Yesterday, walking at night on the\nsnow, in the blizzard, I tired my heart and it aches. I think I am\ngoing to die very soon. That is why I am writing out the notes. I\nthink I am going to die without fear and without resistance.\n\nJust now I sat alone and thought how strange it was that people live\nalone. People; I thought of Stasov;[138] how is he living now, what\nis he thinking, feeling. Of Kolichka,[139] too. And so strange and\nnew became the knowledge that they, all of them, people--are living,\nand I do not live in them; that they are closed to me.\n\n_November 2. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 2nd. Y. P._\n\nAm alive. Am a little better. Have written on the Declaration of\nFaith. I think it is true that it is cold because it endeavours to\nbe infallible.[140] A blizzard. Sent off the letters to Schmidt and\nChertkov. Did not send the letter to Mme. Kalmikov.\n\nTo-day I thought about art. It is play. And when it is the play\nof working, normal people it is good, but when it is the play of\ncorrupted parasites, then it is bad--and here now it has reached\nto decadence.\n\n_November 3. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day November 5. Y. P. Morning._\n\nYesterday was a terrible day.\n\n... At night I hardly slept and was depressed. I just now found the\n_prescriptions_[141] in my diary, looked them over and began to feel\nbetter; to separate one\u2019s true \u201cself\u201d from that which is offended\nand vexed, to remember that this is no hindrance, no accidental\nunpleasantness, but the very work predestined me, and above all to\nknow that if I have a dislike for any one, then as long as there is\nthat dislike in me--then I am the guilty one. And as soon as you\nknow you are guilty, you feel better.\n\nTo-day, lying on the bed, I thought about love towards God ... I wish\nI could say, the love of God, i.e., divine love--that the first and\nprincipal commandment is divine love, but that the other resembling\nit and flowing from it, especially flowing from it, is the love for\nneighbour.\n\nYesterday I wrote 18 pages of introduction to Art.[142]\n\nIt is wrong to say of a work of art, \u201cYou don\u2019t yet understand it.\u201d\nIf I don\u2019t understand it, that means that the work of art is poor,\nbecause its task is in making understandable that which is not\nunderstandable.\n\n_November 6. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 6. Y. P._\n\nAm alive. It is the third day that I continue to write on art. It\nseems to me it is good. At least I am writing willingly and easily.\n\n... Have received a good letter from Vanderveer. Wrote another letter\nto the commander of the battalion in the Caucasus. Chertkov sent me\nhis copy of a similar letter.\n\nTo-day I rode horseback to Tula. A marvellous day and night. I am\njust now going to take a walk to meet the girls.\n\nHave been thinking.\n\n1) Natural sciences, when they wish to determine the very essence\nof things, fall into a crude materialism, i.e., ignorance. Such,\nbesides Descartes\u2019 whirlwinds, are atoms and ether and the origin\nof species. All that I can say, is that it appears to me so, just\nas the heavenly vault appears round to me, while I know that it is\nnot round and that it appears to me so, only because my sight for\nall directions extends on only one radius.\n\n2) The highest perfection of art is its cosmopolitanism. But on\nthe contrary, with us at present it is becoming more and more\nspecialised, if not according to nations, then according to classes.\n\n3) The refinement of art and its strength are always in inverse\nproportion.\n\n4) \u201cConservatism lies in this\u201d ... That is the way I have it noted,\nbut further I can\u2019t remember now.\n\n5) Why is it pleasant to ride? Because it is the very emblem of\nlife. Life--you ride.\n\nI wanted to take a walk....\n\n_November 7. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day November 12. Y. P._\n\nI haven\u2019t noted down anything during this time. I was writing\nthe essay on Art. To-day a little on the Declaration of Faith. A\nweakness of thought and I am sad. One must learn to be satisfied\nwith stupidity. If I do not love, at least not _not_ to love. That,\nthank the Lord, I have attained.\n\n\n\n_November 16. Y. P. Morning._\n\nI still work just as badly and am therefore depressed. The day after\nto-morrow I am going to Moscow, if God commands.[143]\n\n... In the meantime I received a strange letter from the Spaniard\nZanini, with an offer of 22,000 francs for good works. I answered\nthat I would like to use them for the Dukhobors. What is going to\nhappen?[144] I wrote to Kuzminsky on Witte and Dragomirov[145] and\nthe day before yesterday I wrote diligently all morning on War.[146]\nSomething will come of it.\n\nI am thinking continually about art and about the temptations or\nseductions which becloud the mind, and I see that art belongs to\nthis class, but I do not know how to make it clear. This occupies\nme very, very much. I fall asleep and wake up with this thought,\nbut up to now I have come to no conclusion.\n\nThe notes during this time about God and the future life are:\n\n1) They say that God must be understood as a personality. In this\nlies great misunderstanding; personality is limitation. Man feels\nhimself a personality, only because he comes in contact with other\npersonalities. If man were only one, he would not be a personality.\nThese two conceptions are mutually determined; the outer world, other\nbeings, and the personality. If there were not a world of other\nbeings, man would not feel himself, would not recognise himself as\na personality; if man were not a personality he would not recognise\nthe existence of other beings. And therefore man within this Universe\nis inconceivable otherwise than as a personality. But how can it\nbe said of God, that He is a personality, that God is personal? In\nthis lies the root of anthropomorphism.\n\nOf God it only can be said what Moses and Mohammed said, that he is\none, and one, not in that sense that there is no other or other gods\n(in relation to God there can be no notion of number and therefore\nit is even impossible to say of God that he is one (1 in the sense\nof a number), but in that sense that he is monocentric, that he is\nnot a conception, but a being, that which the Greek Orthodox call\na living God in opposition to a pantheistic God, i.e., a superior\nspiritual being living in everything. He is one in that sense that He\nis, like a being to whom one can address oneself, i.e., not exactly\nto pray, but that there is a relationship between me, something\nwhich is limited, a personality, and God--something inconceivable\nbut existing.\n\nThe most inconceivable thing about God for us consists exactly in\nthis, that we know Him as a one being, can know him in no other way,\nand at the same time it is impossible for us to understand a one being\nwho fills up everything with himself. If God is not one, then He is\nscattered and He does not exist. If He is one, then we involuntarily\nrepresent him to ourselves in the shape of a personality and then He\nis no longer a higher being, no longer everything. But, however,\nin order to know God and to lean on Him one must understand Him as\nfilling everything and at the same time as one.\n\n2) I have been thinking how obviously mistaken is our conception of\nthe future life in bodies either more or less similar to ours. Our\nbodies as we know them are nothing but the products of our outer\nsix senses. How then can there be life for that spiritual being who\nis separated from his body--how can it be in that form which is\ndetermined and produced by that body through its senses?\n\n_November 17. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 17. Y. P._\n\nYesterday I hardly wrote anything.\n\n... There is a fight in the papers over Repine\u2019s[147] definition of\nart as amusement. How it fits into my work. The full significance\nof Art has still not been made clear. It is clear to me, and I can\nwrite and prove it, but not briefly and simply. I cannot bring it\nup to that point.\n\nYesterday there was a letter from Ivan Michailovich[148] and from\nthe Dukhobors.\n\nAmusement is all right, if the amusement is not corrupted, is honest,\nand if people do not suffer from that amusement. I have been thinking\njust now; the \u00e6sthetic is the expression of the ethical, i.e., in\nplain language; art expresses those feelings which the artist feels.\nIf the feelings are good, lofty, then art will be good, lofty, and\nthe reverse. If the artist is a moral man, then his art will be\nmoral, and the reverse. (Nothing has come of this.)\n\nI thought last night:\n\nWe rejoice over our technical achievements--steam, ... phonographs. We\nare so pleased with these achievements that if any one were to tell\nus that these achievements are being attained by the loss of human\nlives we would shrug our shoulders and say, \u201cWe must try not to have\nthis so; an 8-hour day, labour insurance, and so forth; but because\nseveral people perish, is no reason to renounce those achievements\nwhich we have attained.\u201d I. e., _Fiat_ mirrors, phonographs, etc.,\n_pereat_ several people.\n\nIt is but sufficient to admit this principle--and there will be no\nlimit to cruelty, and it will be very easy to attain every kind of\ntechnical improvement. I had an acquaintance in Kazan who used to\nride to his estate in Viatka, 130 versts away, in this fashion: he\nwould buy a pair of horses at the market for 20 roubles (horses\nwere very cheap) and would hitch them up and drive 130 versts to\nthe place. Sometimes they would reach the place, and he would have\nthe horses plus the cost of the journey. Sometimes they would not\ncover a part of the road and he would hire. But nevertheless it used\nto cost him cheaper than hiring stage horses. Even Swift proposed\neating children. And that would have been very convenient. In New\nYork, the railroad companies in the city crush several passers-by\nevery year and do not change the crossings to make the disasters\nimpossible, because the change would cost dearer than paying to the\nfamilies of those crushed yearly. The same thing happens also in the\ntechnical improvements of our age. They are accomplished by human\nlives. But one has to value every human life--not to value it, but\nto place it above any value and to make improvements in a way that\nlives should not be lost and spoilt, and to stop every improvement\nif it harms human life.\n\n_November 18. If I live, then Moscow._\n\n\n\n_November 22. Moscow._\n\nThe fourth day in Moscow. Dissatisfied with myself. No work. Got\ntangled up in the article on art and have not moved forward.\n\n... There were here; the Gorbunovs,[149] Boulanger,[150] Dunaev. I\ncalled on Rusanov myself.[151] Received a very good impression.\n\nRead Plato; embryos of idealism.\n\nI recalled two subjects which were very good:\n\n1) A wife\u2019s deception of her passionate, jealous husband; his\nsuffering, his struggle and the enjoyment of forgiveness, and\n\n2) A description of the oppression of the serfs and later the very\nsame kind of oppression by land property, or rather by being deprived\nof it.\n\nJust now Goldenweiser[152] played. One thing--a fantasy fugue:[153]\nan artificiality; studied, cold, pretentious; another--\u201cBigarrure\u201d by\nArensky;[154] sensual, artificial; and a third--a ballad by Chopin;\nsickly, nervous, not one or the other or the third can be of any\nuse to the people.\n\nThe devil who has been sent to me is still with me, and tortures me.\n\n_November 23. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day November 25. Moscow._\n\nAm very weak. My stomach isn\u2019t working. I am trying to write on\nart--but it doesn\u2019t go. One thing is good; have found myself, my\nheart.... A letter from Zanini with an offer of 31,500 francs.[155]\nTischenko, a good novel on poverty.[156] It is now past two, am\ngoing for a walk.\n\n\n\n_To-day November 27. Moscow._\n\nVery weak, poor in all respects. And feel as if I had only just now\nawakened. Have been thinking:\n\n1) We are all in this life--workers placed at the work of saving our\nsouls. It can be compared to keeping up the fire given from heaven\nand lighted on the hearth of my body. My work lies in this, to keep\nup and feed this fire in myself (not to spend the material of this\nfire as I have done lately, except in burning it) and not to think\nhow and what gets lighted from this fire. It is not a difficult\nmatter to thresh with several flails, but to keep in order, not to\nget confused (and not only to thresh, but not to interfere with the\nothers), one has only to remember oneself, one\u2019s own tempo while\nbeating. But as soon as you have begun to think of others, to look\nat them, you get confused.\n\nThe same thing happens in life. Remember only yourself, your own\nwork--and this work is one: to love, to enlarge love in yourself--not\nto think of others, of the consequences of your labour and the work\nof life will go on fruitfully, joyously. Just as soon as you begin\nto think of that which you are producing, about the results of your\nlabour, just as soon as you begin to modify it in accordance with\nits results--your work becomes confused and ceases, and there comes\nthe consciousness of the vanity of life. The master of life gave to\neach one of us separately such a labour, that the fulfilment of that\nlabour is the most fruitful work. And He himself will use and guide\nthis work, give it a place and a meaning. But as soon as I try to\nfind and fix a place for it, and in accordance with this, to modify\nit then I become confused, see the vanity of labour and I despair.\nMy task is to work and He already knows for what it is needed and\nwill make use of it. \u201cMan walks, God leads.\u201d And the work is one;\nto enlarge love in oneself.\n\nI am a self-moving saw or a living spade and its life consists in\nthis, to keep its edge clean and sharp. And it will work well enough,\nand its work will be useful. To keep it sharp, and to sharpen and\nsharpen it all the time, that is to make oneself always kinder and\nkinder.\n\n2) Once more I wrote to N that she is wrong in thinking that it is\npossible for one to renounce oneself from the exploit of living.\nLife is an exploit. And the principal thing is, that that very thing\nthat pains us and seems to us to hinder us from fulfilling our work\nin life--is our very work in life. There is some circumstance, a\ncondition in life which tortures you; poverty, illness, faithlessness\nof a husband, calumny, humiliation,--it suffices only to pity\nyourself and you become the unhappiest among the unhappy. And it\nsuffices only to understand that this is the very work of life which\nyou are called to do; to live in poverty, in illness, to forgive\nfaithlessness, calumny, humiliation--and instead of depression and\npain there is energy and joy.\n\n3) Art becoming all the time more and more exclusive, satisfying\ncontinually a smaller and smaller circle of people, becoming more\nand more selfish, has gone crazy, since insanity is only selfishness\nreaching to its last degree. Art has reached the last degree of\nselfishness--and has gone out of its mind.\n\nI have felt very badly and depressed these days. Father, help me to\nlive with Thee, not to wander from Thy will.\n\n_November 28. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day December 2. Moscow._\n\nFive days have passed and very torturing ones. Everything is still\nthe same.\n\n... My feeling; I have discovered on myself a terrible putrefying\nsore. They had promised me to heal it and have bound it. The sore\nwas so disgusting to me, it was so depressing for me to think that\nit was there, that I tried to forget it, to convince myself that\nit was not there. But some time has passed--they unbound the sore\nand though it was healing, nevertheless it was there. And it was\ntorturingly painful to me and I began to reproach the doctor--and\nunjustly. That is my condition. The principal thing is the devil that\nhas been sent me. Oh, this luxury, this richness, this absence of\ncare about the material life! Like an over-fertilised soil. If they\ndo not cultivate good plants on it, weeding it, cleaning everything\naround them,--it will become overgrown with horrible ugliness and\nwill become terrible. But it is difficult--I am old and am almost\nunable to do it. Yesterday I walked, thought, suffered and prayed\nand it seems to me not in vain.\n\nYesterday I went to Princess Helen Sergeievna.[157] It was very\npleasant. I still cannot work. I shall try to in a minute. I have\nwritten nothing in the note book. Letters from Koni,[158] from\nMme. Kudriavtsev.[159] Yesterday the factory hands came and a new\none, Medusov, I think.\n\n\n\n_Dec. 12. Moscow._\n\nI have suffered much during these days and it seems I have advanced\ntowards peace, towards the good--towards God. Am reading much on\nart. It is becoming clear. I am not even sitting down to write.\nMasha went away. The Chertkovs came.\n\nTo-day I wrote the appendix to _The Appeal_.[160]\n\n\n\n_Dec. 15. Moscow._\n\nNow 2 o\u2019clock in the morning. Have done nothing. My stomach ached.\nAm calm; have no desire to write.\n\n... I have made some notes. I don\u2019t write out everything. Something\nstruck me forcibly--it is my clear consciousness of the weight of the\noppressiveness from my personality, from the fact that I am I. This\ngives me joy because it means that I understood, that I recognised\nas myself, at least partly, a \u201cself\u201d that was not personal.\n\n_December 16, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day December 19 or 20._\n\nFive days have passed and I feel the oppressiveness, the weight of\nmy body and therefore the consciousness of the existence of that\nwhich is not the body has strengthened terribly. I want to throw off\nthis weight, free myself from these chains and nevertheless I feel\nthem. I am sick of my body.\n\nAll this time I have not worked at all and I feel heavy melancholy. I\nam fighting against it by seeking in my life a task which is beyond\nthis life. There is only one such: an approach to the perfection of\nGod, to love. Yesterday it became so clear to me that life here is\nnothing else than a manifestation in these forms of the greatest\nperfection of God. \u201cTo live an age and unto the night\u201d--that is in\nterms of time. To live for a universal life and for this one--that\nis in terms of space.\n\nI have done nothing during this time and am unable to. I am living\nbadly.\n\nI have noted a few trifles on Art:\n\n1) They bring as a proof that art is good, the fact that it produces\na great impression on you. Yes, but who are you? On the decadents,\ntheir works produce a great impression on them. You say that they\nare spoilt. But Beethoven, who does not produce an impression on\nthe working man, produces such an impression on you, only because\nyou are spoilt. Who then is right? What music is beyond question as\nto its value? That kind which produces as impression on a decadent\nand on you and on the working man; simple, understandable, popular\nmusic.\n\n2) What relief all would feel who are locked up in a concert-room\nlistening to Beethoven\u2019s last works, if a jig or a cherdash or\nsomething similar would be played for them.\n\n3) N. was here and said that he recognised only sensation, that\nman himself, the \u201cself\u201d was only a sensation. Sensation receives\nsensation. He reached this nonsense because of the scientific\nmethod; the limiting of the field of research, the non-recognition\nof anything else than sensation, is very good and profitable for the\npractical ends of the science of experimental psychology, but it\nis good-for-nothing as far as a living universal point of view is\nconcerned. And this error is often made by people; they transfer\nto life the method which is suitable to science.\n\n4) Nothing so confuses the conception of art as the acceptance of\nauthorities. Instead of determining by a clear concise conception\nof art whether the works of Sophocles, Homer, Dante, Shakespeare,\nGoethe, Beethoven, Bach, Raphael, Michael-Angelo, come up to the\nconception of good art and exactly how they do so, they determine\nby the existing works of the recognised great artists, art itself\nand its laws. But, however, there are many works of noted artists\nwhich are below every criticism and there are many false reputations,\naccidentally won fame; Dante, Shakespeare.\n\n5) I am reading the history of music:[161] out of sixteen chapters\non artificial music there is one short chapter on popular music. And\nthey know almost nothing about it. So that the history of music is\nnot the history of how real music was born and spread and developed;\nthe music of melodies--but the history of artificial music, i.e.,\nhow real melodious music was distorted.\n\n6) Artificial, master-class music, the music of parasites, feeling\nits own impotence, its own hollowness, takes recourse, in order to\nreplace real interest by artificiality, now to counterpoint, to the\nfugue, now to opera, to illustration.\n\n7) Church music is good, therefore, because it is understood by\nthe masses. The undeniably good is only that which is understood by\nall. And therefore it is true, that the more understandable it is,\nthe better.\n\n8) The various characters expressed by art touch us only because\nin each one of us is the possibility of every possible character.\n(Forgot)\n\n9) The history of music, like all history, is written on the plan to\nshow how it has gradually reached that condition in which the thing\nis found about which the history is now being written. The present\ncondition of music, or that about which the history is written, is\nsupposed to be the highest. But what if it is not only a lower thing,\nbut something entirely distorted, an accidental deviation towards\ndistortion.\n\n10) Belief in authorities causes the errors of authorities to be\naccepted as models.\n\n11) They say that music strengthens the impression of words--in\narias, songs. It isn\u2019t true. Music gets ahead of impressions made\nby words, by heaven knows how far. An aria of Bach; what words can\nrival it at the time when it is being rendered? It is a different\nthing--the words by themselves. To whatever music you would place\nthe Sermon on the Mount, the music would remain far behind, once\nyou penetrated the words. \u201cCrucifix\u201d by Faure,[162] the music is\npitiable compared to the words. They are two entirely different and\nincompatible feelings. In song they go along together only because\nthe words give tone.\n\n(Not exact. About this in another place.)\n\n12) So vividly have I recalled Vasili Perfileev[163] and others,\nwhom I saw in Moscow, and so clear did it become that, although they\nare dead, they still are.\n\n13) The Scylla and Charybdis of artists; either understandable, but\nshallow, vulgar; or pseudo-lofty, original and incomprehensible.\n\n14) The poetry of the people always reflected and not only\nreflected, predicted, prepared, popular movements; the Crusades,\nthe Reformation. What could the poetry of our parasitical circle\npredict and prepare?--Love, debauchery; debauchery, love.\n\n15) Popular poetry, music, art in general is exhausted, because all\nthe talented have been won over by bribes to be buffoons to the rich\nand the titled; chamber music, opera, odes and[164] ...\n\n16) In all art, there exists the struggle between the Christian and\nthe pagan. The Christian begins to conquer and the new wave of the\n15th Century overflows, the Renaissance, and only now at the end of\nthe 19th, the Christian rises again, and paganism in the shape of\ndecadence having reached the highest degree of nonsense, is being\ndestroyed.\n\n17) Besides the fact that the most gifted of the people were won\nover by bribes into the camp of the parasites, the cause of the\ndestruction of popular poetry and music were: at first the serfdom\nof the people and later the most important one--printing.\n\n18) Chertkov said that around us there are four walls of the unknown;\nin front, the wall of the future, in back the wall of the past, to\nthe right the wall of ignorance, of that which is taking place there\nwhere we are not, and the fourth wall, he says, is the ignorance of\nthat which is going on in the soul of another. In my mind this is\nnot so. The first three walls are as he says. One should not look\nthrough them. The less we look beyond them the better. But as to\nthe fourth wall of the ignorance of that which is going on in the\nsouls of other people, this wall we ought to break down with all our\nstrength, striving for a fusion with the souls of other people. And\nthe less we will look beyond those three other walls, the closer we\nwill get to others in this respect.\n\n19) After death in importance, and before death in time, there is\nnothing more important, more irrevocable, than marriage. And just\nas death is only good then when it is unavoidable, but every death\non purpose is bad, so it is with marriage. Only then is marriage\nnot evil, when it is not to be conquered.\n\n20) Apostasy comes from a man professing what he professes not for\nhimself, not for God, but for people. He betrays his professions,\neither because he has become convinced that more people, or better\npeople according to his mind, do not profess the same thing as he,\nor because that which he did before, he did for human fame and now\nhe wants to live for himself, before God.\n\n21) If I believed in a personal God to whom one could turn to with\nquestions, I would say, Why, for what has God made it so, that some,\nknowing the undoubted truth, burn wholly with its fire, while others\ndo not want it, cannot understand or accept it, and even hate it.\n\nIt is now past one. The same weakness, but keen in spirit, when I\nremember the significance of the whole of life, and not only this\none which I have lived through as Leo Nicholaievich (Tolstoi). Help\nme, Lord, to do always, everywhere Thy will, to be with Thee. But\nnot my will, but Thine, be done.\n\n_December 21, Moscow, if I live._\n\nI am still writing _December the 20th, Moscow_.\n\nStill the same depression. Father, help me. Relieve me. Strengthen\nThyself in me, vanquish, drive forth, destroy, the foul flesh and\nall that I feel through it.\n\n... Father, help me. Moreover, I feel better already. What is\nespecially calming is the task, the test of humility, of humiliation,\nan entirely unexpected, exceptional humiliation. In chains, in a\nprison, one can pride oneself on one\u2019s humiliation, but here it is\nonly painful, unless one accepts it as a trial sent by God. Yes,\nlearn to bear calmly, joyfully and to love.\n\n\n\n_December 21. Moscow._\n\nI am learning badly. I continually suffer, helplessly, weakly. Only\nin rare moments do I rise to the consciousness of the _whole_ of my\nlife (not only this one) and my duties in it.\n\nI thought (and felt): There are people lacking both in \u00e6sthetic\nfeeling and in the ethical (especially the ethical), to whom it is\nimpossible to instil that which is good--the less so when they do\nand love that which is bad, and think that the bad is good ...\n\n_December 22, Moscow, if I live_, which is getting to be very\ndoubtful; my heart does not stop aching. Almost nothing gives me\nrest. To-day Posha alone refreshed me. It is so disgusting I want to\ncry over myself, over the remnant of my life which is being futilely\nruined. But perhaps it must be so, yes, in fact, it must be so ...\n\n\n\n_December 25, Moscow._\n\n9 o\u2019c. at night. Spiritually I feel better. But I have no intellectual,\nartistic work, and I am melancholy. Just now I felt that particular\nChristmas softening and gentleness, and poetical impulse. My hands\nare cold, I want to cry and to love ...\n\n\n\n_December 26, Moscow._\n\nI am still not writing anything, but I feel my thoughts revive. The\ndevil still does not leave me.\n\nI thought to-day about _The Diary of a Mad Man_.[165] The principal\nthing is that I have understood my filial relation to God,\nbrotherhood,--and my attitude to the whole world has changed.\n\n\n\n\n1897\n\n\n\n\n_Jan. 5, Moscow._\n\nThere is still nothing good to write about myself. I feel no need\nof working and the devil does not leave me. Have been ill for about\n6 days.\n\nBegan to reread _Resurrection_ and reached up to _his_ decision to\nmarry and threw it away with disgust. It is all untrue, invented,\nweak. It is hard to repair a spoiled thing. In order to repair it,\nthere is necessary: 1) alternately to describe his feeling and\nlife, and hers,[166] and 2) sympathetically and seriously hers, and\ncritically and with a smile, his. I shall hardly finish it. It is\nall very spoilt.\n\nYesterday I read Arkhangelsky\u2019s[167] article \u201cWhom to Serve\u201d and\nwas very delighted.\n\nHave finished the notebook. And here I am writing from it:\n\n1) My article on ... must be written for the people ...\n\n2) (For _The Notes of a Madman_ or for _The Drama_). Despair because\nof madness and wretchedness of life. Salvation from this despair in\nthe recognition of God and one\u2019s filiality to Him. The recognition of\nfiliality is the recognition of brotherhood. The recognition of the\nbrotherhood of man and the cruel, brutal, unbrotherly arrangement of\nlife which is justified by people--leads inevitably to a recognition\nof one\u2019s own insanity or that of the whole world.\n\n3) I read Nakashidze\u2019s[168] letter about the Congress of the\nDukhobors, where they discussed social questions. Here is an instance\nof the possibility of administration without violence. One condition\nis necessary--no, two conditions: the respect of the youth and of\nthe spiritually weak in general, to the resolutions of the elected\nelders, the spiritually stronger--the \u201clittle old men\u201d as the\nDukhobors call them; and the second condition that these \u201clittle\nold men\u201d be rational and loving. At this Congress the question of\nuniting property (in common), was discussed and the \u201clittle old men\u201d\nwere in favour of it, but constantly repeated: \u201cOnly let there be\nno violence, let things be done voluntarily.\u201d\n\nAmong the people and the Dukhobors this respect and recognition of\nthe necessity of fulfilling the resolutions of the old men exist. And\nall this without forms; the election of the elders and the methods\nof agreement.\n\n4) No matter how you grind a crystal, how you dissolve it, compress\nit, it will mould itself again at the first opportunity into the\nsame form. And so the structure of society will be always the same,\nno matter to what changes you submit it. The form of a crystal will\nonly then be changed when chemical changes occur in it, inner ones;\nthe same with society.\n\n5) It would be good to write a preface to Spier[169] containing the\nfollowing:\n\nThe world is such as we see it, only if there do not exist any other\nbeings differently built from us and endowed with other senses than\nours. If we see not only the possibility, but the necessity, of the\nexistence of other beings endowed with other senses than ours, then\nthe world is in no case, merely such as we see it. Our imagination of\nthe world shows only our attitude to the world, just as the visual\npicture which we form for ourselves from what we see as far as the\nhorizon and the sky represents in no way the actual outlines of the\nobjects seen. The other senses, hearing, smell, principally--touch, in\nverifying our visual impressions give us a more definite conception\nof the seen objects; but that which we know as broad, thick, hard\nor soft or how the things seen by us sound or smell, do not prove\nthat we know these things fully and that if a new sense (above the\nfive) were given us, it would not disclose to us that our conception\nof things formed by our five senses was not just as deceptive as\nthat conception of the flatness of objects and their diminishing in\nperspective which sight only gives us.\n\nI see a man in the mirror, hear his voice and am fully convinced\nthat he is a real man; but I approach, I want to grasp his hand\nand I touch the glass of the mirror and see my delusion. The same\nthing must come to pass in a dying man; a new feeling is born which\ndiscloses to him (through his new feeling and the new knowledge it\ngives him) the delusion of recognising his body as himself, and of\nall that he recognised as existing through the means of the senses\nof this body.\n\nSo that the world is certainly not such as we know it to be: let\nthere be other instruments of knowledge--and there will be another\nworld.\n\nBut no matter how that which we consider as the world, our attitude\nto the world, should change--one thing is unalterably such as we\nknow it and is always unchanging, it is _that which knows_. And it\nknows not only in me, but in everything which knows. This thing\nwhich knows is the same everywhere and in everything and in itself.\nIt is God, and it is that for some reason limited particle of God\nwhich composes our actual \u201cself.\u201d\n\nBut what then, is this God, i. e., something eternal, infinite,\nomnipotent, which has become mortal, finite, weak? Why did God\ndivide himself within himself? I do not know, but I know that this\nis so, and that in this is life. All that we know is nothing else\nthan just such divisions of God. All that we know as the world is\nthe knowledge of these divisions. Our knowledge of the world (that\nwhich we call matter in space and time) is the contact of the limits\nof our divinity with its other divisions. Birth and death are the\ntransitions from one division into another.\n\n6) The difference between Christian happiness and pagan is this,\nthat the pagan seeks happiness, prepares it for himself, awaits it,\ndemands it--the Christian seeks, prepares, awaits and demands the\nkingdom of God and accepts happiness when it comes as something\nunexpected, undeserved, unprepared. And it is no less.\n\n\n\n_Jan. 18. Moscow._\n\nDismal, horrid. Everything repels me in the life they lead around\nme. Now I free myself from sadness and suffering, then again I fall\ninto it. In nothing is it so apparent, as in this, how far I am from\nwhat I want to be. If my life were really entirely in the service\nof God, there would be nothing which could disturb it.\n\nI am still writing on art. It is bad. A Dukhobor was here.\n\n\n\n_Feb. 4. Nicholskoe with the Olsuphievs._\n\nI am already here the 4th day and am inexpressibly sad. I am writing\nbadly on art. I just now prayed and became horrified at how low\nI have fallen. I think, I ask myself, what am I to do; I doubt,\nI hesitate, as if I did not know or had forgotten who I was and\ntherefore what I was to do. To remember that I am not master, but\nservant and to do that to which I have been put. With what labour\nhave I struggled and attained this knowledge, how undoubted is this\nknowledge and how I can forget it nevertheless--not exactly forget\nit, but live without applying it.\n\n... Well, enough about this.\n\nI am going to write out what I thought during this time:\n\n1) When all is said and done, it is those people over whom\nviolence is used who always rule, i.e., those who fulfil the law\nof non-resistance. So women seek rights, but it is they who rule,\njust because they are the ones subjected to force--they were and\nthey still are. Institutions are in the power of men, but public\nopinion is in the power of women. And public opinion is a million\ntimes stronger than any laws and armies. The proof that public\nopinion is in the hands of women is that not only the construction\nof homes, food, are determined by women, and not only do the women\nspend the wealth, consequently control the labour of men, but the\nsuccess of works of art, of books, even the appointment of rulers,\nare determined by public opinion; and public opinion is determined\nby women. Some one well said that men must seek emancipation from\nwomen, and not the contrary.\n\n2) (For _The Appeal_).[170] Unmask the deceivers, spread the truth\nand do not fear. If it were a matter of spreading deception and\nmurder, then of course, it would be terrible, but here you would be\nspreading the freedom from deception and murder. Besides, there is\nno ground for fear. Of whom? They ... are themselves afraid.\n\nI remember there worked for us in our village a weak and phlegmatic\n12 year-old boy who once caught on the road and brought back, an\nenormous healthy peasant, a thief, who had taken a coat from the\nhall.\n\n3) The poets, the verse-makers torture their tongues in order to\nbe able to say every possible kind of thought in every possible\nvariety of word and to be able to form from all these words something\nwhich resembles a thought. Such exercise can only be indulged in by\nunserious people. And so it is.\n\n4) If we never moved, then everything which we saw would appear to us\nflat and not in perspective. Motion gives us a conception of things\nin three dimensions of space. The same thing is true concerning the\nmaterial side of things: if we weren\u2019t living, were not moving in\nlife, we would see only the material side of things; but moving in\nlife, moving our spiritual side across the material side of the\nworld, we recognise the falseness of the idea that the material is\nactually such as it appears to us.\n\n5) Twenty times I have repeated it, and 20 times the thought comes\nto me as new, that release from all excitement, fear, suffering,\nfrom physical and especially from spiritual, lies in destroying in\none\u2019s self the illusion of the union of one\u2019s spiritual \u201cself\u201d with\none\u2019s physical. And this is always possible. When the illusion is\ndestroyed then the spiritual \u201cself\u201d can suffer only from the fact\nthat it is joined to the physical, but not from hunger, pain, sorrow,\njealousy, shame, etc. In the first case, as long as it is joined it\ndoes that which the physical \u201cself\u201d wants: it gets angry, condemns,\nscolds, strikes; in the second case, when it is separated from the\nphysical, it does only that which can free it from the torturing\nunion. And only the manifestations of love frees it.\n\n6) For the article on Art. When it is beauty that is recognised as\nthe aim of art, then everything will be art which for certain people\nwill appear as beauty, i.e., everything which will please certain\npeople.\n\n7) I have noted, \u201cthe harm of art, especially music\u201d and I wanted to\nwrite that I had forgotten, but while I was writing, I remembered.\nThe harm of art is principally this, that it takes up time,\nhiding from people their idleness. I know that it is harmful when\nit encourages idleness both for the producers and those who enjoy\nit, but I cannot see a clear definition of when it is permissible,\nuseful, good. I should like to say only then when it is a rest from\nlabour, like sleep, but I do not yet know if that is so.\n\n8) (For _The Appeal_). You are mistaken, you poor, if you think that\nyou can shame or touch or convince the rich man to divide with you.\nHe cannot do that because he sees that you want the same thing that\nhe wants and that you are fighting him with the same means with which\nhe fights you. You will not only convince him, but you will compel\nhim to yield to you only by ceasing to seek that which he seeks,\nceasing to struggle with him, but if you cease to struggle you will\ncease also ... (very important).\n\n9) If the end of art is not the good, but pleasure, then the\ndistribution of art will be different. If its end is the good, then\nit will inevitably be spread among the greatest number of people;\nif its end is pleasure, then it will be confined to a small number\n(not exact and still unclear).\n\n10) Art is--I was going to write food, but it is better to say--sleep,\nnecessary for the sustenance of the spiritual life. Sleep is useful,\nnecessary after labour. But artificial sleep is harmful, does not\nrefresh, does not stimulate, but weakens.\n\n11) I heard counterpoint singing and ...[171] This is the destruction\nof music, a means of perverting it. There is no sense to it, no\nmelody, and any first senseless sequence of sounds are taken and\nfrom the combination of these insignificant sequences is formed some\nkind of a tedious resemblance to music. The best is when the last\nchord is finished.\n\n12) The most severe and consequential agnostic, whether he wants it\nor does not want it, recognises God. He cannot but recognise that in\nthe first place, in the existence both of himself and of the whole\nworld, there is some meaning inaccessible to him; and in the second,\nthere is a law of his life, a law to which he can submit or from which\nhe can escape. And it is this recognition of the highest meaning of\nlife, inaccessible to man but inevitably existing, and of the law of\none\u2019s life, which is God and His will. And this recognition of God\nis immensely stronger than the recognition of ... etc. To believe\nlike this means to dig to bedrock, to the mainland, and to build\nthe house on that.\n\n13) Stepa[172] related the physiologic process which takes place in\nthe infant when it separates from its mother. Truly it is a miracle.\n\nThis thought occupied me in relation to the doctrine that everything\nmaterial is illusion. How can illusion take place there where I do\nnot see it? As you see it, so it takes place. You see everything\nthrough your glasses. That is well enough as regards all other\nphenomena, but here the most fundamental thing is taking place,\nthat from which the whole of my life and of everything living is\ncomposed: the detachment from the world. And here right in front of\nmy eyes this detachment is taking place; there was one and there\nbecame two, like among the first cells, (unclear.)\n\n14) Every living being carries within himself all the possibilities\nof its ancestors. Having been detached, he manifests several of them,\nbut carries in himself the remaining ones and acquires new ones.\nIn this lies the process of life; to unite and to separate. (Still\nmore unclear.)\n\nI have decided no matter what happens, to write every day. Nothing\nstrengthens one so much for the good. It is the best prayer.\n\n\n\n_Evening, February 4. Nicholskoe._\n\nIn the morning I wrote this diary and later tried to write, but\ncould do nothing; had no desire. Undoubtedly if there be strength\nand capacity to write, then one ought to serve God.\n\nIt is just as gloomy. I do not pray enough, hourly.\n\n_February 5, Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_February 5, Nicholskoe._\n\nStill the same intellectual, creative, weakness. But I think it is\nalmost hopeless. There was a search at Chertkov\u2019s. S. arrived.\n\nI thought: I, a worker, am I doing the work commanded? In this is\neverything. Lord, help me.\n\n\n\n_Feb. 6. Nicholskoe._\n\nIn the morning Gorbunov arrived; in the evening a telegram that\nthe Chertkovs are leaving on Thursday.[173] I prepared to go with\nSonya.[174] Am just going. Health better.\n\n\n\n_Feb. 7. Petersburg._\n\nWent to Chertkov. It is joyous there. Then to Yaroshenko.[175]\n\n... I pray that I do not abandon here or anywhere the consciousness\nof my mission, to be fulfilled by kindness.\n\n_Feb. 8. Petersburg. If I live._\n\n\n\nI was alive, but made no entries the two days. _To-day, Feb. 10._\n\nIt doesn\u2019t matter, it doesn\u2019t matter, silence. I was at Stasov\u2019s and\nTolstoi\u2019s.[176] Did nothing bad, but nothing good either. Rather\nsome good. Lord keep me from a spell, but I am better. Have thought\nnothing.\n\n\n\n_Again at the Olsuphievs in Nicholskoe, Feb. 16._\n\nI returned on the morning of the day before yesterday, and fell ill.\nYesterday I was better, wrote on art. Good.\n\n... Women do not consider the demands of reason binding upon\nthemselves and cannot progress according to them. They haven\u2019t got\nthis sail spread. They row without a rudder.[177]\n\nI am again feeling unwell and very sweetly sad. Wrote a letter to\nthe Chertkovs and to Posha. Am not working.\n\n\n\n_Feb. 17. Nicholskoe._\n\nI do not feel well. I tried to write on art....\n\n... Received letters; an adaptation of _On Life_ from the\nAmerican.[178] Wrote two letters to Sonya yesterday and sent them\nto-day.[179]\n\nHaving been thinking even before Petersburg:\n\n1) (For _The Appeal_): To describe the condition of the factory\nworkers, the servants, soldiers, agricultural labourers in comparison\nwith the rich, and show that it all comes from....\n\n2) In the Middle Ages, in the XIth Century, poetry was general--the\npeople and the masters, _les courtois et les vilains_; then they\nseparated and _les vilains_ began to mimic the masters\u2019 and the\nmasters the people\u2019s. A union ought to take place again.\n\n3) A hundred times I have said it to myself and have written it\ndown: the real and only salvation from all sorrow is the knowledge\nof one\u2019s mission, the anxiety whether you have done that for which\nyou were sent.\n\n4) Nearly every husband and wife reproach each other for things for\nwhich they do not consider themselves guilty. But on the one side\nthere is no ceasing to accuse, nor on the other to vindicate.\n\n5) They do not run after a poet or a painter so much, as after an\nactor, and especially after a musician. Music calls forth a direct\nphysical effect, sometimes acute, sometimes chronic.\n\n6) We absolutely falsely ascribe intelligence and goodness to talent,\nand the same to beauty. In this lies great self-delusion.\n\n7) It came into my head with remarkable clearness that in order\nto always feel good, it is necessary always to think of others,\nespecially when you speak with some one.\n\n8) The movement of life, the broadening of a separate being gives\ntime. If there would be no movement, no enlarging of love, then there\nwould be no time; as to space, it is the representation of other\nbeings. If there were no other beings, there would be no space.\n(All nonsense, unthought).\n\n9) Women are deprived of a moral sense for a motor. They haven\u2019t\ngot this sail spread and therefore it does not carry.\n\n_Feb. 18, Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Feb. 18. Nicholskoe._\n\nForty-five years ago I was in battle.[180]\n\nI feel a great sinking in energy. I am very weak, cannot work. But\nis it not possible to live unceasingly before God, doing His work\nin proportion to His strength. I shall try. Help me, Lord. I shall\ntake up the letters. Here demands are made, and it is possible to\nfulfil His work.\n\n_Evening._ Indisposed. Apathy, weakness. Am not taking up the\nessay,[181] wrote letters. Just now a letter from Biriukov. I\nanswered it.\n\n\n\n_February 19. Nicholskoe._\n\nI am just as apathetic, but am not worried. Wrote letters. Wrote to\nevery one. I am going to bed, it is past twelve.\n\n\n\n_To-day, Feb. 20, Nicholskoe._ Seven o\u2019clock in the evening.\n\nI still feel just as badly; constipation and heart-burn. I fell asleep\nin the morning. Then, not trying to work, I took a walk. Extreme\nweakness. My soul is calm, only it is a bore that I am unable to\nwork. The house is full of people.\n\n... Yesterday I wrote many letters.\n\nI walked and thought:\n\nThere is no greater cause for error and confusion of ideas, the\nmost unexpected ones, and inexplicable in any other way, than the\nrecognition of authorities, i.e., the infallible truthfulness or\nbeauty of certain persons, of books or of works of art. M. Arnold[182]\nwas a thousand times right when he said that the business of criticism\nlies in detaching the good from the bad, from all that has been\nwritten and done, and mainly the bad from that which is recognised\nas splendid, and the good from that which is recognised as bad, or\nis not recognised at all. The most striking instance of this error\nand its terrible consequences, holding back for ages the forward\nmovement of Christian mankind, is the authority of the Holy Scriptures\nand the Gospels. How many of the most unexpected and remarkable\nabsurdities, sometimes necessary for its own justification, sometimes\nnot necessary for anything, are said and written in the text of the\nHoly Scriptures.... The same thing happens in the Greek Tragedies,\nin Vergil, Shakespeare, Goethe, Bach, Beethoven, Raphael and in the\nnew authorities.\n\n\n\n_Perhaps I omitted the 21st. To-day, perhaps the 22nd. February,\nSaturday. Nicholskoe._\n\nYesterday I did not work. I read through the first draft on\nart--pretty good. I went for Yushkova\u2019s[183] dress. It was a nice\ntrip. In the evening they spoke about Art and then I heard the\nbrothers Konius[184] who arrived....\n\nTo-day I am a little better in my health, I went on skiis and felt\nweak at heart and uneasy when I went far. It is evening now. I feel\nlike writing letters.\n\nI thought for _The Appeal_ when I looked at the numberless sons of\nN. in their overcoats: He is bringing them up, \u201cmaking\u201d men of the\nworld of them. What for?\n\nYou will say: you live as you do for the sake of the children. What\nfor? Why bring up another generation of the same cheated slaves,\nnot knowing why they live, and living such a joyless life?\n\n_Feb. 23. Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_February 23, Nicholskoe._\n\nTo-day I wrote willingly and eagerly all morning and it seems to me\nI advanced on the essay on art. Then I took a walk before dinner.\nThere is still a pile of people. No serious talk. Yesterday there was\nmusic.... To-day an amateur theatrical. Tania and Michail Adamovich\nplayed very well.[185] It is now evening. The day has passed almost\nwithout heart-burn.\n\n\n\n_February 24. Nicholskoe._\n\nTo-day I arose apathetic and fell asleep again right after luncheon.\nAfter one, I went to meet the riders. Came home, dined. Am struggling\nsuccessfully with heart-burn. Went for a walk in the evening.\n\nRead and am reading Aristotle (B\u00e9nard) on \u00e6sthetics. Very important.\n\nThought during these days:\n\n1) Thought; why is it impossible to even speak to some people ...\nabout truth and good--so far are they away from it. This is so,\nbecause they are surrounded by such a thick layer of temptations\nthat they have become impenetrable. They are unable to struggle with\nsin, because they do not see the sin for the temptations. In this\nlies the principal danger and all the horror of temptations.\n\n2) They say to me when I condemn religious propaganda: You also are\npreaching. No, I do not preach--mainly because I have nothing to\npreach. Even to atheists I am not going to preach God (if I preached,\nI erred). I only draw conclusions from what people accept, pointing\nout the contradictions which are enclosed in what they accept, and\nwhich they do not notice.\n\n3) ... a general, respectable, clean, correct, with thick eye-brows\nand important mien (and uncommonly good-natured, but deprived of\nevery moral motive sense) gave me the striking thought, as to how\nand by what means those most indifferent to social life, to the good\nof society--as to how just those people rise involuntarily to the\nposition of rulers of people. I see how he will manage institutions\nupon which a million lives depend, and just because he likes\ncleanliness, elegance, refined food, dancing, hunting, billiards\nand every possible kind of amusement, and not having the means to\nkeep himself in those regiments, or institutions, or societies where\nall this exist, is advanced little by little as a good and harmless\nman and made a ruler of people. All are like N. and their name is\nlegion.\n\n4) I am reading Aristotle. He says in _Politics_ (Book VII,\nChapter VIII): \u201cDans cette r\u00e9publique parfaite, o\u00f9 la vertu des\ncitoyens sera r\u00e9ele, ils s\u2019abstiendront de toute profession\nm\u00e9chanique, de toute sp\u00e9culation mercantile, travaux d\u00e9grad\u00e9s\n(d\u00e9gradants?)[186] et _contraires_ \u00e0 la vertu. Ils ne se livreront\npas davantage \u00e1 l\u2019agriculture. Il faut du loisir pour acqu\u00e9rir la\nvertu\u201d ...[187]\n\nAll his \u00e6sthetics has for its end (______)[188] virtue. And we with\nthe Christian understanding of the brotherhood of man want to be\nguided by the ethical and \u00e6sthetical conception of the ancients!!\n\n_Feb. 25. Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_February 25. Nicholskoe._\n\nI am alive. I have written a little--not as easily as yesterday. The\nguests have departed. Went for a walk twice. Am reading Aristotle.\nTo-day I received letters ...\n\nYesterday, while walking, I prayed and experienced a remarkable\nsensation which is perhaps similar to that which the mystics excite\nin themselves by spiritual works; I felt myself to be a spiritual,\nfree being bound by the illusion of the body.\n\n_Feb. 26. Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Feb. 26, Nicholskoe._\n\nI am alive. I am writing, so as to keep my resolution. To-day I\nwrote letters all morning, but I had no energy for work.\n\nWent to Mme. Shorin.[189] I had a good talk with her. Perhaps even\nto some purpose. Just as Anna Michailovna[190] said to-day, that I\nhelped her. And thanks be.\n\nI copied the letter to Posha.\n\n\n\n_Feb. 27. Nicholskoe._\n\nWrote this morning poorly, but cleared up something or other. Am\nwell. Took a walk. Spoke with Tania. And that is all.\n\n\n\n_Yesterday was Feb. 28. Nicholskoe._\n\nI have written nothing. In the morning I worked badly. Received a\nletter from Chertkov and Ivan Michailovich and wrote to both. Walked\nand went to Safonovo.[191]\n\nThis morning I thought of something which seemed to me important,\nnamely:\n\n1) I wiped away the dust in my room and walking around, came to the\ndivan and could not remember whether I had dusted it or not. Just\nbecause these movements are customary and unconscious I could not\nremember them and I felt that it was impossible to. So that if I\ndusted and forgot it, i.e., if I did an act unconsciously; then it is\njust the same as if it never existed. If some one conscious saw it,\nthen perhaps it could be restored. But if no one saw it, or saw it\nunconsciously; if the whole complex life of many people pass along\nunconsciously, then that life is as if it had never existed. So that\nlife--life only exists then, when it is lit by consciousness.\n\nWhat, then, is this consciousness? What are the acts which are lit\nby consciousness? The acts which are lit by consciousness are those\nacts which we fulfil freely, i.e., fulfilling them we know that we\nmight have acted otherwise. Therefore, consciousness is freedom.\nWithout consciousness there is no freedom and without freedom there\ncan be no consciousness (if we are subjected to violence and we have\nno choice as to how we should bear that violence, we do not feel\nthe violence).\n\nMemory is nothing else than the consciousness of the past, of the\npast freedom. If I were unable to dust or not to dust, I would not\nbe conscious of dusting, if I were not conscious of dusting, I would\nnot have the choice of dusting or not dusting. If I did not have\nconsciousness and freedom, I would not remember the past, I would\nnot unite it into one. Therefore the very basis of life is freedom\nand consciousness--a freedom-consciousness.\n\n(It seemed to me clearer when I was thinking.)\n\n\n\n_March 1, Nicholskoe._\n\n... To-day I could not write anything in the morning at all--fell\nasleep. I took a walk both in the morning and in the evening. It\nwas very pleasant.\n\nI thought two things:\n\n1) That death seems to me now just as a change: a discharge from a\nformer post and an appointment to a new one. It seems that I am\nall worn out for the former post and I am no longer fit.\n\n2) I thought about N as a good character for a drama; good-natured,\nclean, spoilt, loving pleasure but good, and incapable of conceiving\na radical moral requirement.\n\nI also thought:\n\n3) There is only one means for steadfastness and peace: love, love\ntowards enemies.\n\nYes, here this problem was presented to me from a special, unexpected\nangle and how badly I was able to solve it. I must try harder. Help\nme, Father.\n\n_March 2, Nicholskoe. If I live._\n\n\n\n_March 2, Nicholskoe._\n\nI am alive. Entirely well. To-day I wrote pretty well. In the evening\nafter dinner I went to Shelkovo. It was a very pleasant walk in the\nmoonlight.\n\nWrote a letter to Posha. Received a letter from Tregubov. He is\nirritated because they intercept the letters. But I am not vexed.\nI have understood that one has to pity them, and I pity truly.\nTo-morrow we go. We have been here a whole month.\n\n\n\n_Yesterday was March 3rd. Moscow._\n\nIn the morning I did almost nothing. I stumbled up against the\nhistoric course of art. I took a walk. After dinner I left. I arrived\nat 10.\n\n\n\n_March 4, Moscow._\n\nGot up late. Handled my papers, wrote letters to Posha, Nakashidze.\nWent to the public library, took books. In the evening Dunaev and\nBoulanger were here. It is now late. I am going to bed. S. is at a\nconcert.\n\n_March 5. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\nHeavens, how many days I have skipped: _To-day, March 9. Moscow._\n\nOut of the four days, I wrote two days on art and to-day pretty much.\nI wanted to write _Hadji Murad_ very much and thought out something\npretty well--touching. A letter from Posha. Wrote to Chertkov and\nKoni about the terrible thing that happened to Miss Vietrov.[192]\nI am not going to write out what I have noted.\n\nI am still in the same peaceful, because loving, mood. As soon as I\nfeel like being hurt or wearied I remember God and that my work is\nonly one, to love, not to think of that which will be--and I feel\nbetter right away.\n\nTania is going to Yasnaya.\n\n\n\n_To-day, March 15, Moscow._\n\nLived not badly. I see the end of the essay on art. Still the same\npeace. I thank God. I have just now written letters. It is evening.\nI am going into the tedious drawing-room.\n\n\n\n_To-day, April 4, Moscow._\n\nAlmost a month I have not written (20 days), and I have lived the time\nbadly, because I worked little. Wrote all the time on art, became\nconfused these last days. And now for two days I haven\u2019t written.\n\nI have not lost my peace, but my soul is troubled, still I am master\nof it. Oh, Lord! If only I could remember my mission, that through\noneself must be manifested (shine) divinity. But the difficulty is,\nthat if you remember that alone you will not live; and you must\nlive, live energetically, and yet remember. Help me, Father.\n\nI have prayed much lately that my life be better. But as it is,\nthe consciousness of the lawlessness of my life is shameful and\ndepressing.\n\nYesterday I thought very well about Hadji Murad--that in it the\nprincipal thing was to express a deception of trust. How good it\nwould have been, were it not for this deception. Also I am thinking\nmore and more often of _The Appeal_.\n\nI am afraid that the theme of art has occupied me lately for\npersonal, selfish and bad reasons. _Je m\u2019entends._\n\nDuring this time I made few notes and if I had been thinking about\nanything I have forgotten it.\n\n1) The world which we know and represent for ourselves, is nothing\nelse than laws of co-relation between our senses (_sens_), and\ntherefore, a miracle is a violation of these laws of co-relation, it\ntherefore destroys our conception of the world. In the crudest form,\nit is thus: I know that water (not frozen) is always liquid. And its\nspecific gravity is less than that of my body. My eyes, hearing,\ntouch, demonstrate to me liquid water; and suddenly a man walks on\nthis water. If he walked on the water, then it proves nothing, but\nonly destroys my conception of water.\n\n2) A very common mistake: To place the aim of life in the service\nof people and not in the service of God. Only in serving God, i.e.,\nin doing that which He wants, can you be certain that you are not\ndoing something vain and it is not impossible to choose whom you\nare to serve.\n\n3) Church Christians do not want to serve God, but want God to serve\nthem.\n\n4) Shakespeare began to be valued when the moral criterion was lost.\n\n5) (For _The Appeal_.) We are so entangled that every one of our steps\nin life is a participation in evil: in violence, in oppression. We\nmust not despair, but we must slowly disentangle ourselves from those\nnets in which we are caught; not to tear ourselves through,--that\nwould entangle us worse--but to disentangle ourselves carefully.\n\n6)[193]\n\nI am in a very bad physical condition, almost fever, and the black\ngloom that comes before, but up to now the spiritual is the stronger.\nEscorted Maude\u2019s colony.[194] Ivan Michailovich is still free.[195]\nEverything is all right.\n\n\n\n_Apr. 9. Moscow._\n\nHave been ill. With calmness I thought that I would die. To-day I\nwrote well on Art. They have taken Ivan Michailovich. There was a\nsearch at Dunaev\u2019s.[196] It is all right with the exiles.[197]\n\nOutwardly I am entirely calm, inwardly not entirely. It is enough to\nbear in mind that everything is for the good, and when I bear that\nin mind as I do now--it is good.\n\n\n\n_To-day May 3. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nAlmost a month I have made no entries. A bad and sterile month.\n\nI cut out and burned that which I wrote in heat.[198]\n\n\n\n_To-day July 16. Y. P._\n\nIt is not one month that I have made no entries, but two and a half.\nI have lived through much, both the difficult and the good.[199] Have\nbeen ill. Very severe pains--I think in the beginning of July.[200]\n\nI worked all this time on the essay on art, and the farther I get\nthe better. I finished it and am correcting it from the beginning.\n\nMasha married.[201]...\n\nWe do not quiet, moderate passion, the source of the greatest\ncalamities, but kindle it with all our strength and then we complain\nthat we suffer....\n\nGood letters from Chertkov. A Kiev peasant was here, Shidlovsky.[202]\n\nI feel that I am alone--that my life not only does not interest any\none, but that they are bored and ashamed that I continue to occupy\nmyself with such trifles.\n\nI thought during this time:\n\n1) A type of woman--there are men such also, but mostly it is women\nwho are incapable of seeing themselves, as if their necks were\nstationary and they could not look back at themselves. It isn\u2019t\nexactly that they don\u2019t want to repent: but they can\u2019t see themselves.\nThey live as they do and not in another way, because this way seems\ngood to them. And therefore if they do anything it is because it\nseems good to them. Such people are terrifying. And such people\nmay be intelligent, stupid, good, wicked. When they are stupid and\nwicked it is terrible.\n\n2) With a low moral standard, a firmness of judgment. The acts of all\nthe best people are explained by what _I_ would have done. Christ\npreached out of vanity, condemned the Pharisees from envy, etc.\n\n3) The second condition of art is novelty. To a child everything is\nnew and therefore it has many artistic impressions. The new for us,\nis a certain depth of feeling, that depth in which a man finds his\nseparate individuality from all. That is for indifferent art. For\nthe highest, novelty lies only in religion, as religion is the most\nadvanced world point of view.\n\n4) (For the drama.) They bring to the table a man in tatters and they\nlaugh at the inconsistency of it and at his awkwardness. Revolt.\n\n5) When it happens that you thought of something and then forgot\nwhat you thought, but you remember and know the character of your\nthoughts: sad, dismal, oppressive, joyous, keen--and even remember\ntheir order: first it was sad, and then it became calm, etc.,--when\nyou remember things that way, then it is exactly what music expresses.\n\n6) A theme: A passionate young man in love with a mentally diseased\nwoman.\n\n7) God gave us His spirit--love, reason--in order to serve Him; but\nwe use His spirit to serve ourselves--we use the axe to plane the\nhandle.\n\nI feel fully well and strong physically, but morally, weak. I feel\nlike working and am able. I am going to make notes.[203]\n\n_July 17. Yasn. Pol. If I live._\n\n\n\n_July 17. Y. P._\n\nGot up late, worked badly. There is neither concentration nor capacity\nto embrace everything. Nevertheless I have advanced. Masha came with\nKolia ...\n\nYesterday I talked about love with N: that we madly kindle this\npassion and then we suffer from its exaggerations and excesses.\n\nWent on my bicycle to Yasenki. I love this motion very much. But I\nam ashamed.\n\nA letter from Chertkov; he is very ill. I value him very much. And\nhow not value him.\n\nIt is now 10 o\u2019clock. The Shenshins have left just now. I feel solemn\nand gloomy.\n\n_July 18, 1897. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\nI skipped three days. To-day _July 21_. _Y. P._\n\nI am working well enough. I am even satisfied with my work. Though\nI change much. Everything has come to a head and has gained much.\nI have been reviewing everything again from the beginning.\n\nThe life around me is very wretched....\n\nI do not know why: whether from the stomach or the heat or from\nexcessive physical exercise--but in the evenings I feel very weak.\n\nA good speech by Crookes as to how a microscopic man would look upon\nthe world.[204]\n\nYesterday Novikov was here and he brought splendid notes by Michael\nNovikov.[205] Wrote letters: to Carus,[206] Ivan Michailovich. A\nletter from Evgenie Ivanovich.[207]\n\n_July 22. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_July 28. Y. P._\n\nSix days that I haven\u2019t written. Three or four days ago at night, I\nhad an attack of cholera morbus and the day after I was absolutely\nill and for two days I have been very weak and have written very\npoorly. To-day I am a little better.\n\nThe children were here: Iliushin\u2019s family.[208] They are sweet\ngrandchildren, especially Andrusha. Whatever notes I made, I will not\nwrite out to-day. Longinov[209] was here, a friend of Mme. Annenkov\u2019s\nand to-day Maude and Boulanger.\n\n_July 29. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day Aug. 7. Y. P._\n\nDuring this time a pile of guests[210] ... two Germans, decadents;\na na\u00efve and a somewhat stupid one.... There were here: Novikov, the\nscribe, a very powerful man, and Bulakhov,[211] also a powerful one\nmorally and intellectually. I live very badly, weakly. Very little\ngoodness. To-day the Stakhoviches[212] and the Maklakovs[213] arrived\nalso.\n\nI continue to work on my essay on art and, strange to say, it pleases\nme. Yesterday and to-day I read it to Ginsburg, Sobolev, Kasatkin[214]\nand Goldenweiser. The impression it produces on them is exactly the\nsame as it produces on me.\n\nA letter from Crosby with a joyful letter from a Japanese.[215] From\nChertkov good letters. The correspondence has been very neglected.\n\nI am entirely alone and I weaken. I often say to myself that one\nmust live serving, but when I enter life, though I do not exactly\nforget, yet I scatter myself.\n\nI have written down much, but to-day I have no time to write it out.\n\nFather, help me. I weaken.\n\nI am going to write absolutely every day.\n\n_Aug. 8. Y. P. If I live._\n\nA peasant was here who had his arm torn by a tree and amputated. He\nploughs with a loop attached.\n\n\n\n_Aug. 9._\n\nStakhovich arrived. Read the essay. The tenth chapter is bad. I\nworked pretty much. Have written poor letters. I must write to Posha\nand to Ivan Michailovich.\n\nThere is noted in the book:\n\n1) A servant makes life false and corrupt. As soon as you have\nservants, then you increase your wants, complicate life and make\nit a burden. Instead of joy when you do things yourself, you have\nvexation and the principal thing, you renounce the main duty of\nlife; the fulfilment of the brotherhood of man.\n\n2) The \u00e6sthetic and the ethical are two arms of one lever: to the\nextent that you lengthen and lighten one side, to that extent you\nshorten and make heavier the other side. As soon as a man loses his\nmoral sense, he becomes particularly responsive to the \u00e6sthetic.\n\n3) People know two Gods: one whom they want to force to serve them,\ndemanding from him by prayers the fulfilment of their desires, and\nanother God, one whom we ought to serve, to the fulfilment of whose\nwill, all our desires ought to be directed.\n\n4) It is a common phenomenon that old people love to travel, to go\nfar and to change places. Is it not a foreseeing and a readiness\nfor the last journey?\n\n\n\n_Aug. 15. Y. P._\n\nI am continuing to work. Am advancing.\n\nLombroso was here--a limited, na\u00efve little old man. The Maklakovs.\nLeo arrived with his wife.[216] Boulanger--a nice man. Wrote letters\nto everybody: Posha and Ivan Michailovich and Van-der-Veer. The\noppressive Leontev[217] was here.\n\nThere was something I wanted to write very much, but have forgotten....\n\nA revolting report concerning the missionary congress in Kazan.[218]\n\nThere is noted: \u201cWoman\u2019s character\u201d--and I remember that it was\nsomething very good. Now I have forgotten. It seems to me that it\nwas that the peculiarity of woman\u2019s character is that her feeling\nalone guides her life, and that reason only serves her feeling.\nShe cannot even understand that feeling can be made subservient to\nreason.\n\n2) But there are not so many women--as there are such men--who do\nnot hear, do not see, the unpleasant, do not see it just as if it\ndidn\u2019t exist.\n\n3) When people haven\u2019t the power to get rid of superstition and\nthey continue to pay tribute to it, and at the same time when they\nsee that others have freed themselves, they grow angry at those who\nhave freed themselves. \u201cBut I suffer when I commit stupidities and\nhe is free.\u201d\n\n4) Art, i.e., artists, instead of serving people, exploit them.\n\n5) From the time I became old, I began to confuse people, ...\nbelonging or being marked in my mind as one type. So that I do not\nknow N, N N, but I know a collective personality to which N, N N,\nbelong.\n\n6) We are so accustomed to the thought that everything is for us,\n_that the earth is mine_, that when we have to die, we are surprised\nthat my earth, something belonging to me, will remain and I won\u2019t.\nHere the principal mistake is in thinking the earth as something\nacquired and complementary to me, when it is I who am acquired by\nthe earth, an appendage to it.\n\n7) How good it would be if we could live with the same concentration,\ndo the work of life--principally; communion among people--with that\nconcentration with which we play chess, read music, etc.\n\n_Aug. 16. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day Sept. 19. Y. P._\n\nMore than a month I have made no entries. Things are the same and\nthe work has been advancing all the time. And it could advance still\nmore as to form, but there is absolutely no time. Such an amount\nof work! A typist is making the final copy on a Remington. I have\nreached the 19th chapter, inclusive.\n\nDuring this time the important thing was the expulsion of\nBoulanger.[219]\n\nMy work has been interrupted occasionally only by a letter to the\nSwedish papers about the Dukhobors[220] on the occasion of the Nobel\nprize.\n\nAlso ill health interrupted: a terrible boil on the cheek. I thought\nit was a cancer, and I am happy that it was not very unpleasant to\nthink that: I am receiving a new appointment; one which in any case,\nisn\u2019t slipping past me.\n\nSt. John was here.[221]\n\nMy work was interrupted also by the arrival of the Molokans from\nSamara--in reference to their children which were taken away.[222]\nI wanted to write abroad and even wrote a very violent, and what\nseemed to me, strong letter, but changed my mind. It was not to be\ndone before God. I have to try again.\n\nTo-day I wrote letters: to the Emperor,[223] to Olsuphiev,[224] to\nHeath,[225] and to E. I. Chertkov,[226] and saw the Molokans off.\n\nI wanted to write from my notebooks, but it is late. I am going\nto bed.\n\n_Sept. 20. Yasn. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Sept. 20. Y. P._\n\nLet me write even a few words. The boil still bothers me very much. I\nhave no full _libert\u00e9 d\u2019esprit_. I wrote the Swedish letter to-day,\nand in the evening translated it into Swedish[227] with the Swede.\n\nI am not writing from the notebook, but I will note that which\nentered my head with special vividness.\n\nOur life is so arranged that all our care for ourselves, the use of\nour reason (our spiritual forces) for the care of ourselves, brings\nonly unhappiness. And yet this egotism is necessary in order to live\na separate life. That is His mysterious will. As soon as you live\nfor yourself, you perish; when you live beyond yourself, there is\npeace and joy both for yourself and for others.\n\n_Sept. 20. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day Sept. 22. Y. P._\n\n... Yesterday I finished the translation with Langlet.\n\nTo-day I was busy with Art, but it didn\u2019t go at all, and therefore\nthe preceding did not please me.\n\nS. arrived to-day.\n\nAt night I thought of the separation of lust from love, and that\nether is a conception outside of the senses.\n\nIt is now past twelve in the morning. I am waiting for Ilya and\nAndrusha. I have just now written a letter to the editor of the\n_Tagblatt Stockholm_, and to Chertkov.\n\n_September 23. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Oct. 2. Y. P._\n\nI am working all the time on Art. The abscess is going away. I should\nhave liked more peace. Yes ...\n\n\n\n_To-day Oct. 14. Y. P._\n\n... I am still writing on art. To-day I corrected the 10th chapter.\nI cleared up the vague parts.\n\nI must write out the notebooks; I am afraid I have forgotten much.\n\n1) There is no greater prop for a selfish, peaceful life, than the\noccupation of art for art\u2019s sake. The despot, the villain, must\ninevitably love art. (I have jotted down something on this order,\nbut I can\u2019t recall it now.)\n\n2) I imagined clearly to myself how joyous, peaceful, and fully\nfree a life could be, if one gave oneself entirely to God, i.e.,\nin every instance in life to seek only one thing: to do that which\nHe wants--to do that in sickness, in offence, in humiliation, in\nsuffering, in all temptations and in death--which would then be\nonly a change in appointment. Weakness, the non-fulfilment of that\nwhich God wants--what happens then? Nothing: There is a return to\nthe consciousness that only in its fulfilment is life. The moments\nof weakness--they are the intervals between the letters of life,\nnot life. Father, help me.\n\n3) I saw in my sleep how I think, I say, that the whole matter lies\nin making an effort, that very effort which is spoken of in the\nGospels: \u201cThe Kingdom of God is attained by effort.\u201d Everything\nthat is good, everything that is real, every true act of life is\naccomplished through efforts; make no effort, swim with the current\nand you do not live. But, however, the ... doctrine preaches that\neffort is sin, it is pride, it is relying on one\u2019s own strength:\nthe lay doctrine says the same thing: effort by oneself is useless;\norganisation, surroundings do everything. What error! Effort is more\nimportant than anything. Every least little bit of effort: the\nconquering of laziness, greed, lust, wrath, depression--is the most\nimportant of important things; it is the manifestation of God in\nlife; it is _Karma_; it is the broadening of one\u2019s \u201cself.\u201d Whatever\nhad been marked off is guess work.[228]\n\n4) Details for _Hadji Murad_: 1) The shadow of an eagle over the\nslope of a mountain; 2) at the river, on the sands, are tracks of\nhorses, animals, people; 3) riding into the forest, the horses snort\nkeenly; 4) from behind a clump of trees a goat jumped out.\n\n5) When people are enthusiastic about Shakespeare, Beethoven, they\nare enthusiastic about their own thoughts, dreams, which are called\nforth by Shakespeare, Beethoven, just as people in love do not\nlove the object of their love, but what it calls forth in them.\nIn this enthusiasm, there is no true reality of art, but absolute\nboundlessness.\n\n6) Only then can one understand and feel God when one has understood\nclearly the unreality of everything material.\n\n7) Not long ago, in the summer, I felt God clearly for the first\ntime; that He existed and that I existed in Him; and that the only\nthing that existed was I in Him: in Him, like a limited thing in\nan unlimited thing, in Him also like a limited being in which He\nexisted.\n\n(Horribly bad, unclear. But I felt it clearly and especially keenly\nfor the first time in my life.)\n\nIn general, I don\u2019t know why, but I haven\u2019t the same religious feeling\nwhich I had when I formerly wrote my Journal for no one. The fact\nthat it was read and that it can be read, kills this feeling. But the\nfeeling was precious and helped me in life. I am going to begin anew\nfrom the present date, the 14th, to write again as before--so that\nno one will read it during my life time. If there will be thoughts\nworth it, I can write them out and send them to Chertkov.[229]\n\n8) A man incapable of repentance has no salvation from his sins.\nEven if his sins are pointed out to him, he only gets angry at those\nwho point them out, and a new sin is added.\n\n9) All attempts to live on the land and feed oneself by one\u2019s own\nlabour have been unsuccessful, and could not help being unsuccessful\nin Russia, because it is necessary for a man of our education feeding\nhimself by his own labour, to compete with the peasant--who fixes the\nprices, beating them down by his offer. But he was brought up for\ngenerations in stern life and stubborn work, while we were brought\nup for generations in luxurious life and idle laziness. From this\nit does not follow that one ought not to try to feed one\u2019s self by\none\u2019s own labour, but only that it is impossible to expect its\nrealisation in the first generation.\n\n10) All calamities which are born from sex relations, from being in\nlove, come from this, that we confuse fleshly lust with spiritual\nlife, with--terrible to say--love; we use our reason not to condemn\nand limit this passion, but to adorn it with the peacock feathers\nof spirituality. Here is where _les extremes se touchent_. To\nattribute every attraction between the sexes to sex desire seems very\nmaterialistic, but, on the contrary, it is the most spiritual point\nof view: to distinguish from the realm of the spiritual everything\nwhich does not belong to it, in order to be able to value it highly.\n\n11) Everything that I know is the product of my senses. My senses\ndemonstrate to me my limits, coming in contact with the limits of\nother beings. This sensation, or the knowledge of limits, we recognise\nand cannot recognise otherwise, than as matter. And in this matter\nwe see either only matter or beings who like us are bound by limits.\nThe beings near to us in size, from the elephant to the insect,\nwe know--we know their limits. The beings that are far from us in\nsize, like atoms or like the stars, we recognise as matter only.\nBut besides these two kinds of beings which we know by our senses,\nwe must inevitably acknowledge still other beings (not spiritual\nbeings like us,--that is obvious) not recognisable by our senses,\nbut which are material, i.e., they also form limits. Such beings are\natoms, ether. The presence of these beings, the admission of which\nis demanded by our reason, undoubtedly proves that our senses give\nus only a one-sided and a very limited knowledge of other beings\nand of the outer world. So that we can imagine for ourselves such\nbeings endowed with such senses (_sens_) for whom ether would give\nthe very same reality, as matter for us.\n\n(It is still unclear, but understandable.)\n\n12) If we would always remember that our tongue was given us for\nthe transmission of our thoughts, and the capacity of thinking for\nthe understanding of God and His law of love, and that therefore\nyou must talk only then when you have something good to say! But\nwhen you cannot say anything good, cannot keep back the bad--then\nbe silent, even all your life.\n\n13) As soon as you have a disagreeable feeling towards a man, it\nmeans there is something you don\u2019t know. And you ought to find out:\nyou ought to find out the motives of that act which was disagreeable\nto you. And as soon as you have understood the motives clearly then\nit can anger you as little as a falling stone.\n\n14) You get angry at a woman because she does not understand--or she\nunderstands, but does not do that which her reason tells her. She\nis unable to do it. Just as a magnet acts on iron and does not act\non wood, so are the conclusions of reason not binding on her--have\nno motor power. For her feeling is binding, and the conclusions\nof reasons are so only when they are transmitted by authorities,\ni.e., by the feeling of the desire not to remain behind others. So\nthat she will not believe and will not follow an obvious demand of\nreason, if it be not confirmed by an authority; but she will believe\nand follow the greatest absurdity if only every one does it. She\ncannot do otherwise. But we get angry. There are also many men like\nthat--womanish.\n\n15) One has to serve others, not oneself, if only for the reason\nthat in the serving of others there is a limit and therefore it\nis possible here to act rationally, build a house for him who is\nwithout, buy cattle, clothes; but in the serving of oneself there\nis no limit: the more you serve, the worse it is.\n\n16) Time is only for the body: it is the relationship of beings with\nthe various limits seen by us, to beings whose limits we do not see;\nto the movement of the sun, the moon, the earth, to the movement of\nthe sands in the hour-glass. And therefore time is for that which we\ncall the body, for that which has limits; but for that which has no\nlimits: for the spiritual--there is no time. Therefore you remember\nonly those times in which you lived spiritually. (Unclear, but was\nclear.)\n\n17) We suffer from ourselves, from the demands of our \u201cself,\u201d and\nwe all know that the only means for not suffering from that \u201cself,\u201d\nis to forget it. And we seek forgetfulness in distractions, in\noccupations with art, science, in wine, in smoking--and there is no\nreal forgetfulness. But God made it so that there should be only\none real forgetfulness, one that is real and always at hand--in the\ncare for others, in the serving of others.\n\nBut I forgot this and I live a terribly selfish life, and therefore\nI am unhappy.\n\n18) I went past the out-houses. I remembered the nights that I spent\nthere, and the youth and the beauty of Duniasha (I never had any\nrelation with her), her strong, womanly body. Where is it? It has\nbeen long nothing but bones. What are those bones? What is their\nrelation to Duniasha? There was a time when those bones formed a\npart of that separate being which had been Duniasha. Then this being\nchanged its centre and that which had been Duniasha became a part\nof another being, enormous, inconceivable to me in magnitude, which\nI call earth. We do not know the life of the earth, and therefore\nwe think it dead, just like an insect who lives one hour thinks my\nbody dead, because he does not see its movement.\n\n19) Space is the relation of various limited beings among themselves.\nIt exists. But time is only the relation of the movement of living\nbeings among themselves, and the movement of matter which we consider\ndead.\n\n20) The most horrible of all is intoxication: of wine, of games, of\nmoney greed, of politics, of art, of being in love. It is impossible\nto speak with such people as long as they haven\u2019t slept it off. It\nis terrible.[230]\n\nThe letter to Stockholm has been printed.\n\n_Oct. 15. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day Oct. 16. Y. P._\n\nDid not write yesterday. My health is entirely improved.... From\nOlga Dieterichs, a letter from Chertkov. It is evident that as a\nresult, he and she also have lived through difficult times.[231]\n\nLast night and to-day, I wanted to write _Hadji Murad_. Began it.\nIt has a semblance of something, but I did not continue it, because\nI was not in full mastery. I ought not to spoil it by forcing. Up\nto now the _Peterburgskia Viedomosti_ has not printed it.[232]\n\nI have noted:\n\n1) I have noted many resolutions, rules, which if I could remember,\nI would live well. But the rules are too many, and it is impossible\nto remember them always. The same thing as to imitations of art: the\nrules are too many, and to remember them always is impossible; it\nought to come from within, be guided by feeling. The same thing in\nlife. If only you are touched by feeling, if you live in God, then\nyou would not recede from a single rule and you would do more than\nis in the rules. If one could only always be in this state.\n\nBut to-day, just now, I was in the worst mood. I was angry with\neverything. What does it mean? How explain this state to oneself?\n\n2) This explanation came to me: the soul, the spiritual essence,\ncan live in its own centre or within its own limits. Living in\nitself, it is not conscious of its limits; living in the periphery\nit incessantly and painfully feels its limits. A release from this\nstate is the recognition of the illusion of the material world, to\ngo away from the limits, to concentrate in oneself. (Unclear.)\n\n_Oct. 17. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Oct. 17. Y. P. 12 midnight._\n\n... Help me, Lord, to act not according to my will, but according\nto Thine. Received a letter from N about Beller and other\nministers who preach the inconsistency of military service and\nChristianity,[233] and about Chertkov, that he was fussy, had sinned\nand had fallen ill.[234]\n\nAm correcting the 10th chapter, it is about to be sent off.[235]...\nMy letter was printed in the _Peterburgskia Viedomosti_.\n\nI thought: The road of all evil and of all suffering is not so much\nignorance as false knowledge--deception. _The Appeal_ ought to be\nfinished with an appeal for all to help towards the abolition of\ndeception.\n\n_Oct. 18. Yasn. Pol. If I live._\n\n\n\nYesterday I made no notes; _to-day Oct. 19_. _Y. P._\n\n... Both yesterday and to-day I felt great apathy, although I was\nwell. I don\u2019t feel like working. Corrected Chapters 13, 14, 15. I\nreceived the re-copied chapters from Moscow and the conclusion.\nYesterday I went to Yasenki. To-day I chopped wood and carried it.\nNovikov was here. Viacheslav[236] spent the night. To-day a letter\nfrom Boulanger. I want to write to him right away and to my wife.\nI ought to write to Salomon.\n\nSolitude nevertheless is very pleasant.\n\n_Oct. 20. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day Oct. 21. Y. P._\n\nReceived proof of the Carpenter article from _Sieverni Viestnik_ and\nbegan to write a preface. Corrected _Art_, received letters from\nChertkov and Boulanger.\n\nYesterday my work didn\u2019t go. Went to Yasenki.\n\nJust now, remaining alone after my work, I asked myself what I should\ndo, and having no personal desire (except the bodily demands arising\nonly when I want to eat or sleep) I felt so keenly the joy of the\nknowledge of the Will of God, that I need and want nothing but to do\nwhat He wants. This feeling arose as a result of the question which\nI myself put to myself when I remained alone in the silence: Who am\nI? Why am I? And the answer came so clearly by itself: No matter\nwho and what I am, I have been sent by some one to do something.\nWell, let me do that work. And so joyously and so well did I feel\nmy fusion with the Will of God.\n\nThis is my second live feeling for God. Then I simply felt love for\nGod. At this moment, I cannot remember how it was; I only remember\nthat it was a joyful feeling.\n\nOh, what happiness is solitude! To-day it is so good: you feel God.\n\n_Oct. 22. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Oct. 22. Y. P._\n\nI am writing in the evening. All day I did not feel like working.\nI slept badly.... I corrected the 11th chapter in the morning, in\nthe evening I began the 12th. I was unable to do anything--there\nis a boil on my head and my feet perspire. Is it from the honey?\nAphanasi[237] and Maria Alexandrovna were here.\n\nIt is evening now. I am alone and horribly sad. I have neither doubts\nnor hurts, but am sad and want to cry. Oh, I must prepare myself\nmore, more, for the new appointment.\n\nA letter from Grot;[238] I ought to give him \u201cConcerning Art.\u201d\n\nThought only this:\n\nIn childhood, youth, the senses (_sens_) are very definite, the\nlimits are firm. The longer you live, the more and more do these\nlimits become wiped out, the senses get dulled--there is established\na different attitude towards the world.\n\n_Oct. 23. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Oct. 26. Y. P._\n\nA very strange thing: It is the third day that I cannot write. Am\ndispleased with everything that I have written. There is something\nnew and very important for _Art_, but I cannot express it clearly\nin any way.\n\nA letter from Vanderveer. It is now morning, will go to the post.\n\n\n\n_To-day Nov. 10. Y. P._\n\nI have lived through much these two weeks. The work is still the\nsame; I think I have finished it. To-day I have written letters and\namong them one to Grot to be set up in type. S was here, she left\nfor Moscow from Pirogovo, where we went together. It was good there.\nSince I have come home, my back has ached and in the evening I have\nfever. Alexander Petrovich[239] is writing in the house....\n\nTo-day I wrote 9 letters. One letter to Khilkov,[240] remained. How\nterrible, his affair and condition. Mikhail Novikov was here and\nalso a peasant-poet from Kazan.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) The condition of people who are befogged by a false religion is\njust the same as in blindman\u2019s-buff: they tie their eyes, then they\ntake them by their arms, and then they turn them around and finally\nlet them go. The same with everybody. Without this they do not let\nthem go. (For _The Appeal_.)\n\n2) The most usual judgment about Christianity, especially among the\nnew Nietzschean reasoners, is that Christianity is a renunciation of\ndignity, a weakness, a submissiveness. It is just the contrary. True\nChristianity demands above everything else the highest consciousness\nof dignity, a terrible strength and steadfastness. It is just the\ncontrary: The admirers of strength ought to debase themselves before\nstrength.\n\n3) I walked in the village, and looked into the windows. Everywhere\nthere was poverty and ignorance. And I thought of the former slavery.\nFormerly, the cause was to be seen, the chain which held them was\nto be seen; but now it is not a chain--in Europe they are hairs,\nbut they are just as many as those which held Gulliver. With us the\nropes are still to be seen, well--let us say the twine; and there\nthere are hairs, but they hold so tightly that the giant-people\ncannot move.\n\nThere is one salvation: not to lie down, not to fall asleep. The\ndeception is so strong and so adroit that you often see that those\nvery people which it sucks and ruins, defend the vampires with\npassion and attack those who are against them....\n\n_November 11, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 11, Y. P._\n\nSince morning I have been writing _Hadji Murad_--and nothing has\ncome of it. But it is becoming clear in my head and I feel like\nwriting very much. I wrote a letter to Khilkov and to others, but I\nshall hardly send the one to Khilkov. Maria Alexandrovna was here.\nMy health is entirely good.\n\n_November 12, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_November 12, Y. P._\n\nTo-day Peter Ossipov came:[241] \u201cIn our place they have begun to sell\nindulgences.\u201d The Vladimir-ikon was there and it was ordered through\nthe village elder, that the people be driven to the Church.[242]\n\nN. found ore and considers it very natural that people shall live\nunder the ground, in danger of their lives, and he will receive the\nincome.\n\n... The most important thing is that I have decided to write _The\nAppeal_; there is no time to postpone it. To-day I corrected _On\nScience_. It is evening now, have taken up two versions of _The\nAppeal_, and am going to work on it.\n\n\n\n_Nov. 14, Y. P._\n\n... One thing I want: To do what is better before God. I don\u2019t know\nhow yet. I slept badly at night; bad thoughts, wicked ones. And I am\napathetic, no desire to work. Corrected the preface _On Science_.\n\nI made the following notes:\n\n1) I read of the behavior of the English in Africa. It is all\nterrible. But the thought came to my head: Perhaps it was unavoidably\nnecessary in order that enlightenment should penetrate these peoples.\nAt first I was absorbed in the thought and it occurred to me that\nthus it had to be done. What nonsense! Why should not people, living\na Christian life, go in simply like Miklukha-Maklai,[243] live with\nthem, but is it necessary to trade, make drunkards of them, kill?\nThey say: \u201cIf people were to live as Christians, they would have\nno work.\u201d Here is the work and it is an enormous work: while the\nGospels are being preached to all creation.\n\n2) Science, losing its religious basis, has begun to study trifles--in\nthe main, it has ceased to study important things. From that time\non was formed the theory of experimental science, Bacon.\n\n3) I was thinking, _pendant_ to _Hadji Murad_, of writing about\nanother Russian brigand, Gregori Nicholaev. He should see the whole\nlawlessness of the life of the rich, he should live as a watchman\nof an apple-orchard on a rich estate with a _lawn-tennis_.[244]\n\n4) To-day I am in a very bad mood, and it is very difficult for me to\nremember, to imagine to myself what I am when I am in a good mood.\nBut it is absolutely necessary, so as not to despair and not do\nsomething bad when in a bad mood, to abstain from every activity.\nIs it not the same in life? One ought not to believe that I am this\ngood-for-nothing which I feel myself to be, but to make an effort,\nremember what I am _there_, what I am in _spirit_, and live according\nto that remembered \u201cself,\u201d or do not live at all--abstain.\n\n5) \u201c_Toute r\u00e9union d\u2019hommes est toujours inf\u00e9rieure aux \u00e9l\u00e9ments qui\nla composent._\u201d[245] This is so because they are united by rules. In\ntheir own natural union, as God has united them, they are not only\nnot lower, but many times higher.\n\nI read Menshikov\u2019s article. There is much that is good in it: about\none-God and many Gods, and much that is very weak; the examples.[246]\n\n_Nov. 15, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 15, Y. P._\n\nI worked badly on the preface to Carpenter. After dinner, in the\nblizzard, I went to Yasenki. Took Tania\u2019s letter. Returned--and here\nfor the first time I knew prostration. Then drank tea--recovered.\nRead but did nothing. Wrote a letter only to Maude in answer to his\nremarks.[247]\n\nI thought this trifle: that love is only good then when you are\nnot conscious of it. It suffices to be conscious of the love, and\nmoreover to rejoice in it--and there is an end to it.\n\n_Nov. 16, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Nov. 17. Y. P._\n\nFor the second day, I have been thinking with special clearness\nabout this:\n\n1) My life, my consciousness of my personality, gets weaker and\nweaker all the time, will become still weaker and will end in coma,\nand in an absolute end of the consciousness of my personality. At\nthe same time, absolutely simultaneously and in the same tempo with\nthe destruction of my personality, that thing will begin to live,\nand will live ever stronger and stronger, that which my life made,\nthe results of my thought, feelings; it is living in other people,\neven in animals, in dead matter. And so I feel like saying that this\nis what will live after me.\n\nBut all this lacks consciousness, and therefore I cannot say that\nit lives. But who said that it lacked consciousness? Why can I not\nsuppose that all this will be united in a new consciousness which\nI can justly call _my_ consciousness, because it is all made from\nmy consciousness? Why cannot this other new being live among these\nthings which live now? Why not suppose that all of us are particles\nof consciousness of other higher beings, such as we are going to be?\n\n\u201cMy Father has many dwellings.\u201d[248] Not in the sense that there\nare various places, but that the various consciousnesses,\npersonality, are inter-enclosed and interwoven one into the other.\nIn fact, the whole world as I know it, with its space and time, is\na product of my personality, my consciousness. As soon as there\nis another personality, another consciousness, then there is an\nentirely different world, the elements of which are formed by our\npersonalities. Just as when I was a child, my consciousness awoke\nlittle by little (which made it so that even when a child, an embryo,\nI saw myself as a separate being), so it will awake and is awakening\nnow--in the consequences of my life, in my future \u201cself\u201d after my\ndeath.\n\n\u201cThe Church is the body of Christ.\u201d[249] Yes, Christ, in his new\nconsciousness, lives now through the life of all the living and\ndead and all the future members of the Church. And in the same way\neach one of us will live through his own church. And even the most\nvalueless man will have his own valueless and perhaps bad church,\nbut a church which will create his new body. But how? This is what\nwe cannot imagine, because we cannot imagine anything which is\nbeyond our consciousness. And there are not many dwellings, but many\nconsciousnesses.\n\nBut here is the last, most terrible, insoluble problem: What is it\nfor? For what is this movement, this passing over from some lower,\nmore separate consciousnesses, into a more common, higher one? For\nwhat--that is a mystery which we cannot know. It is for this that\nGod is necessary and faith in Him. Only He knows it and one must\nhave faith that so it ought to be.\n\n2) And again I thought to-day, entirely unexpectedly, about the\ncharm--exactly the charm--of awakening love, when against the\nbackground of joyous, pleasant, sweet relationships, that little\nstar suddenly begins to shine. It is like the perfume of the linden\nor the falling shadow from the moon. There is no full-blown blossom\nyet, no clear light and shadow, but there is a joy and fear of the\nnew, of the charming. This is good, but only when it is for the\nfirst time and the last.\n\n3) And again I thought about that illusion which all are subjected\nto, especially people whose activity is reflected on others--the\nillusion that, having been accustomed to see the effects of your\nacts on others, you verify the correctness of your acts by their\neffect on others.\n\n4) I thought still further: For hypnotism it is necessary to have\nfaith in the importance of that which is being suggested (the\nhypnotism of all artistic delusions). And for this faith, it is\nnecessary to have ignorance and cultivation of credulence.\n\nTo-day I corrected the preface to Carpenter. Received a telegram\nfrom Grot. I want to send off the 10th chapter. A sad letter from\nBoulanger.\n\nWell, _Nov. 18, Y. P._ _If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Nov. 20. Evening._\n\nWrote the preface to Carpenter. Thought much about _Hadji Murad_\nand got my materials ready. I still haven\u2019t found the tone.\n\n... I think with horror of the trip to Moscow.[250]\n\nLast night I thought about my old triple remedy for sorrow and\noffence:\n\n1) To think how unimportant it will be in 10, 20 years, just as is\nunimportant now that which tortured you 10, 20 years ago.\n\n2) To remember what you did yourself, to remember those deeds which\nwere no better than those which are hurting you.\n\n3) To think of that which is a hundred times worse, and might be.\n\nThis could be added; to think out the condition, the soul of the\nman who makes you suffer, to understand that he cannot act in any\nother way. _Tout comprendre c\u2019est tout pardonner._\n\nThe most important and the strongest and the surest of all is to say\nto oneself: Let there not be my will, but Thine, and not as I wish\nbut as Thou wilt; and not that which I wish but that which Thou\nwilt. My work, then, is under those conditions in which Thou hast\nplaced me, to fulfil Thy Will. To remember that when it is difficult,\nit is just this very thing which has been assigned to you, it is\nthe very instance which will not be repeated, in which you may have\nthe happiness of doing that which He wishes.\n\nFather, help me to do only Thy Will.\n\n...\n\nTo-day I corrected the Carpenter translation. My stomach is not\ngood; bad mood and weakness.\n\n_Nov. 21, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 21, Y. P._\n\nI am still thinking and gathering material for _Hadji Murad_. To-day\nI thought much, read, began to write but stopped at once. Went to\nYasenki, took S\u2019s letter.[251] Received nothing.\n\nMaria Alexandrovna was here. She is evidently tired, a poor girl\nand nice.[252]\n\nI thought and noted down:\n\n1) I thought about death--how strange it is that one does not want\nto die, although nothing holds one--and I thought of prisoners who\nhave become so at home in their prisons that they do not want to\nleave them for freedom and are even afraid to. And so we have become\nat home in the prison of our life and are afraid of freedom.\n\n2) We have been sent here to do the work of God. In this sense, how\ngood is the parable about the servants who in the absence of their\nmaster, squander his fortune away instead of doing his work.\n\n3) When you are angry, when you do not love some one, know that it\nis not you, but a dream, a nightmare, a most horrible nightmare.\nAs when they stop mowing in order not to spoil the grass, so it is\nhere. One ought to pray.\n\nRozanov discusses Menshikov and makes fun of him.[253] How ... (I\nhave forgotten) made fun of Nicholai, but he remained silent and\nsmiled at me gaily. How touching this always is.\n\n_Nov. 22, Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 22, Y. P._\n\nI saw very clearly in a dream, how Tania fell from a horse, has\nbroken her head, is dying, and I cry over her.\n\n\n\n_Nov. 24, Y. P._\n\n... Yesterday and to-day I prepared some chapters to send them off\nto Maude[254] and to Grot. There have been no letters for a long\ntime either from Maude, or from Chertkov. To-day there was a nice\nletter from Galia. Exquisite weather; I took a walk far on the Tula\nroad.\n\nIn the morning I worked seriously revising _Art_. Yesterday I worked\non _Hadji Murad_. It seems clear.\n\nDuring this time I thought:\n\n1) What a strange fate: at adolescence--anxieties, passions begin,\nand you think: I will marry and it will pass. And indeed it did pass\nwith me, and for a long period, 18 years, there was peace. Then\nthere comes the striving to change life and again the set-back.\nThere is struggle, suffering, and at the end, something like a haven\nand a rest. But yet it wasn\u2019t so. The most difficult has begun and\ncontinues and probably will accompany me unto death....\n\n2) It would be easy to treat erring people mildly, simply, patiently,\nwith compassion, if these people would not argue and would not argue\nin such a truth-like fashion. One has to answer these arguments\nsomehow or other, and this you cannot stand.\n\n3) Each of us is in such a condition that whether he wants to or\ndoes not want to, he has to do something, to work. Every one of us\nis on the treadmill. The question lies only in this, on which step\nwill you stand?\n\n_Nov. 25. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 25, Y. P._\n\n... Corrected _Art_, it is pretty good; wrote a letter to Maude. A\ngood letter from Galia.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) It always seems to us that we are loved because we are good, but\nit does not occur to us that we are loved because they who love us\nare good. This can be seen if you listen to what that miserable,\ndisgusting and vain man says whom with a great effort you have pitied:\nhe says that he is so good you could not have acted otherwise. The\nsame thing, when you are loved.\n\n2) \u201cLobsters like to be boiled alive.\u201d That is no joke. How often do\nyou hear it, or have said it yourself or are saying it: Man has the\ncapacity of not seeing the suffering which he does not want to see.\nAnd he does not want to see the suffering which he himself causes.\nHow often I have heard it said about coachmen who are waiting, about\ncooks, lackeys, peasants at their work, that they are having a good\ntime--\u201cLobsters like to be boiled alive.\u201d\n\n_Nov. 26. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Nov. 28, Y. P._\n\nTwo days I haven\u2019t written. I am still busy with _Art_ and the\npreface to Carpenter....\n\nThis morning Makovitsky arrived, a nice, mild, clean man. He told me\nmany joyful things about our friends. I went to Yasenki: a letter\nfrom Maude, a good one, and from Grot--not a good one.[255]\n\nAll these days, have not been in a good mood. How to be in Moscow\nin such a state?\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) Often it happens that you are speaking to a man and suddenly he\nhas a tender, happy expression, and he begins to speak to you in\nsuch a way that you think he is going to tell you something most\njoyful, but it turns out--he is speaking about himself. Zakharnin[256]\nabout his operation, Mashenka[257] about her audience with Father\nAmbrose[258] and his words.\n\nWhen a man speaks about something which is very near to him, he\nforgets that the other one is not he. If people do not speak about\nabstract or spiritual things, they all speak necessarily about\nthemselves, and that is terribly tedious.\n\n2) You dash about, struggle--all because you want to swim in your\nown current. But alongside of you, unceasing and near to every one,\nthere flows the divine and infinite current of love, in one and\nthe same eternal course. When you are thoroughly exhausted in your\nattempts to do something for yourself, to save yourself, to secure\nyourself--then drop all your own courses, throw yourself into that\ncurrent--and it will carry you and you will feel that there are no\nbarriers, that you are at peace forever and free and blessed.\n\n3) Only not to love oneself, one\u2019s very self, one\u2019s own Leo\nNicholaievich (Tolstoi)--and you will love both God and people.\nYou are on fire and you can\u2019t help but burn; and burning you will\nset fire to others and you will fuse with that other fire. To love\noneself means to be niggardly with one\u2019s light and to put out the\nfire.\n\n4) When a man says an obvious untruth or an offence to you, then\ncertainly he doesn\u2019t do it from joy: and both are very difficult.\nIf he does it then evidently he can\u2019t do otherwise, and doing it,\nhe suffers. And you, instead of pitying him, get angry at him. On\nthe contrary, you ought to try to help him.\n\n5) The tragedy of a man kindly disposed, wishing only the good, when\nin this state and for this state, which he cannot help but count as\ngood, he meets hissing malice and the hatred of people.\n\n_Nov. 28. If I live. Y. P._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Dec. 2. Y. P._\n\nAgonising, sad, depressed state of body and spiritual force, but I\nknow that I am alive and independent of this condition, yet I feel\nthis \u201cself\u201d but little....\n\nI was busied all this time with corrections and additions to _Art_.\nThe principal thing during this time, was that Dushan was here whom\nI love very much and learned to love still more. Together with the\nSlavonian Posrednik, he is forming a center of a small, but I think\ndivine work.[259] From Chertkov there is still no news.\n\nAn anguish, a soft, mild, sweet anguish, but yet an anguish. If I\nwere without the consciousness of life, then probably I would have\nhad an embittered anguish.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) I was very depressed at the fear of vexation and severe\nconflicts, and I prayed God--prayed almost without expecting aid,\nbut nevertheless I prayed: \u201cLord, help me to go away from this.\nRelease me.\u201d I prayed like this, then rose, walked to the end of\nthe room and suddenly I asked myself: Have I not to yield? Yes, to\nyield. And God helped--God who is in me, and I felt light-hearted\nand firm. I entered that divine current which flows there alongside\nof us always and to which we can always give ourselves when things\nare bad.[260]\n\n2) I had a talk with Dushan. He said that since he has become\ninvoluntarily my representative in Hungary, then how was he to act.\nI was glad for the opportunity to tell him and to clarify it to\nmyself that to speak about Tolstoyanism, to seek my guidance, to ask\nmy decision on problems, is a great and gross mistake. There is no\nTolstoyanism and has never been, nor any teaching of mine; there is\nonly one eternal, general, universal teaching of the truth, which\nfor me, for us, is especially clearly expressed in the Gospels. This\nteaching calls man to the recognition of his filiality to God and\ntherefore of his freedom or his slavery (call it what you want): of\nhis freedom from the influence of the world, of his slavery to God,\nHis will. And as soon as man understands this teaching, he enters\nfreely into direct communication with God and he has nothing and no\none to ask.\n\nIt is like a man swimming in a river with an enormous overflow. As\nlong as the man isn\u2019t in the middle current, but in the overflow, he\nhas to swim himself, to row, and here he can be guided by the course\ntaken in swimming by other people. Here also I could direct people\nwhile I myself approach the current. But as soon as we enter the\ncurrent, then there is no guide and cannot be. We are all carried\nalong by the strength of the current, all in one direction, and\nthose who were behind can be in front. When a man asks where shall\nhe swim, that only shows that he has not yet entered the current\nand that he from whom he asks, is a poor guide if he were unable\nto bring him into the current, i.e., to that state in which it is\nimpossible--because it is senseless--to ask. How ask where to swim,\nwhen the current with irresistible force is drawing me in a direction\nthat is joyous to me?\n\nPeople who submit themselves to a guide, who have faith in him and\nlisten to him, undoubtedly wander in the dark together with their\nguide.\n\nI think I have finished _Art_.\n\n_Dec. 3. Y. P. If I live._\n\nMy work on _Art_ has cleared up much for me. If God commands me to\nwrite artistic things, they will be altogether different ones. And to\nwrite them it will be both easier and more difficult. We shall see.\n\n\n\n_To-day, Dec. 6, Moscow._\n\nOn the 4th I went to Dolgoe.[261] I had a very tender impression\nfrom the ruined house; a swarm of memories.\n\nAlmost two days that I haven\u2019t written. I only prepared the chapters\non _Art_ and packed my things ... I have jotted down nothing. I woke\nfeeling badly.\n\n\n\n_Dec. 7, Moscow._\n\n... I was at Storozhenko\u2019s.[262] Kasatkin was here[263] in the\nevening. I asked for examples. In the morning I corrected _Art_.\n\nI jotted down nothing: there is much bustle. Health good.\n\n_Dec. 8, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, 11th._\n\nI have already spent so many days in Moscow. I have done almost\nnothing, only corrected _Art_. A pile of people and letters. Thank\nGod the most important is good, i.e., I have done nothing that I\nought not to have done. To-day I wrote a letter to Gali.\n\nIt seems to me that the divisions of _Art_ have turned out just as\nthey were before.\n\nA sad impression was produced by what N told about Chertkov[264]\nand by the letter of Ivan Michailovich. Moreover, A, B, C, D,--they\nare all suffering. Well, it is forgivable in them, but how can a\nChristian suffer?\n\nDuring this time N N\u2019s condition became clear. He is mentally\ndiseased, like all people who are non-Christians.\n\nI have consented to give to Troubetskoi by instalments.[265]\n\nA sad letter from Chertkov. I want to write to him.\n\n_Dec. 12, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, the 13th. Morning._\n\nI wrote a letter to the Chertkovs. It seems to me I have corrected\nthe 16th chapter very well.\n\nYesterday I read the correspondence of Z on the sex-problem and I\nwas very indignant and I spoke disagreeably to him at Rusanov\u2019s.\n\nRusanov has the head of Hadji Murad. This morning I wanted to write\n_Hadji Murad_--I lost the outline.\n\nI wrote down something. I now want to write out the themes which\nare worth while and which can be treated as they ought to be:\n\n1) Sergius, 2) Alexander I, 3) Persianninov, 4) the tale of\nPetrovich--the husband, who died a pilgrim. The following are\nworse: 5) the legend of the descent of Christ into hell and the\nreconstruction of hell, 6) a forged coupon, 7) Hadji Murad, 8) the\nsubstituted child, 9) the drama of the Christian resurrection and\nperhaps 10) Resurrection--the trial of a prostitute, 11) (excellent)\na brigand killing the defenceless, 12) a mother, 13) an execution\nin Odessa.[266]\n\nIt is depressing in the house, but I want to be and will be joyous.\n\nI am going to write out only two things:\n\n1) That the physical union with an accidental husband is one of the\nmeans established by God for the spread of His truth: for the testing\nand the strengthening of the stronger and for the enlightenment of\nthe weaker.\n\n2) For people professing filiality to God, not to rejoice in life, to\nyearn, is a dreadful sin, an error. If you understood that the end\nof life is the activity for God for no personal ends, then nothing\ncould hinder this activity, could hold it back. The main thing is\nthat life willy-nilly goes forward to the better: one\u2019s own life\nand the life of the world. How not rejoice at this movement? One\nhas only to remember that life is movement.\n\nI write and I sleep and therefore express myself badly. Until evening,\nif I live.\n\n\n\n_To-day, December 14, Moscow. Morning._\n\nYesterday I received an unpleasant letter from Chertkov and sent\nhim an answer (about the publications).[267]\n\nThe day before yesterday, I read the correspondence of Z about sex\nrelations and became vexed and went to the Rusanovs\u2019 and met Z there\nand showed my condemnation of him sharply. That tortured me and I\nwrote him a note yesterday apologising and I received a nice answer\nwhich touched me.\n\nI feel very ill. I am in the worst mood and therefore am dissatisfied\nwith everything and cannot love. And just now am thinking:\n\nWe find sickness a burden; but sickness is a necessary good condition\nof life. Only it alone (perhaps not alone, but one of the most\nimportant and generally common conditions) prepares us for death,\ni.e., for our crossing over into another life. Therefore indeed it\nwas sent to every one: to children, to adults, to old people, because\nall, at all ages, die. And we find it burdensome. The fact that we\nfind sickness burdensome shows only that we do not live as we ought\nto: both a temporary and at the same time an eternal life--but we\nlive only a temporary life.\n\nSickness is the preparation for the crossing-over and therefore to\ngrumble against sickness is just the same as grumbling against cold\nand rain. One ought to make use of them and not grumble. In fact,\nonly those who live playing, get angry at the rain, but those who\nlive seriously rejoice at it. The same with sickness. More than\nthis: not only sickness but a bad mood, disappointment, sorrows,\nall these help to detach oneself from the worldly and facilitate\nthe crossing-over into the new life.\n\nI am now in such a state of crossing-over.\n\n\n\n_Evening, the 14th._\n\nThe whole day I have been ill and I am in the worst mood. I cannot\nmaster myself and everything is disagreeable and burdensome. I did\nnothing. I read and talked.\n\n_Dec. 15, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, December 17._\n\nTo-day, I am still in the very worst spirits. I am struggling with\nill-will. I gave the essay away.[268] Telegraphed to England. No\nanswer as yet.[269]\n\nA pile of people here, all evening. To-day I wrote twelve letters,\nbut did not work at all.\n\nTo-day I thought the very oldest thing: That one ought to perfect\noneself in love, in which no one can interfere and which is very\ninteresting. But love is not in exclusive attachments, but in a\ngood, not in an evil attitude to every living being.\n\nWrote letters: 1) Posha, 2) Masha, 3) Ivan Michailovich, 4) Prince\nViazemsky, 5) Bondarev, 6) Strakhov, 7) the school teacher Robinson,\n8) Priest, 9) Crosby, 10) Chizhov,[270] 11) Nicholaev in Kazan, and\n12) ----[271]\n\nI am finishing the note-book in a bad mood. To-morrow I begin a new\none. To-day I am also displeased with the essay on art.\n\n\n\n_The diary of the year 1897, Dec. 21, \u201997. Moscow._\n\nI am beginning a new notebook, almost in a new spiritual mood. Here\nare already 5 days that I have done nothing. I am thinking out _Hadji\nMurad_, but I have no desire or confidence. _On Art_ is printed.\nChertkov is displeased and those here also.[272]\n\nYesterday I received an anonymous letter with a threat to kill, if\nI do not reform by the year 1898; time is given only up to 1898. I\nwas both uneasy and pleased.[273]\n\nI am skating. A sign of an inactive mood is that I have noted down\nnothing.\n\nJust now I read through Chekhov\u2019s, _On a Cart_. Excellent in\nexpressiveness, but rhetorical as soon as he wants to give meaning\nto his story. There is a remarkable clearness in my mind, thanks to\nmy book on art.\n\n\n\n_Dec. 26, \u201997. Moscow._\n\nThe day before yesterday I fell ill and I am still not well.[274]\nI am reading much. My heart is heavy. Evening.\n\n_Dec. 27, \u201997. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Dec. 29, \u201997. Moscow. Morning._\n\nI thought of _Hadji Murad_. All day yesterday a comedy-drama, \u201cThe\nCorpse,\u201d[275] took shape. I am still unwell. Yesterday I was at\nBehrs\u2019.[276]\n\nI have received letters with threats of killing. I regret that there\nare people who hate me, but it interests me little and it doesn\u2019t\ndisturb me at all.\n\nHave jotted down something.\n\nA conversation with N: what a pitiable youth: understanding everything\nand at the same time not having the capacity to put anything in the\nright place and therefore he is living in unimaginable confusion.\n\nHave been thinking:\n\n1) They say usually that Christ\u2019s teaching, the real Christ\u2019s\nteaching ... destroys all union, that it is a disuniting\n\u201cindividualism.\u201d How false this is! Christianity only therefore\npreaches personal salvation, \u201cindividualism,\u201d as they say, because\nthis personal salvation is indispensable, accessible, joyous to\nall, and therefore inevitably unites people--not mechanically by\nthe pressure of force from without or by stirring with \u201cculture,\u201d\nbut chemically by an inner, indissoluble union.\n\n2) Sometimes you complain that they do not love your soul, but love\nor do not love your body, and you are angry at them, condemning them,\nbut you do not see that they cannot do otherwise: for them your\nsoul, the holy of holies of your soul, that which--as you know--is\nthe only real thing, the only thing that acts--is nothing, because\nit is invisible, like the chemical rays of the spectrum.\n\n3) There are people, mainly women, for whom the word is only the\nmeans for an attainment of an end, and it is entirely devoid of its\nfundamental significance which is to be an expression of reality.\nThese people are sometimes terribly strong. Their advantage is like\nthat which a man would have who in fencing took off the cork from\nthe rapier. His adversaries are bound by conditions that ... No, the\ncomparison is not good. The best of all: they are like a gambler in\ncards, a sharper. I will find one.\n\nThe examples of this are such: a man wants, for instance, to steal;\nhe takes other people\u2019s money; he says that he was charged to do\nit, they asked him to, and he believes that he was asked to. And\nthe proof of the untruth of his evidence he refutes with a new lie.\nHe kills: the murdered one suffered so, that he begged him to kill\nhim. He wants to do something nasty or something foolish. Well, to\nturn all the furniture upside down or to debauch--and he explains in\ndetail, how it was recognised by doctors, that it was necessary to\ndo this periodically, etc. And he convinces himself that it is so.\nBut when this proves to be not so, he does not hear, he brings forth\nhis own arguments and then at once forgets both his own arguments\nand other people\u2019s. These people are terrible, horrible.\n\n4) The spiritualists say that after death the soul of people lives\non and communicates with them. Soloviev, the father,[277] said\ntruly, I remember, that this is the Church dogma of saints, of\ntheir intercession and of prayers to them. Evgenie Ivanovich also\nsaid truly that as the Pashkov Sect is a taking out of the dogma\nof the Redemption alone and the adaptation of everything to it,\nso spiritualism is the taking out of the dogma of saints, and the\nadaptation of everything to it.\n\n5) But I say the following in regard to this dogma of the soul:\nWhat we call the soul, is the divine, spiritual, limited in us in\nour bodies. Only the body limits this _divine_, this _spiritual_.\nAnd it is this limiting which gives it a form like a vessel gives\nform to a liquid or a gas which is enclosed in it. But we only know\nthis form. Break the vessel and that which is enclosed in it will\ncease to have that form which it has and will spread out, be carried\noff. Whether it combines with other matter, whether it receives a\nnew form--we know nothing about this, but we know for a fact that\nit loses that form which it had when it was limited, because that\nwhich limited it was destroyed. The same with the soul. The soul\nafter death ceases to be the soul and remaining a spirit, a divine\nessence, becomes something other, such that we cannot judge.\n\nI wrote the preface to Chertkov.[278]\n\n_Dec. 30. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n\n1898\n\n\n\n\nTwo days have passed. _Jan. 1st._\n\nI meet the new year very sad, depressed, unwell. I cannot work and\nmy stomach aches all the time.\n\nReceived a letter from Verkholensk from Phedoseev about the Dukhobors,\na very touching one.[279]\n\nStill another letter from the editor _The Adult_ about free love.[280]\nIf I had time, I would like to write about this subject. Probably I\nshall write. The most important is to show that the whole matter lies\nin appropriating to oneself possibilities of the greatest enjoyment\nwithout thinking of consequences. Besides, they preach something\nwhich already exists and is very bad. Why would the absence of outer\n_restraint_[281] improve the whole thing? I am, of course, against\nany regulation and for full freedom, but the ideal is chastity and\nnot pleasure.\n\nI have been thinking during this time only one thing and it seems\nan important thing, namely:\n\n1) We all think that our duty, our vocation, is to do various things:\nbring up children, make a fortune, write a book, discover a law in\nscience, etc. But for all the work is only one thing: to carry out\none\u2019s own life--to act so that life would be a harmonious, good, and\nrational matter. And the work ought to be not before people, to leave\nbehind one a memory of a good life, but the work is before God: to\npresent to Him oneself, one\u2019s soul, better than it was, nearer to\nHim, more submissive to Him, more in harmony with Him.\n\nTo think so--and principally to feel so--is very difficult: One\nalways wanders off for human praise. But it is possible and ought\nto be done.\n\nHelp me, Lord. I sometimes feel this and do at this moment.\n\n_Jan. 2. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, already the 4th._\n\nI am a little better. I want to work. Yesterday Stasov and\nRepine,[282] coffee.... When will I remember that _much talk is much\nbother_?\n\nI received a pamphlet uncensored.\n\nOnly one thing has to be noted down: that all life is senseless,\nexcept that which has for its end the service of God, the service\nof the fulfilment of the work of God, which is unattainable to us.\nI shall write that out later. Now I am in a hurry.\n\nDear Masha arrived, later Tania with Sasha.[283]\n\n_Jan. 5. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Jan. 13._\n\nIt is more than a week that I haven\u2019t written and I have done almost\nnothing. I have been ill all the time, and depressed. At times, I\nam good and calm, and at times uneasy and not good. The day before\nyesterday was difficult. Then the peasants arrived: Bulakhov, with\nSt., Pet., and two from Tula. I felt so light-hearted and energetic.\nOne need not yield to one\u2019s own circle, one can always enter the\ncircle of God and His people.\n\nIt is long since I have been so depressed. A letter from Posha.\nWrote to Posha, Ivan Michailovich, Chertkov, Maude and Boulanger.\n\nI am still endeavouring to find a satisfactory form for _Hadji Murad_\nand I still haven\u2019t it, although it seems I am nearing it.\n\n... To-day a telegram about the work, \u201c_What is Art?_\u201d\n\nHave made some notes and I think important ones.\n\n1) Something of enormous importance and ought to be expounded well.\nOrganisation, every kind of organisation, which frees from any kind\nof human, personal, moral duties. All the evil in the world comes\nfrom this. They flog people to death, they debauch, they becloud\ntheir minds and no one is to blame. In the tale of the resurrection\nof hell, this is the most important and new means.[284]\n\n2) Each one of us is that light, that divine essence, love, the Son\nof God, enclosed in a body, in limits, in the coloured lantern which\nwe have painted with our passions and habits--so that everything we\nsee, we see only through this lantern. To raise oneself so as to\nsee above it, is impossible; on top there is the same kind of glass\nthrough which we see even God, through the glass which we ourselves\nhave painted. The only thing which we can do is not to look through\nthe glasses, but to concentrate in ourselves, recognise our light\nand kindle it. And this is the one salvation from the delusions of\nlife, from its suffering, from its temptations. And this is joyful\nand always possible.\n\nI do this, and it is good.\n\n3) Dreams--they are nothing else than the looking on the world not\nthrough the glasses, but only on the glasses, and on the interweaving\nof various designs interwoven on the glasses. In sleep you only see\nthe glasses; when awake, the world, through the glasses.\n\n4) A woman can, when she loves a man, see merits in him which he\nhas not, but when she is indifferent, she is unable to see a man\u2019s\nmerits other than through the opinion of others. (However, I think\nit is untrue.)\n\n5) The following when I wrote it, seemed to me very important:\n\nChristians strive to a union, and unite among themselves and with\nother people by the Christian tool--by unity, humility, love. But\nthere are people who do not know this means of union, do not believe\nin it and who endeavour to unite (all people endeavour to unite)\nwith other means, outer ones, with force, threats. It is impossible\nto demand of these people who do not know, who cannot understand the\nChristian means of union, that they do not make use of their means;\nbut it is absolutely unjust and unreasonable when these un-Christian\npeople impose their own lower means of union upon people knowing\nand using a higher means. They say, \u201cYou Christians, you profit by\nour means; if you have not been robbed and killed, it is thanks to\nus.\u201d To this the Christians answer, that they don\u2019t need anything\nwhich force gives them (as is really the fact for a Christian).\n\nAnd that is why, though it is legitimate for people not knowing a\nhigher means of union, to use a lower, it is illegitimate, that they\nlook upon their own lower means as a general and unique one, and\nwant to compel those for whom it cannot be necessary to use it. The\nprincipal step before humanity now consists in this, that people\nshould not only recognise and admit the means of Christian union, but\nthat they should recognise that it is the highest, the one to which\nall humanity is striving and to which it will inevitably reach.\n\n6) When you are full of energy, then you live, and you ought to live\nfor this world; when you are sick, then you are dying, i.e., you\nbegin to live for that other after-death world. So that in either\nphase, there is work. When you are sick, dying, then concentrate in\nyourself and think about death and about life after death, and stop\nlonging for this one. Both processes are normal and in both there\nexists work proper to each state.\n\nI feel somewhat fresher spiritually.\n\n_Jan. 14, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, 18._\n\nMy health is a little better. It is now evening. Wrote letters,\n1) Chertkov; 2) Dubrovin; 3) Dubrovsky; Tver; 4) Tula: N. l. Kh.;\n5) Nakashidze; 6) Ivan Michailovich.\n\nTo-day the plot of _Hadji Murad_ became clearer than ever before.\n\n\n\n_Jan. 19. Moscow._\n\nDepressing and unproductive. I cannot work. Several times a week I\nremember that everything disagreeable is only an _Ermahnung_ for an\nadvance onward towards perfection.\n\nHelp, Father. Come and dwell within me. You already dwell within me.\nYou are already \u201cme.\u201d My work is only to recognise Thee. I write\nthis just now and am full of desire. But nevertheless I know who\nI am.\n\n\n\n_To-day, Feb. 2. Moscow._\n\nVery weak and apathetic. All the time I either read or corrected\nproofs of _Art_. There is much to be noted. But I have neither\nstrength nor desire. There have been no events, no letters.\n\n_Feb. 3, Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_February 3, Moscow._\n\nI am still as unproductive intellectually. In the morning it flashed\nacross my mind that I left out the places in _Art_ about the trinity,\nand doing no work, I went to Grot and from there to the publishing\nhouse. I returned past two, read, lay down, dined. _Tarovat_[285]\narrived, then Menshikov, Popov, Gorbunov, and then--Gulenko,[286]\nSuller.[287]\n\nRead Liapunov\u2019s _The Ploughman_. I was very touched.[288]\n\nHave noted down the following:\n\n1) In moments of depression I want to ask help from God. And I may\nask it. But only such help which might help me and not interfere\nwith any one else. And such help is only one thing: love. Every\nother kind of help, material help, not only might, but must come in\nconflict with the material good of others. Only love alone--the\nenlargement of love in oneself--satisfies everything which one can\nwant and does not come in conflict with the good of others. \u201c_Come\nand dwell within us._\u201d\n\n2) Women do not use words to express their thoughts, but to attain\ntheir ends, and it is this purpose they hunt in the words of others.\nThat is why they so often understand people wrong side out. And this\nis very disagreeable.\n\n3) The meaning of life is only one: self-perfection--the bettering\nof one\u2019s soul. \u201cBe perfect like our Father in Heaven.\u201d\n\nWhen things are difficult, when something tortures you, remember\nthat in life, only you are the life--and immediately it will become\neasier. And joyful. As a rich man rejoices when he gathers his\nwealth, so will you rejoice if you place your life only in this.\nAnd for the attainment of this, there are no barriers. Everything\nwhich appears like sorrow, like a barrier in life--is a wide step\nwhich offers itself to your feet that you may ascend.\n\n4) If you have the strength of activity then let it be a loving one;\nif you have no strength, if you are weak, then let your _weakness_\nbe a loving one.\n\n5) Inorganic matter is simply the life of that which we do not\nunderstand. For fleas the inorganic is my finger-nail. In the same\nway, evil is the non-understood good.[289]\n\n6) To serve God and man, but how, with what? Perhaps the possibility\ndoesn\u2019t exist? It is not true: the possibility has always been given\nyou--to become better.\n\n7) Man is an ambassador, as Christ said, an ambassador indeed for\nwhom the important thing is only to fulfil the errand given to him,\nand it doesn\u2019t matter what is thought about him. Let them think\nbadly--sometimes it is necessary. Only let the errand be fulfilled.\n\n8) One of the most common errors consists in this, that people\nare considered good, malicious, stupid, intelligent. Man flows on\nand every possibility is in him: he was stupid, and has become\nintelligent; he was wicked and has become good, and the reverse.\nIn this is the greatness of man. And therefore it is impossible to\njudge man as he is. You have judged and he is already another. It\nis impossible to say--I do not love him: you have said it and he is\nalready another.\n\n9) ...\n\n10) The fact that the end of life is self-perfection, that the\nperfection of the immortal soul is the only end of the life of man,\nis already true because _every other end_ in the view of death, is\nsenseless.\n\n11) If man deliberates upon the consequences of his act, then the\nmotives of his act are not religious.\n\n12) The paper-knife on my knees fell over on account of its weight,\nand it seemed to me that it was something alive, and I shuddered. Why?\nBecause there is a duty to everything living and I grew frightened\nlest I hadn\u2019t fulfilled it, and lest I had crushed, squeezed a living\nbeing.\n\n13) ... In this lies the whole matter--to destroy this hypnosis.\n\n14) It is impossible not to wish that our acts be known and approved.\nFor him who has no God, it is necessary that his acts be known and\napproved. But for him who has God, it is sufficient that they be\nknown. By this can it be verified if a man has God.\n\n_4th Feb. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, the 5th. Morning._\n\nI do not feel like writing at all. All these last days, especially\nyesterday, I have been feeling and applying to life, the consciousness\nthat the end of life is one: to be perfect like the Father, to do\nthat which He does, that which He wants from us, i.e., to love; that\nlove should guide us in the moments of our most energetic activity,\nand that we breathe with it alone in the moments of our greatest\nweakness. Whenever there is something difficult, painful, then it\nsuffices to remember this, and all this difficulty, this pain, will\nvanish and only the joyous will remain.\n\nTo a man who seriously, truly uses his reason, it is obvious that\nall ends are closed to him. One alone is reasonable: to live for the\nsatisfaction of the demands of God, of his conscience, of his higher\nnature. (It is all the same thing.) If this is to be expressed in\ntime, then to live so as to prepare one\u2019s soul to the passing-over\ninto a better world: if this is to be expressed accurately in terms\noutside of time, then it is to fuse one\u2019s life with its timeless\nprinciple, with the Good, with Love, with God. I am afraid only of\none thing, that this strong consciousness acting beneficially on\nme, that the only thing reasonable and free and joyous is the life\nin God, be not calloused, that it do not lose its effect of lifting\nme out of the petty annoyances of life, and of freeing me. Oh, if\nthat could be so to every one and if it could be so forever! In this\nlight last night I considered the various manifestations of life and\nI felt so well and joyous. I will await the examination. I shall\nprepare for it.\n\nWhen I wrote out the notes, I forgot:\n\n1) How absurd is the argument of the enemies of moral perfection,\nthat a man, sacrificing himself really, will sacrifice his perfection\nfor the good of others, i.e., that a man is ready to become evil,\nin order to act well. If one understands by this that a man is\nready to act badly before people, if only he could thereby fulfil\nthe demands of his conscience and not serve a certain cause or\neven certain people, then this is true. The serving of a cause and\nof people can sometimes coincide, and can sometimes not coincide\nwith the demands of conscience; and not serving a certain cause or\npeople, can sometimes coincide and can sometimes not coincide with\nthe demands of conscience. These are individual cases.\n\n2) To doubt that the source of all evil is false religious teaching,\ncan only be done by a man who hasn\u2019t thought of the causes of\nthe daily manifestations of social life. The causes of all these\nmanifestations are thoughts--thoughts of people. How then could false\nthoughts not have an enormous influence on the social system? People,\nsome of them, are well off in a false system based on false thoughts;\nit is natural that they support false thoughts, false-religious\nteaching.\n\n3) I cannot write and I suffer, I force myself. How stupid! As if\nlife lay in writing. It does not even lie in any outer activity.\nIt is not as I will, but as Thou wilt. It is even fuller and more\nsignificant without writing. And here now I am learning to live\nwithout writing. And I am able to.\n\n4) I see that I have made a note and have already said it here,\nnamely, that to perfect oneself does not mean to prepare oneself for\na future life[290] (that is said for convenience, for simplicity of\nspeech); but to perfect oneself means to get nearer to that basis\nof life for which time does not exist and therefore no death, i.e.,\nto carry one\u2019s \u201cself\u201d more and more away from the bodily life into\nthe spiritual.\n\n5) Evgenie Ivanovich says about N: she is at peace only when one\noccupies oneself with her. Any occupation with anything not concerning\nher, does not interest her. Every such occupation with other people\noffends her. It seems to her that she bears the life of every one\nnear her, that without her everybody would be lost. For the least\nreproach, she insults every one. And in 10 minutes she forgets it,\nand she hasn\u2019t the least remorse.\n\nThis is the highest degree of egotism and madness, but there are many\ngrades approaching this. At bottom, to think that I live for myself,\nfor my own enjoyment, for fame, is absolute potential madness. In\nliving--it is impossible not to live for oneself, impossible not\nto defend oneself when attacked,[291] not to fall on the food when\nhungry; but to think that in this is life, and to use that very\nthought given you to see the impossibility of such a life, to use\nit for the strengthening of such a separate individual life, is\nabsolute madness.\n\n6) A wife approaches her husband and caressingly speaks to him as\nshe did not speak before. The husband is moved, but this is only\nbecause she has done something nasty.\n\n7) Jean Grave,[292] \u201c_L\u2019individu et la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9_,\u201d says that revolution\nwill only then be fertile when _l\u2019individu_ will be strong-willed,\ndisinterested, good, ready to help his neighbour, will not be vain,\nwill not condemn others, will have the consciousness of his own\ndignity, i.e., will have all the merits of a Christian. But how will\nhe acquire these virtues if he knows that he is only an accidental\nchain of atoms? All these virtues are possible, are natural,\nin fact, their absence is impossible when there is a Christian\nworld-point-of-view--that is, that we are sons of God sent to do\nHis Will; but in a materialistic world-point-of-view these virtues\nare inconsistent.\n\nIt is now past one. I am going downstairs. I am going to write\nto-morrow.\n\n_Feb. 6. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Feb. 19. Moscow._\n\nIt is long since I have made any entries.[293] At first I was\nill. For about 5 days I have been better. During this time I was\ncorrecting, putting in things and spoiling the last chapters of _Art_.\nI decided to send away Carpenter with the introduction to _Sieverni\nViestnik_. Was correcting the preface also. The general impression\nof this article \u201cOn Science\u201d as well as that of the 20th chapter--is\nremorse.[294] I feel that it is right, that it is necessary, but it\nis painful that I hurt and grieve many good people who err. It is\nobvious that .0999 will not understand why and in the name of what\nI condemn science, and will be indignant. I should have done that\nwith greater kindness. And in this I am guilty, but it is now too\nlate.\n\nThe last time I wrote, I expressed fear lest the carrying over of\nmyself from this worldly life, the offending, the irritating one,\ninto the life before God, the eternal life (now, here) which I\nexperienced would become lost, would become calloused. But here 13\ndays have passed and I still feel this and felt it all the time and\nrejoiced and am rejoicing.\n\nSometimes I begin to lay out patience, or hear an irritating\nconversation, contradiction, or am dissatisfied with my writing,\nwith the condemnation of people, or I regret something--and suddenly\nI remember that it only seems so to me, because I am bent over\nsearching on the floor, and it suffices to straighten up to my full\nheight and everything that was disagreeable, irritating, not only\nvanishes, but helps the joys of triumph over my human weakness.\n\nI haven\u2019t yet experienced this in strong physical suffering. Will\nit endure? It ought to endure. Help, Lord.\n\nOtherwise I am very joyous.\n\nI am joyous, that in old age there has been disclosed absolutely\na new condition of the great indestructible good. And this is not\nimagination, but a change of soul as clearly perceived as warmth and\ncold, it is a going over from confusion, suffering, to a clearness and\npeace and a going over which depends upon myself. Here, in truth, is\nwhere wings have sprouted. As soon as it becomes difficult, painful,\nto walk on foot, you spread the wings. Why not always then on wings?\nEvidently, I am still too weak; still untrained; and perhaps a rest\nis necessary.\n\nIt is interesting to find out if this state is an attribute of old\nage, if young people can experience it also? I think that they can.\nOne must accustom oneself to this. This indeed is prayer.\n\n\u201cYou must hide something, be afraid of something, something tortures\nyou, something is lacking,\u201d--and suddenly: there is nothing to hide,\nnothing to be afraid of, nothing to be tortured over, nothing to\nwant. The main thing is to go away from the human court into God\u2019s\ncourt.\n\nOh, if this would only hold out unto death! But even for that which\nI have experienced, I am grateful to Thee, Father.\n\nI jotted down the following:\n\n1) People can in no way agree to the unreality of all that is\nmaterial. \u201cBut a table exists and always, even when I go out of the\nroom it is there, and for all it is the same as it is for me,\u201d--they\ngenerally say. Well, and when you twist two fingers and roll a little\nball under them do you not unquestionably feel two? It is certainly\nso, every time I take up a little ball in that way there are two\nand for every one who takes up a ball in that way there are two,\nand nevertheless there are no two little balls. In the same way,\nthe table is a table only for the twisted fingers of my senses, but\nit is perhaps half a table, a thousandth of a table--in fact, no\npart of a table at all, but something altogether different. So that\nwhat is real is only my ever recurring impression, confirmed by the\nimpressions of other people.\n\n2) ... I acted badly when I gave my estate to the children. It would\nhave been better for them. Only it was necessary to have been able\nto do this without violating love, and I was unable.\n\n3) You are often surprised how intelligent, good people can defend\ncruelty, violence, savage superstitions...? But it is sufficient\nto remember the exilings, the oppressions, the offences, which are\nbeginning to penetrate the working-classes and you see that this is\nonly a feeling of self-preservation. Only by this is explained the\ntenacity of life....\n\n4) Pharesov told me about Malikov\u2019s[295] teaching. All this was\nbeautiful, all this was Christian: be perfect like your Father; but\nit was not good that all this teaching had for its end influence\nover people and not inner satisfaction, not an answer to the problem\nof life. Influence on others is the main Achilles\u2019 heel.\n\nSo that my condition, which is false for people, is perhaps the very\nthing necessary.\n\n5) ... In order to wipe out one\u2019s sin, one ought to ... repent before\nall the people for the deception, to say: forgive me that I have\ndeceived you ... What a strong scene! And a true one.\n\n6) Our art with its supplying of amusement for the rich classes,\nis not only similar to prostitution, but it is nothing else than\nprostitution.\n\n_Feb. 20. Moscow._\n\n\n\n_To-day, Feb. 25. Moscow._\n\nHave made no entries; corrected something. Wrote letters to-day,\nmore than 7 letters. But I can\u2019t write anything, although I haven\u2019t\nstopped thinking about _Hadji Murad_ and _The Appeal_.\n\n_Feb. 26. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\nHave made no entries for more than three weeks. To-day _March 19_.\n_Moscow._\n\nFinished all my letters. During this time wrote serious letters:\n\n1) To the American colony,[296] 2) _Peterburgskia Viedomosti_ about\nthe Dukhobors;[297] 3) to the English papers also about the Dukhobors,\nand 4) a preface to the English edition _What is Art_--about the\ncensor distortions.[298]\n\nMy inner life is the same. As I foresaw, the new consciousness of life\nfor God, for the perfection of love, has become dulled, weakened,\nand when I needed it, these days, it proved itself to be, if not\nexactly ineffectual, yet less effectual than I expected.\n\nThe principal event during this time was the permission to the\nDukhobors to emigrate.\n\n_What is Art?_ seems to me to be entirely finished now.\n\n...\n\nI have worked very little during all this time. I made rather many\nnotes; I shall try to write them out:\n\n1) One of the greatest errors in summing up a man, is that we call,\nwe define a man as intelligent, stupid, good, evil, strong, weak. But\nman is everything, all possibilities, is a flowing matter.[299] This\nis a good theme for an artistic work and a very important one and a\ngood one, because it destroys malicious judging--\u201cthe cancer\u201d--and\nassumes the possibility of everything good. The workers of the devil,\nconvinced of the presence of bad in man, achieve great results:\nsuperstition, capital punishment, war. The workers of God would\nattain greater results, if they believed more in the possibility of\ngood in people.\n\n2) They want to become the masters of China--the Russians, Japan,\nEngland, the Germans: there are quarrels, diplomatic struggles, there\nwill even be military ones. And all this is only for the mixing of\nthe yellow race into one Christian batter, the propagating and the\nassimilating of ideas like the Crusades and the Napoleonic wars.\n\n3) Lebon writes: \u201cNot only are they going to make food in\nlaboratories, but there will be no need for labour.\u201d People have so\nbadly distributed their two functions, food and labour, that instead\nof joy, these functions are a torture to them and therefore they\nwant to be freed from them. It is just the same as if people would\nso pervert their functions of perspiration and breathing, that they\nwould seek a way of changing them by an artificial method.\n\n4) The longer you live, the less time there remains for life. For an\nendless duration of life, there would then be absolutely no life.\n\n5) Only when you live without consideration of time, past or future,\ndo you live a real, free life for which there are no obstacles.\nYou are only then dissatisfied, in straits, when you remember the\npast (the offences, the contradictions, even your own weaknesses)\nand when you think of the future: will something be or will it not\nbe? Only at one point, do you fuse with God and live your divine\nessence: in the present (even when you live your animal life).\nWhenever you use your reason to consider what will be, then you are\nweak, insignificant; but whenever you use it to do the will of Him\nwho sent you, then you are omnipotent, free. You can even see this\nin the way you immediately weaken, become deprived of strength, when\nyou consider the consequences of your act.\n\n\n\n_To-day, March 21. Moscow._\n\nI continue copying. I am very indisposed, weak, but thank God, in\npeace, I live in the present. Just now I put in order the papers\non _Art_.\n\n6) Socialists will never destroy poverty and the injustice of the\ninequality of capacities. The stronger, the more intelligent, will\nalways make use of the weaker, the more stupid. Justice and equality\nof goods will never be attained by anything less than Christianity,\ni.e., by negating oneself and by recognising the meaning of one\u2019s\nlife in the service to others.\n\n7) I have written down the same as in the 5th, but differently. In\norder to live with God, by God and in God, it is necessary not to\nbe guided by anything from without. Neither by that which was nor\nby that which can be; to live only in the present, only in this, to\nfuse with God.\n\n8) Intelligent Socialists understand that for the attainment of their\nends the principal thing is to lift the working men intellectually and\nphysically. This is possible to be done only by religious education,\nbut they do not understand this and therefore all their work is in\nvain.\n\n9) \u201cSeek the Kingdom of God and His Right, the rest will follow\nyou\u201d--this is the only means of attaining the ends of Socialism.\n\n10) For _The Appeal_:\n\nAll are agreed that we live not as we ought to or as we could. The\nremedy of some is this: a religious fatalism and, still worse, a\nscientific, evolutionary one. Others comfort themselves by the\ngradual bettering and bettering of things by themselves: the step\nby step people. The third assert that everything will establish\nitself when things will reach their very worst (Socialism), when the\nGovernment and the rich classes will control everybody fully, i.e.,\nthe working-men, and then the power will somehow or other make a\nsomersault not only to working-men, but to unerring disinterested\nself-sacrificing working-men, who will then direct all affairs\nwithout error and without sin. The fourth say that to improve the\nwhole matter, it is possible only by the destruction of evil people,\nthe bad ones. But there is no indication where the bad people end\nand where the harmless ones, if not the good ones, begin. Either\nthey will destroy every one as bad or as in the big revolution\nthey will catch the good ones with the bad. As soon as you begin\nto judge strictly, no one will remain in the right. What is to be\ndone? But there is only one instrument: a religious change in the\nsoul of people. And it is this change which is interfered with, by\nall imaginary remedies.\n\n11) My body is nothing else than that piece of everything existing\nwhich I am able to govern.\n\n12) The whole world is that which I sense. But what am I? It is that\nwhich acts.\n\n13) How good it would be to write a work of art, in which there\nwould be clearly expressed the flowing nature of man: that he, one\nand the same man, is now a villain, now an angel, now a wise man,\nnow an idiot, now a strong man, now the most impotent being.\n\n14) Every man, as all people, being imperfect in everything, is\nnevertheless more perfect in some one thing than in another. And\nthese perfections, he puts over another human being as a demand,\nand condemns him.\n\n15) It is impossible to serve, not \u201cGod and mammon,\u201d but \u201cmammon and\nGod.\u201d The service of mammon--every kind of vanity--is a hindrance to\nthe service of God. Peace, solitude, even boredom, is a necessary\ncondition to the service of God. In Moscow religiously they are the\nmost savage of people. In Paris--they are still more savage.\n\n16) There is a kind of English toy called _peepshow_: behind a\nlittle glass, now one thing is shown, now another. This is the way\none ought to show man--_Hadji Murad_: a husband, a fanatic, etc.\n\n17) Not long ago I experienced a feeling, not exactly a reasoning,\nbut a feeling--that everything that is material, and I myself with my\nown body, is only my own imagination, is the creation of my spirit\nand that only my soul _exists_. It was a very joyous feeling.\n\n18) ... does on the other hand the same thing that a false religious\neducation does; it accustoms people to deny their reason.\n\n19) There are two points of view of the world: 1) the world is\nsomething definitely existing, that is, existing in definite forms,\nand 2) the world is something continually flowing, being formed,\ngoing towards something. In the first point of view, the life of\nhumanity also appears as something definite, consisting in the\npeaceful use of the goods of the world. In this point of view--there\nis a continuous dissatisfaction, and discontent with the construction\nof the world. It does not fulfil the demands which are presented.\nIn the second point of view, the life of humanity is conceived as\nsomething which in itself changes and helps to the change and the\nattainment of the ends of the world. And in this point of view there\nis no dissatisfaction or discontentment with the construction of\nthe world. And if there is discontent, it is only with one\u2019s self,\nfor one\u2019s insufficient harmony to the movement of the world and in\nnot helping this movement. (Unclear.)\n\n20) Administrative ambition and greed of misers are therefore\nalluring, because they are very simple. For every other end of\nlife one has to reflect much, to think, and often you do not see\nthe results clearly. And here it is so simple: where there was one\ndecoration there will be two: where there was one million there will\nbe two, etc.\n\n21) I spoke to Evgenie Ivanovich and said to him that I envy his\nfreedom; but he said to me that things are very difficult for him\njust on account of this freedom and even on account of the authority\nand the responsibility which is connected with it. So that it only\nseems to me, that some one is better off and that another is worse,\nas the strong man to the weak, the healthy to the sick, the rich to\nthe poor. And it became suddenly clear to me that all the differences\nin our conditions in the world are as nothing compared with our\ninner conditions. It is just the same, as it would be a matter of\nindifference if a man fell from a boat into the Azov Sea, the Black,\nthe Mediterranean or into the ocean, in comparison with whether he\nwas able to swim or not.\n\n22) I spoke with P about the woman question. There is no woman\nquestion. There is the question of freedom of equality for all human\nbeings. The woman question is only quarrel hunting.\n\n23) The more one is guilty before his own conscience, though hidden,\nthe more willingly and involuntarily he seeks the guilt of others\nand especially those before whom he had been guilty.\n\n24) As soon as you go away into the past or the future, you go away\nfrom God and then you immediately become lonely, deserted, unfree.\n\n25) I began to think about myself, about my own hurts and my own\nfuture life--and I came to my senses. And it was so natural to say\nto myself: and you, what business is Leo Nicholaievich (Tolstoi) of\nyours? And I felt better. Thus there is the one who is hindered by\nthe base, stupid, vain, sensual, Leo Nicholaievich.\n\n26) As soon as you begin to think of the future, you begin to\nguess. If the patience comes out, then this will happen. But this\nis madness! And it is bound to come, because to think of the future\nis the beginning of madness.\n\nI have finished everything. It is now past one, the 21st.\n\n_March 22. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_April 12. Moscow._\n\nAmong the events during this time was the arrival of the Dukhobors,[300]\nthe cares for their emigration, the death of Brashnin.[301] Occupations:\n_Carthago delenda est_[302] and _Hadji Murad_. Worked rather little.\nThe spiritual state rather good. Visitors--most of them peasants,\nyoung, good ones.\n\nSince yesterday have been in a very depressed mood. I am not\nsurrendering, I do not disclose myself to any one, but to God. I\nthink that is very important. It is important to keep silent and\nto suffer a thing through. Otherwise the suffering will go over to\nothers and will make them suffer, but here it will burn itself down\nin yourself. That is the most precious of all.\n\nThis thought helps very much, that in this lies my task, in this is\nmy opportunity to elevate myself, to approach perfection somewhat.\nCome and dwell within me so that my baseness will be stifled. Awake\nin me.\n\nI want to cry all the time.\n\nThought and noted:\n\n1) I found jotted down: \u201cEvery victory over the enemy is an\nenlargement of one\u2019s own strength.\u201d I ought to remember that now\nespecially. There is a struggle going on between my spiritual and\nanimal self, and all that I gain for the former, by all this will\nI weaken the latter. I carry over from one scale of the weights to\nanother. If I fall into temptation, it means a rolling down the road\nto evil; if I resist, it is the beginning of a rolling on a new road\ntowards the good.\n\n2) It is astonishing how we get accustomed to the illusion of one\u2019s\nown individuality, separateness from the world. We see, we feel--that\nlife compels us every minute to feel our union and dependence on\nthe world, makes us feel our incompleteness; and we nevertheless\nbelieve that we ourselves, our very selves, is something in the name\nof which we can live. However, when you understand this illusion\nclearly, then you are surprised, how you could not have seen that\nyou are not a piece of a whole, _but a manifestation in time and\nspace, of something timeless and infinite_.\n\nWomen have always recognised the power of men over them. And it\ncould not have been otherwise in an unchristian world. Men are the\nstronger and men have ruled. It was the same in all the worlds (with\nthe exception of the doubtful Amazons and the law of maternity),\nand it is the same now among .0999 of mankind. But Christianity has\nappeared and has recognised perfection not in strength but in love,\nand by this all the subjected, the captive, the slaves and the women\nhave been freed. But that the freedom of slaves and women be not a\ncalamity, it is necessary that the freed be Christians, i.e., that\nthey affirm their life in the service of God and people, and not in\nthe service of themselves. Slaves and women are not Christians, and\nnevertheless they are freed. And they are terrible. They act as the\nmain-spring of all the calamities of the world.\n\nWhat must be done? Bring slaves and women back again into slavery?\nThat is impossible to do, because there is no one who will do\nit: Christians cannot subject. And non-Christians will no longer\nsurrender themselves into slavery, but will fight. They will fight\namong themselves and one or the other will subject and hold the\nChristians in slavery. What must be done? One thing must be done:\nattract people to Christianity, turn them into Christians. It is\npossible to do this only by fulfilling in life the law of Christ.\n\nHelp me, Lord. Help me. Come into me, awake in me.\n\n_Apr. 13. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day April 27. Grinevka._[303]\n\nThe 3rd day here. I am all right. A little indisposed....\n\nThe latter days in Moscow I spent finishing _Carthago delenda est_.\nI am afraid I have not finished it, and that it is still before\nme. Still I did quite a lot. Here I have not worked at all.\n\nThe misery of the famine is by far not as great as it was in 1891.\nThere are so many lies in all the affairs among the upper classes,\neverything is so tangled up with lies that it is never possible to\nanswer any question, simply--for instance, is there a famine? I am\ngoing to try to distribute as well as I can the money which has been\ncontributed.\n\nYesterday there was a conversation about the same thing: Is exclusive\nlove good? The r\u00e9sum\u00e9 is this: a moral man will look on exclusive\nlove,--it is all the same whether he be married or single--as on\nevil and will fight it; the man, who is little moral, will consider\nit good and will encourage it. An entirely unmoral man does not even\nunderstand it and makes fun of it.\n\nThe _Russkia Viedomosti_ was suspended because of the Dukhobors and\nof me; that is too bad and I am grieved.[304]\n\n1) The proverb: for a good son you do not have to make a fortune,\nfor a bad one, do not leave one.\n\n2) I have made the following note: \u201cGod doesn\u2019t know when the\nawakening of people will take place.\u201d This is what it means: I\nthink that the life of humanity consists in a greater and greater\nawakening, in an enlightening. And this awakening, this enlightening,\nwill be done by people themselves (by God in people). And in this\nis life, in this is the good, and therefore this life and this good\ncannot be taken away from people.\n\n3) My awakening consisted in this, that I doubted the reality of\nthe material world. It lost all meaning to me.\n\n_To-morrow Apr. 28. Grinevka. If I live, I\u2019ll finish._\n\n\n\n_To-day Apr. 29. Morning. Grinevka._\n\nFelt great weakness. Am better since yesterday. But unable to write\nanything. Went to Lopashino,[305] took notes.[306]\n\nRead Boccaccio--it is the beginning of the master-class, immoral art.\n\nNo letters. Serezha was here.[307]\n\nI continue. Thought:\n\n1) You look deeply into the life of man, especially of women,--and\nyou see from what world point of view their acts flow, and you see,\nprincipally, how inevitably all argument against this world point\nof view recoils and you cannot imagine how this world point of view\nwill be changed--in the same way as how a piece of a date-stone\nhas grown through a date. But there are conditions when a change\nis produced and accomplished from within. Live man can always be\nborn, from seeds there are sprouts.\n\n2) I look into the future, and ask: were I to act as I ought to,\nwould everything then be all right, would all obstacles then be\ndestroyed? This question is pleonism. The question is this, whether,\nwere I to act in a realm where there were no obstacles, would there\nthen be any obstacles?\n\n3) It is remarkable how we are without understanding and without\ngratitude. God arranged our life so, that he forbade us all false\npaths, that everything drives us from these false, harmful paths,\nimpoverishing us to ruination, and making us suffer, onto the only\nfree, always joyous path of love--but we nevertheless do not go on\nthis path and we complain that we suffer from the attempts of going\non the false, ruinous paths.\n\n4) One of the most urgent needs of man, equal with and even more\nurgent than eating, drinking, sex desire, and the existence of which\nwe often forget, is the need to manifest oneself, to know that it\nis I who have done a thing. Very many acts which are otherwise\ninexplicable, are explained by this need. One ought to remember this\nboth in their bringing up, and in dealing with men. The main thing\nis that one has to try to make this an activity and not a boast.\n\n5) Why is it that children and simple people are by such an awful\nheight higher than the majority of people? Because their reason is\nnot perverted by the deception of faith or by temptations or by\nsins. Nothing stands on their road to perfection, while adults have\nsin and temptation and deception on theirs. The former have only to\nwalk forward, the latter must struggle.\n\n6) They spoke about love and falling in love, and I made the\nfollowing conclusion for myself: a moral man fights falling in love\nand exclusive love, an unmoral man--condones it.\n\n7) Children are selfish without lies. All of life teaches the\naimlessness, the ruination of selfishness. And therefore old people\nattain unselfishness without lies. These are two extreme limits.\n\n8) I began to consider soup-kitchens and the purchase of flour, and\nmoney, and my soul became so unclean and sad. The realm of money,\ni.e., every kind of use of money, is a sin. I took money and undertook\nto use it only so as to have a reason for going away from Moscow\nand I acted _badly_.\n\n9) I thought much about _The Appeal_, yesterday and to-day. It\nbecame rather clear how a bad arrangement of life results in\nreligious deception. If something is unclear in one\u2019s mind, if life\nis disorderly and you don\u2019t want anything.... (Somehow I haven\u2019t\nsucceeded.)\n\n10) In my sleep I thought to-day that the shortest expression of\nthe meaning of life is this: the world moves, perfects itself; the\ntask of man is to take part in this movement, to submit himself to\nit and to help it.\n\nMy weakness still continues. I have written this out very badly.\n\n\n\n_May 4. Grinevka. (Evening.)_\n\nYesterday there was a whole house full of guests: The Tsurikovs,\nMme. Ilinsky,[308] Stakhovich. I have done nothing during the day.\nIn the morning I wrote a letter to Chertkov[309] and to S[310] and\nto still some one else. The day before yesterday I was in Sidorovo\nand at Serezha\u2019s.[311] In the morning I read Chertkov\u2019s article.[312]\nIt is very good.\n\nThe 1st of May, Lindenberg[313] was here and a teacher[314] and they\nwent to Kamenka. On the 30th, I went to Gubarevka.\n\nWhat hurts me, is that I seem to have lost entirely the capacity\nfor writing. To my shame I am indifferent. Latterly in my sleep, I\nthought keenly about the contrast between the crushed people and\nthe crushers, but did not write it out.\n\nTo-day, yes and in the preceding days, it seemed to me that _Hadji\nMurad_ became clear, but I could not write it. It is true they\ninterfered.\n\nThought:\n\n1) Just as an athlete follows the growth of his muscles, so you ought\nto follow the growth of love, or at least the decrease of evil and\nlies--and life will be full and joyous.\n\n2) Yesterday there was a discussion about the old question: what\nis better--to take part in evil, to endeavour to diminish it (...)\nor to keep away from it? The eternal objection is:--\u201cThere will be\nanarchy\u201d--yes, but now it is worse than anarchy: injustice.--\u201cWhat,\nthen, if to begin everything from the beginning; the strong will\nagain offend the weak.\u201d Yes, everything from the beginning again,\nbut with this difference, that while now we continue the cruelty and\ninjustice which have been established in heathen barbaric times, we\nnow live in the light of Christianity and the cruelty and injustice\nwill not be the same cruelty and injustice.... (It isn\u2019t quite all\nright, but it was.)\n\n3) I look about me and the lines which I see I force into that\nform which lives in my imagination. I see white on the horizon and\ninvoluntarily I give this white the form of a church. Is it not in\nthis way that everything we see in this world takes on the form which\nalready lives in our imagination (consciousness), which we carried\nover from our former life? (An idea.)\n\nExquisite weather. Friendly, hot Spring. I am at peace and am well.\n\n_May 5. Grinevka. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day May 9. Grinevka._\n\nDuring these days we had visitors: Masha, Varia. I go every day\nsomewhere to open a soup-kitchen. I am not writing at all. I feel\nweak. Yesterday there was a rain storm. I went to Bobrika. To-day I\nwent to Nicholskoe. I went to Gubarevka and returning through the\nwood, thought.... I don\u2019t feel like writing, later I shall write\nout two thoughts, very important ones:\n\n1) One, that I cannot put before me, that which tortured me before:\nmy destruction.\n\n2) That the other life begins to attract me, only the process of\ngetting there is terrible. If only I could arrive safely, everything\nthere will be all right;\n\n3) To-day I thought that the object of faith is only one--God. This\nI must write out, explain.\n\nTo-day I am in a very weak state.\n\n_May 10. Grinevka. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day May 11. Grinevka._\n\nYesterday I wrote a little on _The Appeal_.[315] Then I went to\nMikhail\u2019s Ford.\n\nSaw Strakhov in my sleep,[316] who said to me that I should write\nout clearly, for the plain man, what God is. \u201cYou ought to write\nit, Leo Nicholaievich,\u201d (Tolstoi.)\n\nTo-day my stomach ached a little. I didn\u2019t dine and wrote much on\n_The Appeal_. It seems to be taking form. I am feeling fresh in the\nhead, a thing I haven\u2019t felt for a long time. Thanks to my gymnastic\nexercises, I have become convinced for the first time, that I am old\nand weak and I must stop physical exercise entirely. This is even\npleasant.\n\nI forgot for a moment, my rule, not to expect anything from others,\nbut to do what one ought to do oneself before God,--and there arose\nin me an evil feeling.... But I remembered, asked in good faith what\nwas necessary and I felt better.\n\n1) There is one object of faith--God, He who sent me. He who sent\nme, He who is everything of which I feel myself to be a part. This\nfaith is indispensable and satisfying. If you have this faith then\nthere is no room for any other. Everything else is trust and not\nfaith. You can only have faith in that which undoubtedly is, but\nwhich we cannot embrace with our reason.\n\n2) Yesterday I thought that the form of thinking--categories--are\nnot seven but four: cause, matter, space, time. But only one:\nmovement, encloses everything in itself. Movement is a change of\nplace, therefore there is space; change of place can be swifter\nand slower, therefore there is time; and a preceding movement is a\ncause, a following one, an effect; that which is displaced is matter.\nEverything is movement. Man himself moves incessantly and therefore\neverything explains itself to him by movement alone.\n\n3) The most harmful effect of an evil act is that when a man\naccomplishes it he frees himself from the demands of his conscience.\n\u201cWe eat animals, therefore why not hunt?\u201d--... and so you have no\nneed to stand on ceremony ... etc.\n\n4) A strange thought came to me. Our whole life is in this, that we\nconsider ourselves a separate unit, an individual, a man. But besides\nthis being specialised, individualised, from all others, chemistry\ndiscloses for us entirely different separate units, acids, nitrogen,\netc. They are separate and therefore they have life. (Nonsense.)\n\n_May 12. Grinevka. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day May 15. Morning. Grinevka._\n\nWithin these two days I went to Mtsensk,[317] Kukuevka, and yesterday\nto Batyevo.[318] Wrote _Hadji Murad_ unwillingly. I have exercised\nagain.[319] It is stupid, almost an insanity. Wrote a poor letter\nto Posha. I am pleased with every one here.\n\nJust now I have reread this journal and it did not leave me very\ndissatisfied. Oh, if I would only remember more my transitory,\nsubservient condition here!\n\nHave made no entries. My health would be good if my back weren\u2019t\naching. Began to write letters. Not succeeding. One must wait\npeacefully and live before God.\n\n_May 16. Grinevka. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day May 19. Grinevka._\n\nSonya was here. She arrived the 17th. This morning she went away.\nI have been trying to write these two days. Can\u2019t do anything. An\nexceptional weakness and pain in my spinal column.\n\n\n\n_To-day May 20. Evening. Grinevka._\n\nThis morning I wrote rather much on _The Appeal_. In the evening I\nwrote 13 letters. Went nowhere. My back is better. The main thing,\nis that my brain is working and I am happy.\n\nReceived 500 roubles, and 1000 roubles are lying in Cherni.[320]\n\nI am not going to write any more, although I have many notes.\n\n\n\n_To-day May 27. Grinevka. In the morning._\n\nDuring this time I wrote _The Appeal_ and finished the article on\nthe condition of the people.[321]\n\nJust now I am writing to write out my notes--there is much that\nhas to be written out--that everything which is said in Paul\n(Corinthians xiii) about love has to be said, and even more--about\nthe renunciation of oneself. It is impossible to lay up love within\noneself--but the renunciation of oneself is possible. It suffices\nto renounce oneself and love will arise.\n\nI thought this, because just now in the morning, I began to remember\nall the difficulties which might arise from the distribution of\nthe contributions, about everything which had to be done for the\nDukhobors, for my own writing, and of which I had done nothing, and\nabout all my weaknesses, errors, about my joyless life with the\nchildren, and such as I had not wanted it to be, and my lack of\nconsequence--and it sufficed only to negate myself, my own desires,\nand immediately all wrong passed away, both of the past and the\nfuture, and one thing remained, the need of service in the present.\nHow time vanishes remarkably in the consciousness of one\u2019s mission.\n\n\n\n_To-day, I think, June 12. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nI went with Sonya (my daughter-in-law)[322] to the Tsurikovs,\nAphremovs, and the Levitskys.[323] I have a very pleasant impression\nand fell in love with many; but fell ill and did not do my work and\nmade a lot of fuss both for Levitsky and the household.[324]...\n\nIt is four days since I arrived in Yasnaya and I am recovering\nnicely. Wrote many letters.\n\nI received almost 4,000 roubles, which I cannot use this year.[325]\n\nMasha is here with her husband and Iliusha. The Westerlunds were\nhere.[326]...\n\nTo-day, entirely unexpectedly, I began to finish _Sergius_.[327] No\nnews from England.[328]\n\nI have made many notes.\n\n1) I cannot remember now what and how I thought it: this is the\nnote: \u201cYou are often too strict with people, and he, poor man, is\ngood for nothing.\u201d\n\n2) Although I noted it before, I can\u2019t help but repeat: ...\n\n3) ...\n\n4) The life of the world is one, i.e., in the sense that it is\nimpossible to apply the conception of number to it. Plurality\ncomes only from the partitions of consciousness. For a universal\nconsciousness there is no number, no plurality.\n\n5) Non-resistance to evil is important not therefore only, because a\nman has to act so for himself, for attaining the perfection of love,\nbut also because only non-resistance alone stops evil, localises it\nin itself, neutralises it, does not permit it to go farther, as it\ninevitably does, like the transmission of movement to elastic balls,\nif there be no force which would absorb it. Active Christianity is\nnot in doing, creating Christianity, but in absorbing evil.\n\nI feel very much like writing out the story, _The Coupon_.[329]\n\n6) Death is the crossing-over from one consciousness to another, from\none image of the world to another. It is as if you go over from one\nscene with its scenery to another. At the moment of crossing over,\nit is evident that that what we consider real, is only an image,\nbecause we are going over from one image into another. At the moment\nof this crossing-over, there becomes evident, or at least one feels,\nthe most actual reality. Because of this, the moment of death is\nimportant and dear.\n\n7) For a universal consciousness, for God, matter does not exist.\nMatter is only for beings, separated one from another. The limits\nof separateness is that which we call matter, in all its infinite\nforms.\n\n8) It is impossible to remember sufficiently that the life of all\nbeings is continuous movement. Almost all our misery comes from the\nfact that we do not know this or forget this. And imagining that\nwe do not go forward, but that we stand still, we grasp the beings\nmoving alongside of us--some going faster, some going slower than\nwe--we grasp them and hold on as long as the force of the movement\ndoes not tear us away. And we suffer.\n\n9) We are all rolling down a slope, going down lower and lower to\nthe plain. Every attempt to hold to one\u2019s place, only makes the fall\nbigger, the more you hold on.\n\n10) We are sent to cross this sloping path, carrying across it that\nlight which is entrusted to us. And all that we can do--is to help\neach other on the road to carry this light; but we hold back, pushing\neach other down, extinguishing our light and that of the others.\n(It isn\u2019t good, not what I wanted to say.)\n\n11) I know, that when people yawn in front of me, I can become\ninfected, and therefore I say to myself: I don\u2019t want to yawn and\nI won\u2019t. I have learned to do this as to yawning, but I am only\nbeginning to learn this as to anger.\n\n12) The sight depresses me strangely ... of those owning the land\nand compelling the people to work. How my conscience is struck. And\nthis is not something reasoned, but a very strong feeling. Was I\nwrong in not giving my land to the peasants? I don\u2019t know.\n\n13) Lieskov made use of my theme and badly.[330] I had an exquisite\nthought--three problems: What was the most important time? what man?\nand what act? The time is the immediate, this minute; the man--he\nwith whom you have immediate business; the act, to save your soul,\ni.e., to do the act of love.[331]\n\n14) It is impossible to save humanity from that deception in which\nit is caught.... Only a religious feeling can give the counterstroke\nand conquer.\n\n_June 13. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_June 14. Y. P. Evening._\n\nBoth days I wrote _Father Sergius_. It is coming out well. Wrote\nletters. To-day there was a christening.[332]\n\nI still cannot be fully good.... It is difficult, but I do not\ndespair.\n\n\n\n_To-day June 22. Y. P._\n\nOn the 16th I fell very ill.[333] I never had felt so weak and so near\ndeath. I am ashamed to have made use of the care which they gave me.\nI could do nothing. I only read and made some notes. To-day I am a\ngreat deal better. Ukhtomsky[334] was pleased with my article,[335]\nbut nevertheless he refused to print it. I telegraphed to Menshikov\nthat he should try the _Viestnik Evropa_ and the _Russki Trud_.[336]\nI am afraid I am going to become tiresome.\n\nThe youth have been driven away. For they have forbidden that the\nflour that was bought be sold.[337]\n\n... Received a letter from Chertkov, a good one. The Dieterichs\narrived.[338] Dear Dunaev was here. They talked about the great riot\nof the factory workers. I shall finish later.\n\n\n\n_To-day June 28. Y. P. Evening._\n\nI am only now recovered, and am experiencing the joy of _convalescence_.\nI feel nature very vividly, keenly, and have a great clarity of\nthought.\n\nI wrote a little on _The Appeal_. To-day I wrote _Father Sergius_\nand both are good. Wrote many letters yesterday. All that I received\nyesterday were unpleasant: from N, but principally from Gali, with\nthe news that they have all quarrelled.[339] Posha is going to\nSwitzerland and Boulanger to Bulgaria.\n\nTania went to Masha\u2019s....\n\nThere is only one thing; one real thing that has been given us: to\nlive lovingly with one\u2019s brothers, with every one. One must renounce\noneself. I wrote that to my friends and I am going to be strict with\nmyself.\n\nHere is what I have written down....\n\nI have just read up to this point, where everything that is difficult\ncan be made to vanish when you throw off the illusion of a personal\nlife, when you recognise your mission in the service to God, and\nthat it would be good to experience this in physical suffering,\nwhether it will stand physical suffering. And here was a chance to\nexperience it and I forgot and did not experience it. It is too bad.\nBut the next time.\n\nHave written down:\n\n1) Paul Adam[340] gives the peasants a cruel characteristic,\nespecially the working men: they are vulgar, selfish, slaves,\nfanatics--perhaps all this is just, but the one thing, that they\ncan live without us and we cannot live without them, wipes out\neverything. And therefore it is not for us to judge. (Something is\nwrong here.)\n\n2) It is especially disagreeable for me when people who have lived\nlittle and thought little, do not believe me, and not understanding\nme, argue with me about moral problems. It would be the same for which\na veterinary surgeon would be hurt, if people who were not familiar\nwith his art were to argue with him. The difference is only in this,\nthat the art of the veterinary, the cook, the samovar-maker or any\nkind of art or science, is recognised as an art or a science where\nonly those people are competent who have studied that realm; in the\nmatter of morality every one considers himself competent, because\nevery one has to justify his life. But life is justified only by\ntheories of morality. And every one makes them for himself.\n\n3) I have often thought about falling in love, about the good, ideal\nfalling in love, which is exclusive of every sensuality, and I cannot\nfind either place or meaning for it. But its place and meaning is\nvery clear and definite: it is to lighten the struggle between sex\ndesire and chastity. Falling in love ought to be for a young man who\ncannot keep to full chastity before marriage, and to release the\nyoung men in the most critical years, from 16 to 20 or more, from\nthe torturing struggle. Here is the place for falling in love. But\nwhen it breaks out in the life of people after marriage, it is out\nof place and disgusting.\n\n4) I am often asked for advice as to the problem of owning land. It\nis my old custom to answer: that it is unsuitable for me to answer\nsuch problems, just as it would be unsuitable for me to answer the\nproblem how to make use of the ownership or the labour or the rent\nof a bonded serf.\n\n5) People who stand on a lower moral plane or religious world point\nof view cannot understand people standing on a higher plane. But\nthat there should be a possibility of union between them, there has\nbeen given to people standing on a lower plane the instinct for the\ngood and a respect for this good. If there is not this instinct and\nrespect, then it is very bad. But in our society, among so-called\neducated people, this is getting to be less and less.\n\n\n\n_To-day June 30. Y. P._\n\nI am still ill, and very weak. But I think I am improving, and my\nspiritual state is good. The day before yesterday I received a letter\nabout the quarrel in England.[341] I wrote to them. It is very sad\nand very instructive. Yesterday I received a letter from Khilkov\nwith a letter from Miss Pickard about the Dukhobors.[342] I wrote\nletters to Crosby, and Willard[343] and Khilkov. The affair of the\nDukhobors is important and big and evidently something will come\nout of it which is entirely different from what we are preparing,\nbut it is God\u2019s affair. To-day Mme. Annenkov arrived. Menshikov\ntelegraphed that Gaideburov[344] will print with omissions. During\nthese days I wrote _Sergius_--it isn\u2019t good.\n\nI am going to continue to write out the former:\n\n6) ...\n\n7) A man is a being separated from all others, who feels his limits.\nAmong the number of general limits by which he separates himself\nfrom other beings, are his limits which are in common with that\nbeing incomprehensible to him--the earth. Death is the destruction\nof all the various common limits with other beings and always of the\ncommon limit of the being of the earth--a fusion with earth. Every\nsickness, wound, old age, is a destruction of these limits.\n\n8) The work of life is to love. It is impossible to love expressly\nthose people unworthy of love; but it is possible not to love--to\nbehave well, in a good way, toward such people in every given moment.\n\n9) I remembered keenly what a matter of enormous importance was\ncomplete truthfulness in every detail, in everything, the avoidance\nof all outer false forms. And I decided to keep to this. _It is\nnever too late to mend._[345]\n\n10) The minister said to the murderer: \u201cOh brother, don\u2019t worry.\nGod has pardoned even greater sinners. But who are you? Don\u2019t lose\nheart. Pray.\u201d The murderer burst into tears.\n\n11) How great and stable seemed the happiness of the American people,\nand how unstable it proved to be, like all happiness not founded\non life, according to the law of Christ. The Spanish-American War,\nJingoism.\n\n12) I have often prayed (almost without believing, to try out) that\nGod arrange my life as I wish. To-day I simply prayed my customary\nmorning prayer and rather attentively. And after this prayer, I\nrecalled my wish and wanted to add a prayer about the fulfilment\nof this wish, and tried to address God about it. And immediately I\nrealised my mistake--that it would be very much better if everything\nwas not according to my will, but according to His. And without the\nleast effort and with joy I said: \u201cYes, let there not be my will,\nbut Thine.\u201d\n\n13) A spiritual life means that you should see the connection between\ncause and effect in the spiritual world and that you be guided in\nlife by this connection. Materialists do not see this connection\nand therefore do not take it as a guide for their acts, but they\ntake as a guide for their acts the physical, causal connection, the\none which is so complicated that we never fully know it, because\nevery effect is an effect of an effect; but the fundamental cause\nof everything--is always spiritual. (Not clearly expressed, but\nimportant).\n\n14) Epictetus says this very thing when he reproaches people for\nbeing very attentive to the phenomenon of the outer world--to that\nwhich is not in our power and being inattentive to the phenomenon\nof the inner, to that which is in our power.\n\n15) To many it seems that if you exclude personality from life and a\nlove for it, then nothing will remain. It seems to them that without\npersonality there is no life. But this only appears so to people who\nhave not experienced self-renunciation. Throw off personality from\nlife, renounce it, and then there will remain that which makes the\nessence of life--love.\n\n16) (For _The Appeal_) ...\n\n_To-morrow, July 1st. If I live._\n\n\n\n_July 6. Y. P._\n\nAm entirely well. Yesterday I took leave of Dunaev and Mme. Annenkov,\nwho were here. I live very badly. I cannot reconcile myself to the\nwill of God.\n\nTo-day I thought:\n\nThe life of Christ is very important as an instance of that\nimpossibility of man to see the fruits of his labours. And the less\nso, the more important the work. Moses could enter into the promised\nland with his people, but Christ could in no way see the fruit of\nhis teaching even if he had lived up to now. This is what one has\nto learn. But we want to do the work of God and to receive human\nreward.\n\n\n\n_July 17. Y. P. \u201998. Morning._\n\nThere was nothing very special during these 11 days. I have decided\nto give my novels away, _Resurrection_ and _Father Sergius_, to be\nprinted for the Dukhobors.[346]\n\nS. went to Kiev.\n\nAn inner struggle. I believe little in God. I do not rejoice at the\nexamination, but am burdened by it, admitting in advance that I\nwon\u2019t pass. All last night I didn\u2019t sleep. I rose early and prayed\nmuch.\n\nTo-day the Dieterichs and the Gorbunovs arrived. It was pleasant\nwith them. Took hold of _Resurrection_, and in the beginning it went\nwell, but from the moment when I became alarmed, these two days, I\nhave been unable to do anything. I took a very nice walk.\n\nI wrote a letter to J\u00e4rnefelt[347] and prepared a postscript. This\nis the only important thing. But I haven\u2019t the strength to withstand\nthe customary temptation.[348] Come and dwell within us. Awake the\nresurrection in me!\n\nI have made many notes. I will hardly have time to write them out now.\n\n1) Brooding leads to dreams, dreams to passions, passion to devils.\n(From _Love for the Good_.)[349]\n\n2) The \u00e6sthetic pleasure which you receive from Nature is attainable\nto all. Every one is affected by it differently, but it affects\nevery one. Art should have the same effect.\n\n3) How difficult it is to really live for God alone. You think you\nare living for God, but as soon as life jolts you, as soon as that\nsupport in life to which you are holding on, fails you, then you\nfeel that there is no holding power in God and you fall.\n\n4) For _Father Sergius_: Alone he is good, with people he falls.\n\n5) What an obvious error: to live for worldly ends. Whenever the\npurpose is not narrowly egotistic then this purpose is not quickly\nattained in life. Moses did not enter the promised land and Christ\ndespaired of His labour: \u201cWhy hast Thou abandoned me?\u201d...\n\n6) There is no peace, either for him who lives for worldly ends\namong people, or for him who lives for spiritual ends alone. There\nis peace only then when a man lives for the service of God among\npeople.\n\n\n\n_To-day, July 20. Y. P._\n\nA letter from S and from Masha. I still do not sleep, but things\nare settling themselves in my soul, and as always, suffering is\nof benefit. Yesterday I went to Ovsiannikovo, spoke with Ivan\nIvanovich.[350] Yesterday I worked well on _Resurrection_.\n\nIt is morning now. I am not continuing to write out from the\nnotebooks, but I am going to write out what I--not being asleep--have\njust now been thinking; it is an old but easily forgotten thing,\nand an important one which should be also told to N with whom they\ntalked last night. Namely:\n\n1) Life for oneself is a torture, because you want to live for an\nillusion, for that which does not exist, and it not only cannot be\nhappy, but it cannot be at all. It is the same as dressing and\nfeeding a shadow. Life exists only outside of oneself, in the service\nof others, and not in the service of one\u2019s near ones, beloved\nones--that is again for oneself--but in the service of those whom\nwe do not love, and better still, in the service of enemies. Help,\nFather. The terrible error is that one confuses sex-love, love for\nchildren, for friends, with love of people through God, of people\nto whom you are indifferent, and still more of enemies, that is, of\nerring people.\n\n\n\n_Aug. 3. Pirogovo._\n\nAgain everything is in the old way, again my life is horrid. I have\nlived through very much; I haven\u2019t passed the examination. But I do\nnot despair and I want a re-examination. I passed the examination\nexceptionally badly, because I had the intention of going over to\nanother institution. It is just these thoughts one must throw away,\nthen one will learn better.\n\nDuring this time Sonya returned and dear Tania Kuzminsky was here.\nThe work on _Resurrection_ goes very badly, although it seems to me\nI have thought it out much better. The 3rd day in Pirogovo. Uncle\nSerezha[351] is not as good as he was before: he is not in the mood.\nMaria Nicholaievna.[352] For two days nothing has come into my head.\n\nDuring this time there was alarming news about the condition\nof the Dukhobors[353] and that Mme. M. N. Rostovtzev was put in\nprison.[354] For a long time there has been no letter from Chertkov.\nPerhaps they intercept them.[355]\n\nAm going to continue to write out that which I had not written out:\n\n1) ...\n\n2) There are two methods of human activity--and according to which\none of these two kinds of activity people mainly follow, are there\ntwo kinds of people: one use their reason to learn what is good and\nwhat is bad and they act according to this knowledge; the other act\nas they want to and then they use their reason to prove that that\nwhich they did was good and that which they didn\u2019t do was bad.\n\n3) It is absolutely clear that it is much more profitable to do\neverything in common, but the reasoning about this is insufficient.\nIf the reasoning were sufficient then it would have happened long\nago. The fact that it is seen among Capitalists is unable to\nconvince people to live in common. Besides the reasoning that this\nis profitable, it is necessary that the heart be ready to live like\nthat (that the world point of view should be such that it would\nharmonise with the indications of the reason), but this is not so\nand will not be so until the desires of the heart are changed, i.e.,\nthe world point of view of people.\n\n4) Even if that which Marx predicted should happen, then the only\nthing that will happen, is that despotism will be passed on. Now\nthe capitalists rule, but then the directors of the working people\nwill rule.\n\n5) The mistake of the Marxists (and not only they, but the whole\nmaterialistic school) lies in the fact that they do not see that the\nlife of humanity is moved by the growth of consciousness, by the\nmovement of religion, by an understanding of life becoming more and\nmore clear, general, meeting all problems and not by an economic\ncause.\n\n6) The most unthought thing, the error, of the theory of Marx is in\nthe supposition that capital will pass from the hands of private\npeople into the hands of the government, and from the government,\nrepresenting the people, into the hands of the workers....\n\n7) There is nothing that softens the heart so much as the\nconsciousness of one\u2019s guilt, and nothing hardens it so much as\nthe consciousness of one\u2019s right.\n\n8) Working people are so ... that it seems to them they have no\noutlet. Salvation lies in truth, in preaching and professing it.\n\n9) They prove the law of the conservation of energy; but energy is\nnothing else than an abstract notion, just the same as matter. But\nan abstract notion is always equal to itself. In fact, this is\nnothing else than as if we were to begin to prove that the law of\ngravitation, notwithstanding seeming departures, exists unchangingly\nin everything. (Unclear and perhaps untrue.)\n\n10) The belief in miracles has for its basis the consciousness that\nour world just as it is, is the product of our senses. But the error\nlies only in supposing that the miraculous, that is, that something\nwhich is against the laws of reason, when applied to our senses,\ncan happen for us with our tool of consciousness, i.e., with our\nsenses. That which is against our laws of reason, when applied to our\nsenses, can happen for other beings, for beings with other senses,\njust as our tool of consciousness, our sense, is only one particular\ninstance from the innumerable quantity of other possibilities.\n\n11) It is a great error to think that the reason of man is perfect\nand can disclose everything to him. The limitation of reason is\nbest seen and most obvious from the fact that a man cannot solve\n(he clearly sees that he cannot) the problems of infinity: for each\ntime there is still more time, for each space there is still more\nspace, for each number there is still a number, so that all time\nand space is unknowable.\n\n12) The reason of man is just as weak and insignificant in comparison\n(and in an infinite number of times more so) with that which is, as\nis the reason (the means of perception) of a beetle and an am\u00e6ba in\ncomparison with the reason of man. The reason of man in comparison,\nnot only with the highest reason, but with the reason which is higher\nthan his--is just the same as the understanding of a complicated\nproblem of higher mathematics or even of algebra for a man not knowing\nmathematics, to whom it seems insoluble, as are the problems of the\ninfinity of space and time to us. While the problem is simple and\nclear for one knowing mathematics. The difference is only in this,\nthat one can learn mathematics, but no study will help to solve the\nproblem of space and time. This is the limit of the possibility of\nour knowledge under our reason.\n\n13) I pray God that He release me from my suffering which tortures\n_me_. But this suffering is sent to me by God in order to release\nme from evil. The master whips his cattle with the whip in order to\ndrive them from the burning yard and save them, and the cattle pray\nthat he do not whip them.\n\n14) There are common, sometimes intentional, sometimes unintentional,\nmisunderstandings of my opinions which I confess irritate me:\n\na) I say that God ... is not God and that God is that which alone\nis--the unattainable good, the beginning of everything: against me\nthey say, that I deny God;\n\nb) I say that one ought not to resist violence by violence: against\nme they say, that I say it is not necessary to fight evil;\n\nc) I say that one ought to strive towards chastity and that on this\nroad the highest grade will be virginity, and second a clean marriage,\nthe third not a clean, that is, not a monogamous marriage: against\nme they say, that I deny marriage and I preach the destruction of\nthe human race.\n\nd) I say that art is an infectious activity and that the more\ninfectious art is, the better it is. But that this activity be good\nor bad, does not depend on how much it satisfies the demands of art,\ni.e., its infectiousness, but on how much it satisfies the demands\nof the religious consciousness, i.e., morality, conscience; against\nme they say that I preach a _tendence_ art, etc.\n\n15) Woman--and the legends say it also--is the tool of the devil.\nShe is generally stupid, but the devil lends her his brain when she\nworks for him. Here you see, she has done miracles of thinking,\nfar-sightedness, constancy, in order to do something nasty; but as\nsoon as something not nasty is needed, she cannot understand the\nsimplest thing; she cannot see farther than the present moment and\nthere is no self-control and no patience (except child-birth and\nthe care of children).\n\n16) All this concerns women, un-Christians, unchaste women, as are\nall the women of our Christian world. Oh, how I would like to show\nto women all the significance of a chaste woman. A chaste woman (not\nin vain is the legend of Mary) will save the world.\n\n17) People are occupied with three things: 1) to feed themselves,\ni.e., to continue their existence, 2) to multiply--to continue the\nexistence of the specie, and 3) to fulfil that for which they had\nbeen sent in the world: to establish the kingdom of God. For this\nthere is one means--to perfect oneself. Almost all people are occupied\nwith the first two matters, forgetting the last, which at bottom is\nthe only real work.\n\n18) The decline of the moral consciousness of humanity lies in the\ngreatest part of the people being placed in such a situation that\nall interest in life for them is only to feed and to multiply. It\nis just the same as if the master kept his cattle, caring only that\nthey be fed, or better, that they do not die from hunger and that\nthey multiply, and never received any income from them: no wool, or\nmilk, or work from them--from these cattle. The Master who sent us in\nthis world requires from us, besides existence and its continuation,\nalso the labour He needs.\n\n19) For _Resurrection_. It was impossible to think and remember\none\u2019s sin and be self-satisfied. But he had to be self-satisfied in\norder to live, and therefore he did not think and forgot.\n\n20) It is impossible to demand from woman that she valuate the feeling\nof her exclusive love, on the basis of moral feeling. She cannot\ndo it, because she hasn\u2019t got a real moral feeling, i.e., one that\nstands higher than everything.\n\nTo-day I plan to go home.\n\n_Aug. 4. Y. P. If I live._\n\nWhy does the 4th of August come to my mind as if it were important?\nNothing important has happened.\n\n\n\n_To-day, August 24. Y. P._\n\nDuring this time I received no letters from Chertkov and am very\nperplexed.[356] I think that during this time the Dukhobors were\nhere. Letters from Khilkov, from Ivan Michailovich. I answered them\nall. To-day Sullerzhitsky arrived.[357] I am working all the time\non _Resurrection_ and am pleased, even very much so. I am afraid of\nshocks.\n\n... And I feel well. A full house of people: Mashenka,[358]\nStakhovich, Vera Kuzminsky,[359] Vera Tolstoi.[360]\n\nI am copying:\n\n1) People were sent into the world to do the work of God, but they\nquarrelled, fought and established things in such a way that for\nsome, there is no time to do the work, because they have to feed\nthemselves, and for others there is no time, because they have to\nguard that which they took away. What a waste of strength! It is\njust as if workers had been sent to work and given food; some have\ntaken the food away and they have to guard it and the others have\nto get food, and the work stands still.\n\n2) People live in the world not fulfilling their mission--it is the\nsame way as if factory workers were only busied with how to lodge\nthemselves, feed themselves and amuse themselves.\n\n3) One of the most important tasks of humanity consists in the\nbringing up of a chaste woman.\n\n4) I often think that the world is such as it is, only because I\nam so separated from all the rest. As soon as my separateness from\n_Everything_ will end, then the limits will be torn away and other\nlimits will be established--and then the world will become altogether\ndifferent for me.\n\n5) You wish to serve humanity? Very well. That which you wish to\ndo, another will do. Are you satisfied? No, dissatisfied, because\nthe important thing for me is not what will be done, but what _I_\nwill do; that I do my work. This is the best proof that the matter\nis not in the doing, but in the advancement towards the good.\n\nIs it possible that I am advancing? Help, Lord.\n\n6) How difficult it is to please people: some need one thing, others\nanother. They need both my past and my future. God is one, and His\nWill in respect to me is one, and He wants only my present, what I\nam doing this minute is what He wants. And what was, has been, and\nwhat will be, isn\u2019t my business.\n\n7) Egoism, the whole egoistic life, is legitimate only as long as\nreason has not awakened. As soon as it has awakened, then egoism is\nlawful, only to that degree in which one has to sustain oneself as a\ntool necessary for the service of people. The purpose of reason--is\nthe service to people. All the horror lies in its being used for\nservice to oneself.\n\n8) Man gives himself to the illusion of egoism, lives for himself--and\nhe suffers. It suffices that he begin to live for others, and the\nsuffering becomes lighter and there is obtained the highest good in\nthe world: love of people.\n\n9) As one disaccustoms oneself from smoking or other habits, so\none can and must disaccustom oneself from egoism. When you wish to\nenlarge your pleasure, when you wish to exhibit _yourself_, when\nyou call forth love in others, stop. If you have nothing to do for\nothers, or you have no desire to do anything, then do nothing--only\ndon\u2019t do anything for yourself.\n\n10) The Bavarian told about their life. He boasts about the high\ndegree of freedom, but at the same time they have compulsory religious\nteaching, a crude Catholic one. That is the most horrible despotism.\nWorse than ours.\n\n_Aug. 25. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 2. Y. P._\n\nIt is horrible to see for what a long time I have made no entries:\nmore than two months. And not only has there been nothing bad, but\nrather everything was good. The Jubilee was not as repulsive and\nas depressing as I expected.[361] The sale of the novel and the\nreceipt of the 12,000 roubles which I gave to the Dukhobors was well\narranged.[362] I was displeased with Chertkov[363] and I saw that\nI was at fault. A Dukhobor arrived from the province of Yakutsk. I\nliked him very much[364] ...\n\nMasha is pitiable in her weakness, but she is just as near in\nspirit....\n\nBut glory to God and thanks be to Him that he has awakened it in me\nand has kept it burning so that it is natural for me either to love\nand rejoice, or to love and to pity. And what happiness!\n\nArcher was here yesterday, arriving from Chertkov--I liked him.[365]\nThere is much to do, but I am all absorbed in _Resurrection_, being\nsparing with the water and using it only for _Resurrection_. It\nseems to me it won\u2019t be bad. People praise it, but I don\u2019t believe.\n\nEverything that I noted--it was all very important--I will write\nout later, but now I want to write that which I just now, walking\non the path, in the evening, not only thought but felt clearly:\n\n1) Under my feet there is the frozen, hard earth; around, enormous\ntrees; overhead a cloudy sky; I fed my body, I feel pain in the\nhead; I am occupied with thoughts on _Resurrection_; and yet I\nknow, I feel in all my being, that both the firm and frozen earth\nand the trees and the sky and my body and my thoughts--all this is\nonly a product of my five senses, my image, the world, made by me\nbecause such is my partition from the world. And that it will be\nsufficient for me to die--and all this will not disappear but will\nbecome transformed, as they make transformations in the theatres:\nfrom bushes and stones, they make castles, towers, etc. Death is\nnothing else than such a transformation, dependent from another\npartition from the world, another personality: Here I consider as\nmyself, my body with my senses, and then something else will detach\nitself to be myself. And then the whole world will become something\nelse. But the world is such and not something else, only because I\nconsider myself as this and not as something else. But there can\nbe an innumerable quantity of divisions of the world. (This is not\nentirely clear for others, but for me--very.)[366]\n\n_Nov. 3. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Nov. 14. Y. P._\n\nAgain I have not noticed how 11 days have passed. Have been very\nintensely occupied with _Resurrection_ and am making good progress.\nAm absolutely near the end. Serezha and Suller were here and both\nwent away to the Caucasus with my letter to Golitsin.[367] S. arrived\nyesterday. Very well. It is a long time since I have felt so well\nand keen, intellectually and physically.\n\nI cannot make out what I have written out and what I haven\u2019t.[368]\n\n1) How difficult it is to please people! In order to please them it\nis necessary that the past and the future meet their demands. But\nin order to please God, one has only to satisfy His demands in the\npresent.\n\n2) To live for others seems difficult--just as to work seems\ndifficult. But just as in work, in the care for others there may be\nthe best reward: love of others may and may not be; while in labour\nthere is an inner reward, you work to the end, get tired, and you\nfeel good.\n\n3) The poetry of the past occupied itself only with the strong of\nthe world: with the Czars, etc., because the strong of the world\nappeared as the highest and the most complete representatives of\nthe people. But if you take the plain people, then it is necessary\nthat they express general phenomena ... (Unclear.)\n\n4) If you do not permit yourself to live for yourself, then\ninvoluntarily, from boredom, you begin to live for others.\n\n5) Woman, just like man, is endowed with feeling and brain, but\nthe difference is in this, that men mostly consider themselves and\ntheir feelings bound by the commands of reason, while women consider\ntheir feelings binding for themselves and for their reason. The same\nthing, but only in different places.\n\n6) You get angry at the philosopher who reasons, who considers that\nthe main basis of the life of man is his material nature; but this\nman does not know the spiritual, but knows only material effect and\ntherefore he cannot think otherwise.\n\n7) You think that you are alone and you suffer from loneliness; yet\nyou are not only in harmony, but you are one with every one; only\nartificial and removable barriers separate you. Remove them--and you\nare one with every one. The removing of these barriers according to\nyour strength is the business of life.\n\n8) If a man considers his animal being as himself, then he will\nrepresent God also as a material being, a ruler who rules materially\nover material things. But God is not such, God is spirit and does\nnot rule over anything, but lives in everything.\n\n9) ... If people could have been so deceived, then there is no\ndeception into which they would not fall.\n\n10) I have noted down that it is depressing because there is no\nlife, but only an egoistic existence. I cannot remember what else\nI could have meant by this.\n\n11) God manifests himself in our consciousness. When there is\nno consciousness--there is no God. Only consciousness gives the\npossibility for the good, for continence, service, self-sacrifice.\nEverything depends to what consciousness is directed. Consciousness\ndirected to the animal \u201cself\u201d kills, paralyzes life. Consciousness\ndirected to the spiritual \u201cself\u201d rouses, lifts, frees life.\nConsciousness directed to the animal \u201cself\u201d strengthens, ignites\npassion, creates fear, struggle, the horror of death. Consciousness\ndirected towards the spiritual \u201cself\u201d frees love. _This is very\nimportant and if I live, I will write it out._\n\n12) Death is a change of consciousness, a change of that which I\ncan recognise as myself. And therefore fear of death is a horrible\nsuperstition. Death is a joyous event standing at the end of each\nlife. Suffering is sent to people to hold them back from death.\nOtherwise every one understanding life and death, would struggle\ntowards death. But now it is impossible to go towards death unless\nthrough suffering.\n\n13) The greatest act in life is the consciousness of one\u2019s _self_,\nand its consequences are benevolent or most terrible, according to\nwhether you direct your consciousness towards the spirit or towards\nthe body.\n\n14) In order to get rid of moral suffering (and even physical) there\nare two means: to destroy the cause of suffering or the feeling in\none\u2019s self which produces suffering. The first is not in man\u2019s power,\nthe second is. (I am repeating Epictetus).\n\n15) The moral progress of humanity advances only because there are\nold people. The old people become kinder, wiser, and give over that\nwhich they have lived through to the following generations. If this\nwere not so, humanity had not advanced; and what a simple method!\n\n16) If man looks on life materially, then old people do not become\nbetter, but worse, and there is no progress.\n\n17) Technical progress is greeted by every one, is pushed on by\nevery one; the moral, the religious progress, is held back by the\npriests. From this come the main calamities in life.\n\n_November 15. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\nIt seemed to me that I made no entries for about three days and now\nit is ten days. _To-day, Nov. 25. Y. P._\n\n... I promised to arrive December 6th.[369]... I feel also like\ngoing to Pirogovo. We are alone: Tania, Masha, Kolia. Only Liza\nObolensky.[370] I am still diligently occupying myself with\n_Resurrection_.\n\nLast night I thought out an article on why the people are corrupted.\nThey have no faith of any kind. They christen na\u00efve infants and then\nthey consider every reasoning about faith (perversion) and every\nlapse, as a capital crime. Only the sectarians have faith. Perhaps\nI am going to bring that into the _Appeal_. What a pity. I thought\nit out well at night.\n\n_Resurrection_ is growing. It can hardly be compressed into 100\nchapters.[371]\n\nI have noted down the following and I think it is very important\n(which might be good for the Declaration of Faith):\n\n1) We are very much accustomed to the reasoning as to how the life\nof other people, people in general, should be arranged. And such\nkind of reasoning does not seem strange to us. And yet such kind\nof reasoning could in no ways exist among religious and therefore\nfree people; such reasoning is the consequence of despotism, ...\nIn this way reason ... They say: \u201cIf I had the power I would do so\nand so with the others.\u201d That is a dangerous error, not only because\nit tortures, deforms people who have to undergo violence ... but it\nweakens in all people the consciousness of the necessity of improving\nthemselves, which is the only effective means of influencing other\npeople.\n\n2) To-day I thought about this from another angle. I recalled\nthe words of the Gospel: \u201cAnd the pupil is not higher than the\nteacher; if he learns then he will be like the pupil.\u201d We, the rich\nmaster-classes, teach the people. What would happen if we succeeded\nin teaching them so that they become as we are?\n\n3) They talk, they write, they preach about the knowing of God. What\na horrible blasphemy, and horrible admission of the non-understanding\nof what God is and what we are. We, a particle of the infinite whole,\nwish to understand not only this whole, but its causes, the origin\nof the whole. What absurdity and what a recognition of godlessness,\nor a recognition of God of that which is not God. We can only know\nthat He is, \u03a4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd, He exists, and we can only conclude by ourselves,\nwhat He is not.\n\n4) Love is God. Love is only the recognition that God is not flesh,\nnot passion, not egoism, not malice. (Doubtful.)\n\n5) Violence rules our world, i.e., malice, and therefore there is\nalways found in society a majority of dependent, unstable members:\nwomen, children, stupid ones--brought up on malice, and who side\nwith malice. But the world ought to be ruled by reason, by goodness;\nthen all this majority would be brought up on goodness and would\nside with it. In order that this should take place it is necessary\nthat reason and goodness manifest themselves, and undismayed, assert\ntheir existence; that is very important.\n\n6) The complexity of knowledge is a sign of its falseness. That\nwhich is true is simple.\n\n7) How bad it is that people seeking perfection are pained at\ncalumny, at a deserved bad name (or better still, at an undeserved).\nCalumny, a bad name, gives an opportunity, drives toward an activity,\nthe value of which is only in our conscience. This is so rare, so\ndifficult, and so useful. Involuntary simpleness is the best school\nfor goodness.[372]\n\n8) I have noted down: \u201c_Justice is insufficient. It is ...[373]\nnecessary to oppose._\u201d I cannot remember what this means.\n\n9) Physical labour is important, because it prevents the mind from\nworking idly and aimlessly.\n\n10) Perhaps it is more important to know what one ought not to think\nabout, than to know what one ought to think about.\n\n11) Women are weak and they not only do not want to know their own\nweakness, but want to boast of their strength. What can be more\ndisgusting?\n\n12) A good man if he does not acknowledge his mistakes and tries to\njustify himself can become a monster.\n\n13) ...\n\n\n\nNow _Nov. 26_. _Morning. Y. P._\n\nDid not sleep and thought:\n\n1) Evil is the material for love. Without evil there is none and\ncan be no manifestation of love. God is love, i.e., God manifests\nHimself to us in victory over evil, i.e., in love. The question of\nthe origin of evil is just as absurd as the question of the origin\nof the world. It is not \u201cwhence comes evil?\u201d that one must know,\nbut \u201chow to conquer it? How to apply love?\u201d\n\n\n\n\n1899\n\n\n\n\n_Jan. 2. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nThe last time I wrote it was November 25, which means a month and\na week. I made entries in Yasnaya Polyana, then I was in Moscow,\nwhere I did not make one entry. At the end of November I went to\nPirogovo. I returned on the first and since that time have not been\nquite well--the small of my back ached and still aches, and lately\nI have had something like bilious fever. It is the second day that\nI am better.\n\nAll this time I have been occupied exclusively with _Resurrection_.[374]\nI have had some communications about the Dukhobors,[375] an innumerable\npile of letters. Kolechka Gay is with me, with whom it is a rest to\nbe.... I am calm in the fashion of an old man. And that is all.\n\nThere is quite a lot to write out. I am going to write it out on the\npages I skipped. Lately I feel as if my interest in _Resurrection_\nhas weakened, and I joyously feel other, more important, interests,\nin the understanding of life and death. Much seems clear.\n\n\n\nMade an entry, the 2nd of January. To-day, _Feb. 21_. _Moscow._\n\nMore than six weeks that I have made no entries. Am all the time\nin Moscow. At first _Resurrection_ went well, then I cooled off\nentirely.[376] I wrote a letter to the non-commissioned officer[377]\nand to the Swedish papers.[378] For about three days I have again\ntaken up _Resurrection_. Am advancing.\n\nStudents\u2019 strike. They are trying to drag me in all the time.[379]\nI am counselling them to hold themselves passively, but I do not\nfeel like writing letters to them.\n\n... As to me--my back is better. There is living with us, an\ninteresting and live Frenchman, Sinet,--the first religious\nFrenchman.[380] There is very much that I ought to write out. Have\nbeen in a very bad mood; now all right.\n\n_Feb. 22. Moscow._\n\n\n\n_June 26. Yasnaya Polyana._\n\nFour months that I have made no entries. I will not say I have lived\nbadly all this time. I have worked and am working diligently on\n_Resurrection_. There is much that is good, there is that, in the\nname of which I write. During these days I have been gravely ill;\nnow well....\n\nDifficult relations because of the printing and translating of\n_Resurrection_,[381] but most of the time am calm.\n\nNeglected correspondence. They continue sending money for the\nfamine-stricken, but I can do nothing else but send it to them\nthrough the post.[382] Kolichka is with me helping me in the work.\n\n...\n\nI continue to write out from my note-book:\n\n14) Nearing the place of destination, one thinks more and more often\nof that place to which one is nearing. Thus also while nearing death,\nthe change of destination.\n\n15) Only always to remember that there is no other meaning in life,\nno other way of finding the joy of life, but through fulfilling His\nwill. And how peacefully and joyously one could live!\n\n16) In time of illness, to fulfil His will by preparing oneself for\nthe going over into another form.\n\n17) It seems to us that the real labour is the labour on something\nexternal: to make, to collect something; property, houses, cattle,\nfruit; but to labour on one\u2019s own soul--that is just phantasy. And\nyet every other labour except on one\u2019s own soul, the enlarging of\nthe habits of good, every other labour is a _bagatelle_.\n\n18) They do not obey God, but adore Him. It is better not to adore,\nbut to obey.\n\n19) No matter what the work you are doing, be always ready to drop\nit. And plan it, so as to be able to leave it.\n\n20) The machine ... is a terrible machine. If we would have clearly\nunderstood its danger, we would never have permitted it to be formed.\n\n21) It seems strange and immoral that a writer, an artist, seeing\nthe suffering of people, sympathises less than he observes, in order\nto reproduce this suffering. But that is not immoral. The suffering\nof one personality is an insignificant thing in comparison with that\nspiritual effect, if it is a good one, which a work of art will\nproduce.\n\n22) Humanity, it is an enormous animal who seeks and cannot find what\nit needs. Very slowly, sensations call forth emotions, and emotions\nare transmitted to the brain and the brain calls forth acts. The\nactivity of the liberals, Socialists, revolutionaries, are attempts\nto galvanise, to compel the animal to act by arousing its motor\nnerves and muscles. But there is one organ which does everything when\nit is not impaired; in the animal it is the brain, in the people,\nreligion.\n\n23) I am depressed and I ask God to help me. But my work is to serve\nGod and not that He should serve me.\n\n24) An individual, personal life is an illusion. There is no such\nlife; there is only function, a tool, for something.\n\n25) ... is vestigial, having no application, like the appendix.\n\n26) We complain at our depressed spirits, but they are necessary.\nMan cannot stay on that height to which he sometimes rises; but man\nrises and then hypnotises himself for the time of his depression and\nin the time of his depression he already acts from the view-point that\nwas disclosed to him in the moment of rising. If only to know how\nto make use of those moments of rising and to know how to hypnotise\noneself!\n\n27) The evil of the world, its cause is very simple. Every one seeks\n_midi \u00e0 quatorze heures_--now in the economic system, now in the\npolitical. I just now read the discussions in the German parliament,\non how to keep the peasants from running to the cities. But the\nsolution of all problems is one and no one recognises it and it does\nnot even seem to be of interest to them. But the solution is one,\nclear and undoubted: ... The salvation is one: the destruction of\nfalse teaching.\n\n28) The difference between people: N thinks about death, and that\ndoes not lead him farther than the question of how and to whom he\nshould leave his money, where and how be buried. And Pascal also\nthinks about death.\n\n29) ...\n\n30) There is no future. It is made by us.\n\n31) The infinity of time and space is not a sign of the greatness\nof the human mind, but on the contrary, it is a sign of its\nincompleteness, of its inevitable falsity.\n\n32) We think of the future, we build it; but nothing future is\nimportant, because the important thing is to do the creative work of\nlove, which can be done under every possible condition; and therefore\nit is altogether indifferent, what the future will be.\n\n33) We get angry at circumstances, are pained, wish to change them,\nbut all possible circumstances are nothing else than indications as\nto how to act in different spheres. If you are in need, you must\nwork, if in prison--think, and if in wealth, free yourself ... etc.\n\nIt is just like a horse getting angry with the road on which he is\nbeing led.\n\n34) The press--that is a lie: _with a vengeance_.[383]\n\n35) Everything is divided. Only God unites us, living in everything.\nThat is why He is love.\n\n36) The conception of God to a religious man, is continuously\ndestroyed and being replaced by a new, higher conception.\n\n37) ...--is not only the loss of labour, of lives, but the loss of\nthe good.\n\n38) With many people it is possible to live only when you treat\nthem as you would a horse: not to take them into consideration, not\nreproaching them, not suggesting, but only finding a _modus vivendi_.\nIt is about them: \u201cNot to cast pearls\u201d ... It is terrible, but\nwithout this rule, it would be worse.\n\n39) Is it possible to imagine to oneself a Socialist working-man\nwith faith in the Iversk Ikon? Then, first of all, there must be a\nreligious emancipation.\n\n40) We are all agreed that only he is free who has overcome passion,\nand yet knowing this, we seriously trouble ourselves with the freeing\nof people who are full of passions.\n\n41) A rational conviction can never be complete. A full conviction\ncan only be irrational, especially with women.\n\n42) Answer good for evil and you destroy in an evil man all pleasure\nwhich he receives from evil.\n\n43) God is love. We know God only in love, which unites everything.\nYou know God in yourself through the striving towards this union.\n\n44) One continually thinks that the good will be good for him. But\nthe good is, or it is not--it is not something that _will be_.\n\n45) The important thing lies in thoughts. Thoughts are the beginning\nof everything. And thoughts can be directed. And therefore the\nprincipal task of perfection is--to work on thoughts.\n\n_June 27. If I live. Y. P._\n\n\n\n_To-day July 4th. Y. P._\n\nAll this time I have been ill with my usual stomach sickness. The\nwork which absorbed me very much, has stopped.\n\nChrist as a myth;[384] and Kenworthy\u2019s book, a rational exposition\nof the life of Christ. The first is better. There is need of a\nphilosophy of moral economy, i.e., of religious truth. There is such\na thing.\n\nI have had many good thoughts, being ill and nearing death. I think\noften with pain of brother S.\n\nI have noted down the 4th:\n\n1) The government destroys faith, but faith is necessary. Some\nviolating themselves believe in the miraculous, in the absurd;\nothers in science. But in which? In the contemporary. But in the\ncontemporary, there is 99/100 of lie and error. In every contemporary\nscience there are lies. Truth revealed by God is of course the right,\nit is religion; and truth obtained by the reason of man, by science,\nis also of course, the right. But the matter lies in recognising\nwhat is discovered by God and what has been gained by human reason.\n\n2) Death is the destruction of those organs by means of which I\nperceive the world as it appears in this life; it is the destruction\nof that glass through which I looked and a change to another.\n\n3) Educated people using their education not for the enlightenment\nand freeing of the working-classes, but for befogging them, are\nlike workers using their strength not for sustaining life but for\ndestroying it. These are the intellectual Pugachevs, Stenka Razins,\nonly a thousand times more dangerous.\n\n_July 5. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day September 28. Y. P._\n\nHave worked all the time on _Resurrection_; now I have stumbled on\nthe third part. It is long since I have made no progress.\n\n... I have wrought for myself a calm which is not to be disturbed:\nnot to speak and to know that this is necessary; that it is under\nthese conditions one ought to live.\n\nThere are here Ilya, Sonya[385] with the children, Andrusha with\nhis wife, Masha with her husband.\n\nI am thinking more and more often about the philosophic definition of\nspace and time. To-day, if I have time, I am going to write it out.\n\nI read an interesting book about Christ never having been, that it\nwas a myth.[386] The probabilities that it is right--there are as\nmany _for_ it, as there are _against_.\n\nYesterday with the help of Masha I answered all the letters; many\nremained unanswered. I am still ill; rarely a day without pain. I am\ndissatisfied with myself, also morally. I have let myself go very\nmuch--I do not work physically and I am occupied with myself, with\nmy health. How difficult it is to bear sickness resignedly, to go\nunto death without resistance--and one must.\n\nI have been thinking during this time:\n\n1) Women demanding for themselves the work of man and the same\nfreedom, mostly demand for themselves unconsciously the freedom for\nlicence, and as a result go down much lower than the family, though\naiming to stand higher than it.\n\n2) What is this memory which makes from me one being, from childhood\nunto death? What is this faculty connecting separate beings in time,\ninto one? One ought to ask not what is it that unites, but what\ndivides, these beings. The faculty of time divides, beyond which\nI cannot see myself. I am one indivisible being from birth until\ndeath; but to manifest and to know myself, I must do so in time. I\nam now such as I was and will be; but one who had to and even will\nmanifest myself and know myself in time. I have to manifest myself\nand know myself in time--for communion with other beings and for\ninfluencing them.\n\n3) I plucked a flower and threw it away. There were so many of\nthem, it was no pity. We do not value these inimitable beauties of\nliving beings and destroy them, having no pity not only for plants,\nbut for animals, human people. There are so many of them. Culture,\ncivilisation, is nothing else than the ruin of these beauties and\nthe replacing them ... with what? The saloon, the theatre ...\n\n4) They reproach you with malice, debauchery, lies, thefts, bring\nproof, etc. What is to be done? Answer the question with What time\nis it? Are you going to take a swim? Have you seen N N, etc. That\nis the best and only means of bearing these accusations and even\nclearing them up.\n\n5) The dearest thing on earth is the good relation between people;\nbut the establishment of these relations is not the result of\nconversation--on the contrary, they become spoiled by conversation.\nSpeak as little as possible, and especially with those people with\nwhom you want to be in good relation.\n\n6) In eating, I destroy the limits between myself and other beings;\ncreating children, I do almost the same thing. The results of the\ndestruction of material limits are visible; the results of the\ndestruction of the spiritual limits and the union resulting from\nthis are invisible, only because they are broader.\n\n7) \u201cPeople are divided (divided from other beings), and this appears\nto them as space. The fact that they are inseparable in essence\nappears to them as time.\u201d That is the way I have noted it. Space\ndivides, time unites. But this is untrue. Both time and space are\ndividers and they form the impossibility of realising unity. (Unclear,\nbut I understand. I will make it clear later.)\n\n8) Brotherhood is natural, proper to people. Non-brotherhood,\ndivisions, are carefully nurtured.\n\n9) Sometimes one feels like complaining childishly to some one (to\nGod), to beg for help. Is this feeling good? It is not good: it is a\nweakness, a lack of faith. That which more than anything resembles\nfaith--the beseeching prayer, is in truth a lack of faith--a lack\nof faith that there is no evil, that there is nothing to ask for,\nthat if things are going badly with you, then it only demonstrates\nthat you ought to improve yourself, and that there is going on, that\nvery thing which ought to be, and under which you ought to do that\nwhich has to be done.\n\n10) Just now I wrote this coldly, understanding with difficulty that\nstate in which you wish to live for God alone, and I see through\nthis how there are people who absolutely never understand this, not\nknowing any other kind of life besides the worldly, for people. I\nknow this state, but cannot just now call it up in myself, but only\nremember it.\n\n11) Everything which lives without consciousness, as I live when I\nsleep, as I lived in the womb of my mother, lives not materially,\ni.e., not knowing matter, but lives. But life is something spiritual.\nEndeavouring to remember my state before consciousness, on the\nthreshold of consciousness, I know only the feeling of depression,\nsatisfaction, pleasure, suffering, but there is no conception of\nmy body or of another\u2019s. The conception of body (matter) manifests\nitself only when consciousness is manifested. The conception of body\nmanifests itself only, because consciousness gives understanding of\nthe presence in one\u2019s self of the basis of everything (spiritual).\nAnd at the same time, as I know that I am the basis of everything,\nI know also that I am not the whole basis, but a part of it. And it\nis this being a part of a whole, these limits separating me from the\nwhole, I know through my body: through my own body and the bodies\nsurrounding me.\n\n12) If you desire something, if you are afraid of something, that\nmeans that you do not believe in that God of love which is in you.\nIf you had believed in Him, then you could not have wanted anything\nor have been afraid, because all desires of that God which lives in\nyou are being always fulfilled, because God is all-powerful; and\nyou would never have been afraid, because for God there is nothing\nterrible.\n\n13) Not to think that you know in what the will of God really lies,\nbut to be humble; and then you will be loving. And the will of God\nin relation to you, lies only in this.\n\n14) People convincing others that reason cannot be the guide of life\nare those in whom reason is so perverted, that they clearly see that\nthey have been led into a swamp.\n\n15) The only instance where a man can and ought to occupy himself\nwith himself, is when he feels unhappy. Unhappiness is the best\ncondition for perfection, the ascent to the higher steps. Unhappiness\nis a sign of one\u2019s own imperfection. One ought to rejoice at these\ninstances: it is the preparation of one\u2019s self for work, a spiritual\nfood.\n\n16) Now I am an ordinary man, L. N. (Tolstoi), and animal, and now\nI am the messenger of God. I am all the time the same man, but now\nI am the public and now I am the judge himself with the chain,\nfulfilling the highest responsibilities. One must put on the chain\nmore often.\n\nLatterly I have got out of the habit, have weakened. I have only\njust now remembered.\n\n17) Man is a being beyond time and beyond space who is conscious of\nhimself in the conditions of space and time.\n\n18) Games, cards, women, races, are alluring because they have been\nthought out for the _blas\u00e9s_. It is not for nothing that the wise\nteachers have forbidden them. Artificial play is corrupting. They\nare needed for the _blas\u00e9_, but the simple working people need the\nvery simplest plays without preparation.\n\n19) Only then will you produce true love, when you will resist\noffence, overcome offence with love, will love your enemy.\n\n20) They desire, they are excited, they suffer only for trifles or for\nbad things. The good things are accomplished without excitement. It is\nfrom this that the word heart means malice. (_Serdit_, to get angry,\nto put into a passion, comes from _sertse_, the heart.--_Translator\u2019s\nnote._)\n\n\n\n_To-day Oct. 2. Y. P._\n\nI am still ill,--I am not suffering, but I feel threatened constantly.\nMorally I am better--I remember God in myself more often, and\ndeath. It seems to me I have come out of the difficult place in\n_Resurrection_.... Kolichka went away. Sonya arrived--she is ill.\n\nI am continuing to write out from the notebooks:\n\n1) I have made this note: Space comes from the consciousness of\nlimits, from the consciousness of one\u2019s own separateness; I am one,\nand the world is another. And in the world are similar beings with\nlimits: 2, 3, 4, ... to infinity.\n\nThese beings can find place only in space. From the consciousness\nof limits comes also time. I have thought this out again and can\nexpress it in this way: Separateness, the non-all-comprehensiveness\nof our _selves_, is expressed in recognising a part of moving matter\nas ourselves. The part of matter which we recognise as ourselves\ngives us an understanding of space; that part of motion which we\nrecognise as ourselves gives us a conception of time.\n\nOr, in other words: We cannot imagine a part of matter in any other\nway than in space. To imagine a part of motion, we cannot in any other\nway than in time. Space comes from the impossibility of imagining two\nor many objects beyond time. Time comes from the impossibility of\nimagining two, many objects beyond space. Space is the possibility\nof representing to one\u2019s self two, many objects at one and the same\ntime. Time is the possibility of representing to one\u2019s self two,\nmany objects, in one and the same space (one goes out, the other\nenters).\n\nDivisions cannot be in one space, without time. If there were no time\n(motion) all objects in space would be unmoving and they would form\nnot many objects, but one space, undivided and filled with matter. If\nthere were no space, there could be no motion and our \u201cself\u201d would\nnot be separated by anything from all the rest. My body understood\nby me as my \u201cself,\u201d and understanding all the rest, is that part\nof matter which moves for a definite time and occupies a definite\nspace.\n\n(Not good, unclear, perhaps even untrue.)\n\n2) Anarchy does not mean the absence of institutions, but only the\nabsence of those institutions to which people are compelled to submit\nby force, but those institutions to which people submit themselves\nvoluntarily, rationally. It seems to me that otherwise there cannot\nbe established and ought not to be, a society of beings endowed with\nreason.\n\n3) \u201cWhy is it that after sin, suffering does not follow that person\nwho committed the sin? Then he would see what ought not to be\ndone\u201d--because people live not separately but in society and if\nevery one suffered from the sin of each one, then every one would\nhave to resist it.\n\n4) Conscience is the memory of society assimilated by separate\nindividuals.\n\n5) In old age you experience the same thing as on a journey. At first\nyour thoughts are on that place from which you are going, then on\nthe journey itself, and then on the place to which you are going.\n\nI experience this more and more often, thinking of death.\n\n6) It is true that a great sin might be beneficial, by calling forth\nrepentance before God, independently from human judgment. Such a\nsin leads one away from the realm of human judgment, from vanity,\nwhich masters man and hides from him his relation to God.[387]\n\n7) The physical growth is only a preparation of material for spiritual\nwork, the service to God and man which begins with the withering of\nthe body.\n\n\n\n_To-day Oct. 13. Y. P._\n\nI am still not fully well. It is as it ought to be. But that does\nnot hinder from living, thinking and moving towards a fixed goal.\n_Resurrection_ advances poorly. Have sent away four chapters, I think\nnot passable by the censor, but at least I think I have settled on one\npoint, and that I won\u2019t make any more great important changes. I do\nnot cease thinking of brother Sergei, but because of the weather and\nill health I cannot make up my mind to go.... Sonya was in Moscow and\nis going again to-day. To-day I had a kind of intellectual idleness,\nnot only to-day, but all these latter days. For _Resurrection_ I\nhave thought out good scenes. Concerning separateness which appears\nto us as matter in space and movement in time, I am thinking more\nand more often and more and more clearly.\n\nI have also received Westrup\u2019s pamphlets from America about the\nmoney,[388] which struck me by explaining everything that was unclear\nin financial questions and reducing everything as it ought to be,\nto violence.... If I get time I will write it out. I have another\nimportant, joyous thought, although an old one, but which came to\nme as a new one and which makes me very happy, namely:\n\n1) The principal cause of family unhappiness--is because people are\nbrought up to think that marriage gives happiness. Sex attraction\ninduces to marriage and it takes the form of a promise, a hope, for\nhappiness, which is supported by public opinion and literature; but\nmarriage is not happiness, but always suffering, which man pays for\nthe satisfaction of his sex desire. Suffering in the form of lack of\nfreedom, slavery, over-satiety, disgust of all kinds of spiritual and\nphysical defects of the mate which one has to bear; maliciousness,\nstupidity, falsity, vanity, drunkenness, laziness, miserliness,\ngreed and corruption--all defects which are especially difficult\nto bear when not in oneself but in another person, and from which\none suffers as if they were one\u2019s own; and the same with physical\ndefects: ugliness, uncleanliness, stench, sores, insanity, etc.,\nwhich are even more difficult to bear when not in oneself. All this,\nor at least something of this, will always be and to bear them will\nbe difficult for every one. But that which ought to compensate: the\ncare, satisfaction, aid, all these things are taken as a matter of\ncourse; while all defects as if they were not a matter of course, and\nthe more one expected happiness from marriage the more one suffers.\n\nThe principal cause of this suffering, is that one expects that which\ndoes not happen, and does not expect that which always happens.\nAnd therefore escape from this suffering is only by not expecting\njoys, but by expecting the bad, being prepared to bear them. If you\nexpect all that which is described in the beginning of \u201cThe Thousand\nand One Nights,\u201d if you expect drunkenness, stench, disgusting\ndiseases--then obstinacy, untruthfulness, even drunkenness, can, if\nnot exactly be forgiven, at least be a matter of no suffering and\none can rejoice that there is absent that which might have been,\nthat which is described in \u201cThe Thousand and One Nights\u201d: that there\nis no insanity, cancer, etc. And then everything that is good will\nbe appreciated.\n\nBut is it not in this, that the principal means of happiness in\ngeneral lie? And is it not therefore that people are so often unhappy,\nespecially the rich ones? Instead of recognising oneself in the\ncondition of a slave who has to labour for himself and for others,\nand to labour in the way that the master wishes, people imagine\nthat every kind of pleasure awaits them, that their whole work lies\nin enjoying them. How not be unhappy under this circumstance?\nThen everything: work and obstacles and illnesses--the necessary\nconditions of life--appear as unexpected, terrible calamities. The\npoor, therefore, are less often unhappy: they know beforehand that\nbefore them lie labour, struggle, obstacles, and therefore they\nappreciate everything which gives them joy. But the rich, expecting\nonly joys, see a calamity in every obstacle, and do not notice and\ndo not appreciate those goods which they are enjoying. \u201cBlessed be\nthe poor, for they shall be comforted; the hungry, for they shall\nbe fed; and woe unto ye, the rich.\u201d\n\n_Oct. 14. Y. P. If I live._\n\n\n\n_Oct. 27. Y. P._\n\nWe are living alone: ... Olga,[389] Andrusha, Julie[390] and Andrei\nDmitrievich.[391] Everything is all right, but I am often indisposed:\nthere are more ill days than healthy ones and therefore I write\nlittle. Sent off 19 chapters,[392] very much unfinished. I am working\non the end.\n\nI have thought much, and perhaps well:\n\n1) About the freedom of the will, _simply_: Man is free in everything\nspiritual, in love: he can love or not love, more and less. In\neverything remaining he is _not_ free, consequently in everything\nmaterial. Man can direct and not direct his strength towards the\nservice of God. In this one thing (but it is an enormous thing),\nhe is free: he can pull or be driven.\n\n2) ... of the workers, prostitution and many other things, all this\nis a necessary, inevitable consequence and condition of the pagan\norder of life in which we live, and to change either one or many\nof these, is impossible. What is to be done? Change the very order\nof this life, that on which it stands. How? By this, in the first\nplace, by not taking part in this order, in that which supports it\n... etc. And, second, to do that in which man alone is absolutely\nfree: to change selfishness in his soul and everything which flows\nfrom it: malice, greed, violence, and everything else by love and by\nall that which flows from it: reasonableness, humility, kindness and\nthe rest. It is impossible to turn back the wheel of a machine by\nforce,--they are all bound together with cogs and other wheels--but\nto let the steam go which will move them or not let it go is easy;\nthus it is terribly difficult to change the very outer conditions\nof life, but to be good or bad is easy. But this being good or evil\nchanges all the outer conditions of life.\n\n3) Our life is the freeing of the enclosed--the expansion of the\nlimits in which the illimitable principle acts. This expansion of\nthe limits appears to us as matter in motion. The limit of expansion\nin space appears to us as matter. That part of matter which we\nrecognise as ourselves we call our body; the other part we call the\nworld. The limit of expansion in time we call motion. That part of\nmotion which we recognise as ourselves we call our life; the other\npart we call the life of the world. All of life is the expansion of\nthese limits, the being freed from them.\n\n(All unclear, inexact.)\n\n\n\n_Nov. 20. Moscow._\n\nMuch I have not written out. I am in Moscow.... For 70 years I have\nbeen lowering and lowering my opinion of women and still it has to\nbe lowered more and more. The woman question! How can there not be a\nwoman question? Only not in this, how women should begin to direct\nlife, but in this, how they should stop ruining it.\n\nAll morning I have not been writing and have been thinking two things:\n\n1) We speak of the end of life--although it is true, not the one which\nwe understand, but the one which would be understood by the highest\nreason. The purpose is just the same as the cause. The cause is\nlooking backward, the purpose is looking forward, but the cause, the\nconception of the cause (and therefore of an end) appears only then\nwhen there is time, i.e., a being is limited in his conceptions by\ntime. And therefore for God, and for man living a Godly life, there\nis no purpose. There is life in which consciousness grows (?[393])\nand that is all.\n\n2) A drop fusing with a great drop, a pool, ceases to be and begins\nto be.\n\n\n\n_To-day December 18. Moscow._\n\nAlmost a month I have not written. Have been severely ill.[394] Had\nacute pain for one day, then a respite, and weakness. And death\nbecame more than natural, almost desirable. And so it has remained\nnow, when I am getting well--that is a new, joyous step.\n\nFinished _Resurrection_. Not good, uncorrected, hurried; but it has\nfallen from me and I am no longer interested. Serezha is here, Masha\nand her husband, Maria Alexandrovna.\n\nI am all right. Have not yet begun to write anything. More than\nanything I am occupied with ______,[395] but I have no desire for\nanything very much, am resting. Wrote letters.\n\nI am attempting to write out my notes:\n\n1) (Trifles) about many-voiced music. It is necessary that the voice\nsay something, but here there are many voices and each one says\nnothing.\n\n2) One of the principal causes of evil in our life is the faith\ncultivated in our Christian world, the faith in the crude Hebrew\npersonal God, when the principal sign (if one can express it so)\nof God is that he is not limited, by anything, consequently not\npersonal.\n\n3) One should conquer death--not death, but the fear of death coming\nfrom a lack of understanding of life. If only you understand life\nand its necessarily good purpose--death--then you cease to fear it,\nto resist it. And when you cease to fear it, you cease to serve\nyourself, a mortal, and you will serve an immortal: God, from whom\nyou came and to whom you are going.\n\n4) Matter is everything which is accessible to our senses. Science\nforces us to suppose matter inaccessible to our senses. In this\nrealm, there can be beings composed of that matter and perceiving\nit, matter inaccessible to our senses. I do not think that there are\nsuch beings; I only think that our matter and our senses perceiving\nit, are only one of _innumerable_[396] possibilities of life.\n\n5) \u201cI am a slave, I am a worm, I am a Czar, I am a God.\u201d[397] Slave\nand worm true, but Czar and God untrue. It is in vain that people\nattribute a special significance and greatness to his reason. The\nlimits of human reason are very narrow and are seen at once. These\nlimits are the infinity of space and time. Man sees the final answers\nto the questions he asks himself, recede and recede in time and also\nin space, and in both these realms.\n\n6) I read about Englehardt\u2019s book: _Evolution, the Progress of\nCruelty_.[398] I think that here there is a great deal of truth.\nCruelty has increased mainly because division of labour has been\nbrought to pass, which assists the increase of the material wealth\nof man. Every one speaks of the benefits of the division of\nlabour, not seeing that the inevitable condition of the division\nof labour, besides the _mechanising_ of man, is also the removing\nof those conditions which call forth a human, moral communion\nbetween people. If we are doing the same work, as agricultural\nlabourers, then naturally there would be established between us an\nexchange of service, a mutual aid, but between the shepherd and the\nfactory-weaver, there can be no communion.\n\n(This seems untrue; I shall think it over.)\n\n7) What would God\u2019s attitude be towards prayer, if there were such a\nGod to whom one could pray? Just the same as would be the attitude\nof the owner of a house where water had been introduced and to whom\nthe inhabitants would come to ask for water. The water has been\nintroduced. You have only to turn the tap. In the same way everything\nhas been prepared for men which is necessary to them, and God is\nnot at fault that instead of making use of the clean water which\nwas there, some of the tenants carry water from a stagnant pond,\nothers fall into despair from lack of water and beg for that which\nhad been given them in such abundance.\n\n8) ...\n\n9) One can by personal experience verify the truth, that God, a\npart of Whom is my own _self_, is love, and by the experimental way\nconvince one\u2019s self of this truth. As soon as love is violated, life\nends. There is no desire to do anything, everything is depressing,\nand on the contrary, as soon as love is restored, as soon as you\nhave made peace with those whom you quarrelled, forgiven, received\nforgiveness--then you wish to live, to act, everything seems easy\nand possible.\n\n10) It would be good to express even in approximate numbers and then\ngraphically, that quantity of labour, of working days, which rich\npeople use up in their lives. Approximately more or less, this could\nbe expressed by money. If I spend 10 roubles a day, that means that\n20 men are working constantly for me. (Unclear, not what I want\nto say.)\n\n11) They generally say: \u201cThat is very deep, and therefore not to be\nfully understood.\u201d This is untrue. On the contrary. Everything that\nis deep is clear to transparency. Just as water is murky on top,\nbut the deeper it is, the more transparent.\n\n12) One small part of people, about 20 per cent., is insane by\nitself, possessed by a mania of egoism, which reaches to the point of\nconcentration of all spiritual strengths on oneself; another, the\ngreater part, almost 80 per cent., is hypnotised by the scientific,\nby the artistic ... and principally ... hypnotism, and also does not\nmake use of its reason. Therefore progress in the world is always\nattained by the insane possessed by the same kind of insanity by\nwhich the majority is possessed.\n\n13) I experience the feeling of peace, of satisfaction, when I am\nill, when there takes place in me the destruction of the limits of\nmy personality. As soon as I get well I experience the opposite:\nrestlessness, dissatisfaction. Are these not obvious signs that\nthe destruction of the limits of personality in this world, is the\nentrance of life into new limits?\n\nI have finished.\n\n_December 19. Moscow. If I live._\n\n\n\n_To-day December 20. Moscow._\n\nMy health is not good. My spiritual condition is good, ready\nfor death. In the evenings there are many people. I tire. In\nnumber 51,[399] _Resurrection_ did not appear and I was sorry. This\nis bad.\n\nI thought out a philosophic definition of life. To-day I thought\nwell about _The Coupon_.[400] Perhaps I shall write it out.\n\n\n\n\n_Notes_\n\n\n\n\nNOTES TO THE TEXT\n\nBY V. G. CHERTKOV\n\n\n[1] With the words, \u201cI continue,\u201d Tolstoi begins a new note-book of\nthe Journal; this note-book presupposes another which the editors\nhave only in separate fragments. The previous note-book ended with\nthe following note:\n\n\u201cOctober 8, 1895, Y. P.\n\n\u201c(I am beginning an entry to-day with just what I finished two\ndays ago.)\n\n\u201cI have only a short time left to live and I feel terribly like\nsaying so much: I feel like saying what we can and must and cannot\nhelp believing--about the cruelty of deception which people impose\nupon themselves; the economic, political and religious deception,\nand about the seduction of stupefying oneself--wine, and tobacco\nconsidered so innocent; and about marriage and about education and\nabout the horrors.... Everything has ripened and I want to speak\nabout it. So that there is no time for performing those artistic\nstupidities which I was prepared to do in _Resurrection_.\n\n\u201cBut just now I asked myself: but can I write, knowing that no one\nwill read? And I experienced something of disappointment; but only\nfor a time; that means that there was some love of fame in it. But\nthere was also the principal thing in it--the need before God.\n\n\u201cFather, help me to follow the same path of love. And I thank Thee.\nFrom Thee flows everything.\u201d\n\n[2] In the original, merely the initials of the phrase are used.\nThus Tolstoi would often finish what he had written during the day\nwith I. I L. (If I live), marking ahead in this fashion the date of\nthe following day.\n\n[3] Countess Sophia Andreevna Tolstoi, born Behrs, 1844, wife of\nTolstoi. In the Journal, Tolstoi calls her S., S. A., or Sonya.\n\n[4] \u201cCatechism\u201d Tolstoi called that systematic exposition of his\nphilosophy in the form of questions and answers which he had begun\nabout this time. In the text, he calls this work, The Declaration of\nFaith, or simply, The Declaration. (See entries December 23, \u201995,\nand further.) In the following year, 1896, Tolstoi abandoning the\ncatechism form, continued and finished the work, which, in 1898, was\npublished under the title _Christian Doctrine_ by _The Free Press_\n(_Swobodnoe Slovo_) issued by A. and V. Chertkov, England, and later\nin 1905, it appeared also in Russia.\n\n[5] Tolstoi never returned to the continuation and revision of the\nplot of the story _Who is Right?_ which had been begun by him about\nthis time, and so it has remained unfinished. The beginning of the\nstory as it was written by Tolstoi, is printed in his collected\nworks (see the full collection of works by Tolstoi, edited by P.\nBiriukov, published by Sytin, 1913).\n\n[6] I.e., with Katiusha Maslov and not with Nekhliudov, as the first\nform of the novel was begun.\n\n[7] John C. Kenworthy, an English Methodist minister, a writer\nand lecturer, who shared at that time the opinions of Tolstoi\nand who founded in England an agricultural colony composed of his\nco-thinkers. The author of the work, _Tolstoi, His Life and Works_,\nLondon, 1902. There was printed abroad in the Russian Language in\nthe journal of _The Free Press_ (1899, No. 2, England) his _The\nAnatomy of Poverty_. They were lectures to the English workingmen\non political economy, which struck Tolstoi favourably and which he\nincluded in the manuscript which was then being issued under the\ntitle of _Archives of L. N. Tolstoi, No. II_, and to which he even\nwrote an introduction. In later life, Kenworthy fell ill of nervous\nprostration and was taken to a sanatorium.\n\n[8] Albert Shkarvan, a Slav, who shared Tolstoi\u2019s opinions. An army\nsurgeon in the hospital in Kashai (Hungary), he resigned from this\nservice in February, 1895, for religious reasons, for which he was\nimprisoned for four months.\n\n[9] The Russian sect of Dukhobors, living in the Caucasus in 1895, to\nthe number of several thousand souls, upon the suggestion of their\nleader, Peter Vasilevich Verigin, who was at that time in exile, gave\nnotice to the authorities that they would no longer take the oath or\nserve in military service, and, in a word, would no longer take any\npart in governmental violence, and in the night from the 28th to the\n29th of June of that year, burned all their weapons. Cossacks were\nsent against them and after some executions, two hundred were put in\nprison, many were exiled from their native land and forced to live\nin Armenian, Georgian and Tartar villages in the Province of Tiflis;\nabout two or three families in a village, without land and with the\nprohibition against intercourse among themselves. Those Dukhobors\nwho remained in active service and refused to serve, were sent away\nto disciplinary regiments. (See _Dukhobors_, by P. Biriukov, 1908,\npublishers, _Posrednik_; besides there is much material pertaining\nto the history and the movement of the Dukhobors printed in various\nissues of _The Free Press_.)\n\n[10] The manager of the Moscow Little Theatre, Walts, used to call on\nTolstoi for the purpose of receiving information about the staging\nof his drama, _The Power of Darkness_.\n\n[11] Ivan Ivanovich Bochkarev (died 1915), former revolutionary\nSlavophile who suffered much for his convictions. He became acquainted\nwith the group of people around Tolstoi because of his belief in\nvegetarianism, to which he arrived independently of any one. In his\npersonal conversations with Tolstoi, Bochkarev disputed his religious\nconvictions, heatedly denying all his religious metaphysics. At this\ntime he lived near the village of Ovsiannikovo, six versts from\nYasnaya Polyana, on the estate of Tolstoi\u2019s daughter, T. L. Sukhotin.\n\n[12] Prince Nicholai Leonidovich Obolensky, the grandnephew of\nTolstoi--later married to Tolstoi\u2019s daughter, Maria Lvovna.\n\n[13] Maria Alexandrovna Schmidt, an old friend, who shared Tolstoi\u2019s\nopinions and whose personality and whole life, Tolstoi esteemed very\nhighly. In the Journal of February 18, 1909, he wrote, \u201cI never knew\nand do not know any woman spiritually higher than Maria Alexandrovna.\u201d\nIn the eighties, when class-teacher in the Nicholaievsky Orphan Asylum\nin Moscow, Mme. Schmidt made the acquaintance of the forbidden works\nof Tolstoi, upon which she left the asylum and went to live on the\nland, and up to her death supported herself by the labours of her\nown hand. The last ten years of her life she lived near the village\nof Ovsiannikovo, on the estate of T. L. Sukhotin, procuring her\nlivelihood by the sale of the berries and vegetables from her own\ngarden and the dairy products from her cows. She died October 18,\n1911.\n\n[14] With Bochkarev.\n\n[15] Alexander Nikiphorovich Dunaev, an old friend of the Tolstoi\nfamily, later one of the directors of the Moscow Commercial Bank.\n\n[16] Constantin Nicholaievich Zyabrev, nick-named \u201cBieli\u201d (White), a\npeasant from Yasnaya Polyana, who was also called by the villagers,\n\u201cthe Blessed.\u201d Tolstoi liked to speak with him. He lived in the\ngreatest poverty and never bothered about the next day. At the time\nof the visit, mentioned in the Journal, he was already near death\nand soon passed away. Some years before this, Tolstoi helped him to\nrebuild his cabin.\n\n[17] Dr. Ivan Romanovich Bazhenov, who lived at this time in\nVladivostok, sent Tolstoi his manuscript essay on the necessity of\ncalling an ecumenical council and asked his opinion on this question.\nIn the copy of the Journal at the disposal of the editors, and\nperhaps in the original of the Journal, it was written Bozhanov.\n\n[18] A letter from G. F. Van-Duyl from Amsterdam. In the letter of\nNovember 18th, Tolstoi answered his letter as follows:\n\n\u201cOnce a man has understood and is permeated with the consciousness\nthat his true happiness, the happiness of his eternal life, that\nwhich is not limited by this world, consists in the fulfilment of\nthe will of God and that against this will ... then no consideration\ncan force this man to act against his true happiness. And if there\nis an inner struggle and if, as in that case about which you spoke,\nfamily considerations come out on top, it only serves as a proof\nthat the true teaching of Christ was not understood and was accepted\nby him who could not follow it; this only proves that he wanted to\nappear as a Christian, but he was not so in reality.\u201d\n\n[19] Paul Ivanovich Biriukov, one of Tolstoi\u2019s nearest friends and\nfollowers, who later wrote his biography (two volumes, published by\n_Posrednik_, Moscow). Tolstoi often calls him Posha in the Journal.\n\n[20] The editors were unable to discover the title of this pamphlet.\n\n[21] Maria Vasilievna Siaskov, an amanuensis, who was employed for\nmany years in the publishing house of _Posrednik_.\n\n[22] Tatiana Andreevna Kuzminsky (born Behrs), a sister-in-law of\nTolstoi, wife of Senator A. M. Kuzminsky.\n\n[23] _Konevski_, this is the way Tolstoi called the novel,\n_Resurrection_, which he had begun then, the subject of which he\nadopted at the end of the eighties from stories told by the well-known\nCourt-worker, A. Th. Koni.\n\n[24] Arthur Schopenhauer (1788\u20131860), the great German philosopher.\nTolstoi evidently read the translation by Ph. V. Chernigovitz,\n_Aphorisms and Maxims_, in two parts, 1891\u20131892. Tolstoi, as early\nas 1869, wrote to A. A. Fet: \u201cDo you know what the present summer\nmeant to me? Continual enthusiasm over Schopenhauer and a pile\nof spiritual pleasures which I never have experienced before....\nSchopenhauer is one of the greatest geniuses among people.\u201d\n\n[25] That which was noted down in his pocket note-book--Tolstoi had\nthe habit of putting down thoughts which came to him and which seemed\nto him important in a pocket note-book which never left him. Later he\ncopied the most valuable thoughts into his Journal, revising, more\nor less, as he went along. In rewriting from the note-book Tolstoi\noften began the entry with these words, \u201cI have been thinking\u201d or\n\u201cI have it noted.\u201d\n\n[26] See Note 4.\n\n[27] This essay, entitled _Shameful_, pointing out the cruelty and\nsenselessness of corporal punishment which the law at that time\napplied to the peasants, was printed with omissions and alterations\nin the Russian newspapers and later abroad in full in _Leaflets of\nThe Free Press_, No. IV, England, 1899; later it was printed in\n_The Full Collected Works of L. N. Tolstoi_, published by Sytin,\nsubscribed and popular editions, volume XVIII.\n\n[28] In the Moscow Little Theatre.\n\n[29] N, a young artist living in the home of the Tolstois, after\nrefusing military service on account of religious convictions,\nwas placed in the military hospital in Moscow in the ward for the\ndiseases of the heart, where he was visited by Tolstoi. Later,\nvarious difficult experiences and spiritual changes led him to agree\nto military service....\n\n[30] Nicholai Alexeievitch Philosophov, father of Countess S. N.\nTolstoi, wife of Count I. L. Tolstoi.\n\n[31] A. A. Shkarvan sent Tolstoi his letter entitled \u201cWhy It Is\nImpossible to Serve as a Military Doctor.\u201d Later this letter, in\nrevised form, appeared in his book, _My Resignation from Military\nService. Notes of a Military Doctor_. (Published by _The Free Press_,\nEngland, 1898, Chapter IV.)\n\n[32] Maria Lvovna Tolstoi (1872\u20131906), second daughter of Tolstoi,\nafterwards married to Count N. L. Obolensky.\n\n[33] Count Ilya Lvovich Tolstoi (born 1866), second son of Tolstoi.\nHas written a book, _My Recollections_ (Moscow, 1914).\n\n[34] Vladimir Grigorevich Chertkov and his wife, Anna Constantinovna\n(born Dieterichs). V. G. Chertkov made the acquaintance of Tolstoi\nin 1883. For biographical information about him see under \u201cBiography\nof L. N. Tolstoy\u201d by P. Biriukov (Volume II, 1913) and also in the\npamphlet, _Tolstoi and Chertkov_, by P. A. Boulanger (Moscow, 1911)\nand in the essay of A. M. Khiriakov: \u201cWho Is Chertkov?\u201d (_Kievski\nMysl_, 1910, No. 333, December 2nd).\n\n[35] Soon Tolstoi began this drama (see entry of January 23, 1896),\nwhich he called _And Light Lights Up Darkness_. This drama, having\nto a great extent a biographic character, portrays the torturing\ncondition of a man who has gone through an inner religious crisis, and\nwho lives with his family which, not understanding him, interferes\nwith his attempts to change his life according to the truth revealed\nto him. This was first printed with a great many censor deletions in\n_The Posthumous Literary Works of L. N. Tolstoi_ (edited by A. L.\nTolstoi, 1911, Volume II).\n\n[36] The Englishman, John Manson, came to Tolstoi with a request for\nhis opinion on the collision between the United States and England\non account of the boundaries of Venezuela. Tolstoi answered by an\nextensive letter which was published under the title, \u201cPatriotism\nor Peace?\u201d and printed abroad (by Deibner in Berlin, and others.)\nIt was not printed in Russia.\n\n[37] Ernest Crosby (1856\u20131907), an American social-worker, a poet\nand writer. When he was a representative of the United States in the\nInternational Court in Egypt, he read Tolstoi\u2019s _On Life_, which\ncaused an upheaval in his soul. As a result, he left the Government\nservice and devoted his life to the propaganda of the social-religious\nviews of Tolstoi and the social-economic views of Henry George.\nHe founded The Social Reform League, the object of which was the\ndiscussing of the problems of reorganisation of contemporary life on\nthe basis of justice and equality, and the furthering of the actual\nrealisation of this reorganisation.\n\n[38] E. N. Drozhin, a district school teacher, in 1891, refused\nmilitary service at the recruiting in the city of Sudzha in the\nProvince of Kursk. He was sentenced to be sent to a disciplinary\nbattalion and stayed fifteen months in the Voronezh disciplinary\nbattalion. Here he fell ill of consumption and the doctors pronounced\nhim unfit to continue military service, upon which he was transferred\nto the state\u2019s prison to finish his sentence. He died in the Voronezh\nprison on January 27, 1894, from inflammation of the lungs which he\ncontracted at the time of his transfer ... from the disciplinary\nregiment to the prison. The story of his refusal from military\nservice is described in detail in the book by E. I. Popov: _Life and\nDeath of E. N. Drozhin, 1866\u20131894_, published by _The Free Press_,\nEngland, 1899. Tolstoi wrote an appendix to this book in which he\nexpressed the opinion that such people like Drozhin \u201cby their activity\nhelp....\u201d In reference to this article the well-known German writer,\nFrederick Spielhagen, printed an open letter to Count Leo Tolstoi in\nthe newspapers, in which he considered Tolstoi guilty of Drozhin\u2019s\ndeath, a useless one, according to Spielhagen, for the abolition\nof war and the establishment of universal peace. This letter was\ntranslated into Russian in 1896 and appeared as a separate pamphlet.\n\n[39] See Note 36.\n\n[40] A voluminous letter devoted to the problem of non-resistance to\nevil by violence and the relation of contemporary American writers\nto it.\n\n[41] Count Andrei Lvovich Tolstoi, born 1877, fourth son of Tolstoi.\nIn this year he served in the Tver military as a volunteer (before\nthe prescribed age).\n\n[42] Nicholai Michailovich Nagornov, husband of Tolstoi\u2019s niece,\nVarvara Valerianovna. In the letter to A. K. Chertkov of January 13,\n1896, Tolstoi wrote: \u201cWe had a death lately. Nagornov died, the\nhusband of my niece. She loved him passionately and they lived\ntogether remarkably happily ... no one knows anything of him, but\nthe good.... My heart feels solemn and good because of this death.\u201d\n\n[43] Fedior Kudinenko, a peasant, a co-thinker of Tolstoi, a former\n_gendarme_.\n\n[44] See note 29.\n\n[45] Dushan Petrovich Makovitsky (Du\u0161an Makovick\u00fd), a Slovak, who\nlater became one of the closest friends and followers of Tolstoi,\nspent six years in Yasnaya Polyana from the end of 1904 to the day\nTolstoi left, in the capacity of family doctor, and was near Tolstoi\nuntil the latter\u2019s death. At this time he lived in his native land,\nin Hungary, taking part in the publication of translations into the\nSlavonian of Tolstoi\u2019s books and of writers near to him in spirit.\nThe article here mentioned is \u201cInstances of Refusal from Military\nService among the Sect of the Nazarenes, in Hungary.\u201d Printed in\n_Leaflets of the Free Press_, England, 1898, No. I.\n\n[46] The Nazarenes, a sect spread in Hungary, Chorvatia, Serbia,\nBulgaria, Switzerland and the United States, whose members refuse\nmilitary service.\n\n[47] Nicholai Nicholaievich Strakhov (1828\u20131896), a friend of the\nTolstoi family, a noted writer and philosopher, highly valued\nby Tolstoi as a man and a literary critic. He had an extensive\ncorrespondence with Tolstoi, which was published by the Tolstoi\nMuseum Society in Petrograd, 1914.\n\n[48] The family of the Counts Olsuphiev was very much liked by\nTolstoi. This is what he wrote about them to V. G. Chertkov on\nFebruary 9, 1896: \u201cThey are such very simple and good people, that\nthe difference between their opinion and mine, and not the difference\nbut the non-recognition of that by which I live, does not bother\nme. I know that they cannot, but that they want to be good and that\nthey have gone as far as they could in that direction.\u201d\n\n[49] Nicholai Vasilevich Davydov, an old friend of the Tolstoi\nfamily, being appointed at this time President of the Tula District\nCourt, was presented to the Emperor and had a long conversation with\nhim about Tolstoi, answering the questions asked him by the Emperor.\nAt present, N. V. Davydov is President of the Tolstoi Society in\nMoscow.\n\n[50] Alexander Ivanovich Ertel (1855\u20131908), a well-known writer,\nauthor of the novel _The Gardenins_ and other stories and novels. The\nessay by Ertel which Tolstoi mentions was published in _Nedielia_ in\n1896, No. III, under the title, \u201cIs Russian Society Declining?\u201d He\nobjected to Tolstoi who said in the article \u201cShameful\u201d that one ought\nnot to _ask_ about the abolition of corporal punishment, but \u201cone must\nand ought only to denounce such a thing.\u201d \u201cThe way of denunciation\nand repentance is tested and is being tested--\u201d wrote Ertel, \u201cbut in\nitself it is not sufficient for successful struggle against evil.\nFor the greatest effectiveness in this struggle of changes, the\n_judicial_ path of \u2018petitions, declarations and addresses,\u2019 deserves\nevery kind of sympathy from the side of historical rationalism as\nwell as from the Christian point of view.\u201d Later Tolstoi, highly\nappreciating the popular style of Ertel, wrote a preface to the\nposthumous edition of his works, Moscow, 1909.\n\n[51] See Note 38.\n\n[52] M. A. Sopotsko, at one time in the beginning of the Nineties\nshared some of Tolstoi\u2019s views in relation to the outer life, but\nnever understood the essence of his religious philosophy. Later\nSopotsko became a supporter of Orthodoxy and frequently attacked\nTolstoi and his friends in print.\n\n[53] Marian Zdziechowski, a professor in the Cracow University, a\nwell-known social worker. In the _Sieverni Viestnik_ for the year\n1895, No. 7, under the pseudonym M. Ursin, he contributed an article:\n\u201cThe Religious Political Ideals of Polish Society.\u201d In respect to\nthis article Tolstoi wrote him a long letter which was printed abroad\nand later was reprinted in the _New Collection of Letters of L. N.\nTolstoi_, collected by P. A. Sergienko (published by Okto, 1911),\nfrom which by order of the Moscow Court it was deleted. After this\nletter M. E. Zdziechowski wrote several times to Tolstoi on the\nproblems of Catholicism, but to those letters, mentioned in the\nJournal, Tolstoi evidently answered by a personal conversation during\nthe former\u2019s visit to Yasnaya Polyana in the summer of 1896.\n\n[54] In her letter addressed to M. L. Tolstoi, Vera Stepanovna\nGrinevich touched most seriously and deeply upon the fundamental\nproblems concerning the religious upbringing of children. This letter\nproduced a very strong impression on Tolstoi and he intended to answer\nit in detail, but other work drew him away from accomplishing this\nresolution. The letter of V. S. Grinevich and the letter to her by\nM. L. Tolstoi and V. G. Chertkov are printed in her book: _The New\nSchool-family and the Causes of its Origin_.\n\n[55] Nicholskoe, an estate of Count Olsuphiev near Moscow, close to\nthe station of Podsolnechnaia on the Nicholai railroad.\n\n[56] Eugene Heinrich Schmidt, a German-Hungarian writer, resembling\nin some respects the philosophy of Tolstoi. In the Nineties he\nissued a magazine in Budapest: _Die Religion des Geistes_, and a\nnewspaper with a Christian anarchical tendency: _Ohne Staat_. In\n1901 he printed a book in Leipzig, _Tolstoi, His Meaning to Our\nCivilization_ (see also his article on the cultural significance\nof the works of Leo Tolstoi, printed in the International Tolstoi\nAlmanac by P. A. Sergienko, published by _Kniga_, 1909.)\n\n[57] Sergei Alexandrovich Rachinsky (1836\u20131902), a celebrated worker\nfor popular education, who sacrificed his lectures in the Moscow\nUniversity for his favourite occupation of teaching the peasant\nchildren in the village schools to write and read. A relative to\nTolstoi on account of the first wife of his son, Sergei Lvovich,\nand personally acquainted with Tolstoi as early as the beginning of\nthe Sixties.\n\n[58] Written originally in English.\n\n[59] The letter was called forth by the Italian-Abyssinian war, which\nwas then going on. The rather extensive beginning of this letter\nhas been preserved, but up to now has not been published anywhere.\n\n[60] _Here follow words that have been crossed out._ Note made by\nPrince N. L. Obolensky in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[61] Michail Petrovich Novikov, a peasant of the Province of Tula,\nwho served a year as an army scribe in one of the regiments stationed\nin Moscow. After his acquaintance with Tolstoi he suffered much\nbecause of his endeavour to realise his beliefs in his life. A gifted\nwriter.\n\n[62] Countess Tatiana Lvovna Tolstoi (born 1864), the eldest daughter\nof Tolstoi. In the year 1899 she married M. S. Sukhotin.\n\n[63] Maria Michailovna Kholevinsky, a woman doctor, living in Tula.\nBy Administrative order, after the event mentioned in the Journal,\nshe was exiled to Orenburg.\n\n[64] This letter, sent to both ministers (I. L. Goremykin and N. V.\nMuraviev) and to the same publishing house, was printed at first\nabroad in the paper _The Free Press_, No. 2, in 1902 (England),\nafterwards in Russia. (See _Full Collected Works of Tolstoi_,\npublished by Sytin, 1913--popular edition, Volume XXII. It is known\nthat the request of Tolstoi in this letter: To direct all the\nprosecutions for the spreading of his forbidden books in Russia to\nhimself and not to his followers and friends, as well as a whole\nseries of subsequent similar petitions to Governmental officials--was\nnot granted.)\n\n[65] The second act of Wagner\u2019s opera, _Siegfried_. For the impression\nproduced on Tolstoi, see _What Is Art?_ chapter XIII--in the letter\nto his brother, Count S. N. Tolstoi, on April 20, 1896, Tolstoi\nunder the fresh impression of this opera wrote the following: \u201cLast\nnight I was at the theatre and heard the celebrated new music of\nWagner\u2019s opera, _Siegfried_. I could not sit through a single act\nand I fled from the place like mad, and now I cannot talk calmly\nabout it. It is stupid, unfit for children above seven years of age,\na _Punch and Judy_ show, pretentious, feigned, entirely false and\nwithout any music whatever. And several thousand sat and pretended\nto be fascinated.\u201d\n\n[66] Aphrikan Alexandrovich Spier (1837\u20131890), a remarkable Russian\nphilosopher, who lived many years in Germany and who wrote his works\nin German: _Thinking and Reality_, _Morality and Religious_, etc.\nTolstoi was then reading his principal work, _Denken und Wirklichkeit_\n(_Thinking and Reality_)--in a letter of 1896 to Countess S. A.\nTolstoi, Tolstoi wrote: \u201cI am reading a newly discovered philosopher,\nSpier, and am rejoicing.... A very useful book, destroying many\nsuperstitions, especially the superstition of materialism.\u201d (_The\nLetters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, Moscow, 1913, page 510.)\n\n[67] The philosopher\u2019s daughter, Elena Aphrikanovna Spier, who sent\nher father\u2019s works to Tolstoi.\n\n[68] Grigori Grigorevich Myasoyedov (1835\u20131912). A celebrated\nartist, the painter of the picture, \u201cThe Reading of the Ordinance,\nof February 19th\u201d and others; one of the principal initiators and\nfounders of the Society of Travelling Expositions.\n\n[69] Dmitri Dmitrievich Sverbeev, the Governor of Courland, an\nacquaintance of the Tolstois\u2019.\n\n[70] The cement factory, Gill, within 7 versts of Yasnaya Polyana.\n\n[71] To the Coronation in Moscow there went: Countess S. A. Tolstoi\nand Countess A. L. Tolstoi; while Countess T. L. Tolstoi went to\nSweden for the coming marriage in Stockholm of Count L. L. Tolstoi\nand D. Ph. Westerlund.\n\n[72] The branch post office, 7 versts from Yasnaya Polyana.\n\n[73] Died in 1913.\n\n[74] The well-known publisher of _Novoe Vremia_, M. O. Menshikov, a\ncontributor at that time to the liberal magazine, _Knizhki Nedieli_,\nwhere among other things, he occupied himself with popularizing\nTolstoi\u2019s ideas. In the article \u201cThe Errors of Fear,\u201d printed in\nthat magazine in 1896 (Nos. IV to VI) Menshikov sharply condemned\ncertain governmental repressions of the time. For this article the\nmagazine received a warning. Towards the later journalistic activities\nof Menshikov, Tolstoi took a critical attitude.\n\n[75] Fedior Alexeievich Strakhov, a friend, who shared the views of\nTolstoi, author of philosophic articles published by _Posrednik_\nunder the titles _Beyond Political Interests_, _The Search For\nTruth_. _Posrednik_ also published a collection of articles of\nvarious thinkers compiled by him under the title _Spirit and Matter_\n(against materialism).\n\nSeveral of his other articles were issued abroad. For Tolstoi\u2019s\nreview of the books of F. A. Strakhov see in Journal, August 15,\n1910.\n\n[76] Nicholai Nicholaievich Strakhov (died in January of this year).\n\n[77] With F. A. Strakhov.\n\n[78] Timofei Nicholaievich Granovsky (1813\u20131855), a Russian historian,\na professor at the Moscow University.\n\n[79] Vissarion Grigorevich Bielinsky (1810\u20131848), the critic--see in\nJournal, March 7, 1899, a comparison between Bielinsky and Gogol.\n\n[80] Alexander Alexandrovich Herzen (1812\u20131870), a great writer. From\n1847 to his death he lived abroad as an exile. His collected works\nwith censor deletions have been published in Russia only in 1905.\nTolstoi as early as August 4, 1860, wrote in his Journal, \u201cHerzen,\na scattered mind, sickly ambition. But his broadness, skilfulness,\nkindness and refinement is Russian.\u201d Soon after, in the beginning of\n1861, Tolstoi, being abroad, spent a month in London, where he saw\nHerzen almost daily. In addition to the opinion expressed in this\nnote of Tolstoi\u2019s about Herzen, it should be noted that afterwards\nTolstoi, appreciating him from another point of view, acknowledged\na broad educational significance to his works (see, for example,\nJournal, October 12, 1895). In the letters to V. G. Chertkov of\nFebruary 9, 1888, and to N. N. Gay of February 13 of the same year,\nTolstoi called Herzen \u201ca man remarkable in strength, in mind and in\nsincerity\u201d and expressed regret that his works were forbidden in\nRussia, as the reading of them, according to his opinion, would be\nvery instructive to the youth.\n\n[81] Nicholai Gavrilovich Chernishevsky (1828\u20131889) and Nicholai\nAlexandrovich Dobroliubov (1836\u20131861), Russian critics. Tolstoi\nbecame acquainted with Chernishevsky when he published his works in\n_Sovremennik_, which was edited by Chernishevsky.\n\n[82] Five-year-old daughter of F. A. Strakhov.\n\n[83] _Declaration of Faith_, later re-named _The Christian Doctrine_.\n\n[84] The estate of Tolstoi\u2019s brother, S. N. Tolstoi, in the district\nof Krapivensk, in the Government of Tula, 35 versts from Yasnaya\nPolyana.\n\n[85] Count Sergei Nicholaievich Tolstoi (1826\u20131904). See for him in\n_Biography of L. N. Tolstoi_ by P. Biriukov and in _My Recollections_\nby Count I. L. Tolstoi, Moscow, 1914.\n\n[86] The daughters of Count S. N. Tolstoi: Vera, Varvara and Maria\nSergievna.\n\n[87] Charles Salomon, the translator of some of Tolstoi\u2019s works\ninto French, and a professor of the Russian language in the higher\ninstitutions in Paris.\n\n[88] Sergei Ivanovich Tanyeev (1856\u20131915), composer, at one time\ndirector at the Moscow Conservatory, an acquaintance of the Tolstoi\nfamily, who lived three summers (1894\u20131896) in Yasnaya Polyana.\n\n[89] On the Khodinka field at the time of the coronation celebration\nof May 18, 1896. In the beginning of the year 1910, Tolstoi wrote a\nlittle story called _Khodinka_, printed for the first time in his\n_Posthumous Literary Works_, Volume III, published by A. L. Tolstoi,\nMoscow, 1902.\n\n[90] Timofei Nicholaievich Bondarev (1820\u20131898), a peasant of the\ndistrict of the Don. In 1867 he was exiled to Siberia for conversion\nto the Jewish faith and lived in the district of Minusinsk, in\nthe Province of Yeniseisk, to the end of his life. Wrote a work\ncalled _Industriousness and Parasitism, or The Triumph of the\nAgricultural Worker_ (issued with abbreviations in 1906 in Petrograd\nby _Posrednik_,) in which he proved the moral obligation of each man\nto do agricultural work. Tolstoi wrote a long introduction to this\nwork. As to the impression which this work produced on Tolstoi, he\nhimself wrote in his book _What Then Shall We Do?_ (1884\u20131886) the\nfollowing: \u201cIn all my life, two Russian thinkers had upon me a great\nmoral influence and enriched my thought and clarified my philosophy.\nThese people were not Russian poets, scholars, preachers--they\nwere two remarkable men who are now living, and who all their life\nlaboured in the _muzhik_ labour of peasants, Siutaev and Bondarev.\u201d\nIn his letter here mentioned to Bondarev, Tolstoi touched upon those\nreligious problems which Bondarev asked him. For more details about\nBondarev see in the article of C. S. Shokhor-Trotsky: \u201cSiutaev and\nBondarev\u201d (in the _Tolstoi Annual_, 1913), Petrograd, 1914, issued by\nthe Tolstoi Museum Society, following which are printed ten letters\nby Tolstoi to Bondarev and some writings of Bondarev himself.\n\n[91] _My Refusal From Military Service, The Memoirs of an Army\nPhysician_, issued by _The Free Press_, 1898, England. Tolstoi read\nthis work even before, in manuscript, and at this time probably was\nre-reading it. In his letter to A. A. Shkarvan of December 16, 1895,\nTolstoi wrote: \u201cYour memoirs are interesting and important to the\nhighest degree. I read them with spiritual joy and was touched.\u201d\n\n[92] See Note 29.\n\n[93] Stephane Mallarm\u00e9 (1842\u20131898), French poet, considered one of\nthe most prominent Symbolists. For a more detailed opinion of him\nby Tolstoi, see his book, _What Is Art?_ Chapter X.\n\n[94] Goethe (1749\u20131832), the German poet. See for Tolstoi\u2019s opinion\nof him in his Journal, September 13, 1906. Earlier in 1891, in his\nletter to Countess A. A. Tolstoi, Tolstoi wrote: \u201cAs to Goethe, I\ndo not like him at all. I don\u2019t like his conceited paganism.\u201d\n\nShakespeare (1564\u20131616). See Tolstoi\u2019s article about him \u201cOn\nShakespeare\u201d and \u201cOn The Drama\u201d and the opinion in his journal\nMarch 15, 1897.\n\n[95] Declaration of Faith.\n\n[96] Henry George (1839\u20131897), noted American social worker and\nwriter on economic questions. In his numerous works, chiefly on\nagrarian questions, he was a warm defender of the destitute and the\noppressed. George considered the existence of private land ownership\nas the principal cause of the existence of poverty; appearing as\nits opponent, he suggested the abolition of all existing taxes,\nsubstituting for them a _single tax_ on the value of land; by means\nof this reform, land would pass into the hands of people cultivating\nit by their own labour, because for people who did not work it, it\nwould be unprofitable to own great stretches of land, since they\nwould have to pay a large amount of taxes on them.\n\nTolstoi sympathised very much with George\u2019s scheme and wrote much\nabout it (_The Great Sin_, _The Only Possible Solution of the Land\nQuestion_, _A Letter to a Peasant_ and some chapters in _Resurrection_\nand others). Of the works of George, Tolstoi recognised as the\nbest his _Social Problems_, to the Russian translation of which he\nwrote a preface. In the last years of George\u2019s life, Tolstoi was\nin correspondence with him; in his letter to him of 1894 Tolstoi\namong other things wrote: \u201cThe reading of each one of your books\nclarifies for me much which formerly was not clear to me and\nconvinces me more and more of the truth and practicality of your\nsystem\u201d [translated from the Russian from a translation from the\nEnglish.--_Translator\u2019s note_]. On the occasion of George\u2019s death,\nTolstoi wrote to Countess S. A. Tolstoi on October 24, 1897:\n\u201cSerezha told me yesterday that Henry George was dead. Strange to\nsay, his death struck me as the death of a very close friend. The\ndeath of Alexandre Dumas produced the same impression upon me.\nOne feels as if it were the loss of a real comrade and friend.\u201d\nMany works of George\u2019s are translated into the Russian; there is a\nsplendid biography of him written by S. D. Nicholaev, and published\nby _Posrednik_: _The Great Fighter for Land Liberation, Henry\nGeorge_, Moscow, 1906.\n\n[97] Anna Constantinovna Chertkov.\n\n[98] In the letter to Count L. L. Tolstoi of June 7, 1896, Tolstoi\nrelated the incident as follows: \u201cYesterday a remarkable event\nhappened to me. Two or three times there came to me a young civilian\nfrom Tula asking me to give him books. I gave him some of my articles\nand spoke with him. He was, according to his convictions, a Nihilist\nand an Atheist. I told him from the bottom of my heart all that I\nthought. Yesterday he came and gave me a note: \u2018Read it,\u2019 he said,\n\u2018then tell me what you think of me.\u2019 In the note it was written\nthat he was a junior officer in the gendarmerie, a spy, sent to me\nto find out what is going on here, and that he became unbearably\nconscience-stricken and that is why he disclosed himself to me. I\nfelt pity and disgust and pleasure.\u201d\n\n[99] The priest, John Ilich Sergiev (of Kronstadt) (1829\u20131908),\nwho enjoyed great fame as \u201cThe supplicator for the sick.\u201d In his\npreaching and his books he many times made sharp attacks against\nTolstoi and his views.\n\n[100] Declaration of Faith.\n\n[101] Zakaz, a piece of Yasnaya Polyana forest, not far from the\nhouse. Tolstoi was afterwards buried there.\n\n[102] Tolstoi had the opportunity to closely observe the nomadic\nlife of the Bashkirs in the province of Samara, where he went in\nthe Sixties to drink kumyss, and in the Seventies and Eighties to\nhis own estates (see _The Biography of L. N. Tolstoi_ written by\nP. I. Biriukov (Moscow, 1913) published by _Posrednik_, Volume II,\nChapter VIII; and also the _Recollections_ in the _Children\u2019s\nMagazine_, Mayak, 1913, by V. S. Morosov, a former pupil of the\nYasnaya Polyana school in the beginning of the Sixties).\n\n[103] A village within four versts from Yasnaya Polyana.\n\n[104] Leonilla Fominishna Annenkov (1845\u20131914), an old friend of\nTolstoi\u2019s and an adherent of his philosophy, the wife of a Kursk\nlandlord, the well-known scholarly lawyer, K. N. Annenkov (1842\u20131910).\nShe made the acquaintance of Tolstoi in 1886 and from that time on\ncorresponded very much with him. Completely sharing the opinions of\nTolstoi, she applied them with a rare sequence to life and she was\nnoted for her remarkable abundance of love which attracted every one\nwho met her. Tolstoi valued her highly, considering that she had \u201ca\nclear mind and a loving heart.\u201d\n\n[105] _Farther on one line is crossed out._ A note of Princess M. L.\nObolensky in the copy at the disposal of the editors.\n\n[106] It weighed upon him that certain persons to whom he did not\nwant to show his Journal had read it nevertheless. In the last years\nof his life he was compelled to hide the current Journal somewhere in\nhis rooms, and the finished note-books he gave away in safe keeping.\n\n[107] A village four versts from Yasnaya Polyana, where the Chertkovs\nlived in summer.\n\n[108] Declaration of Faith.\n\n[109] The note of July 19, 1896, he evidently originally inserted\nin a note-book from which he later wrote it out in his Journal.\n\n[110] Tolstoi\u2019s brother, Count S. N. Tolstoi.\n\n[111] This article under the title of \u201cHow to Read The Gospels and\nWhat Is Its Essence\u201d was printed at first in the edition of _The\nFree Press_, 1898, and after in 1905 in Russia. (See the complete\nworks of Tolstoi published by Sytin, Popular Edition, Volume XV.) The\ncentral thought of this article is that in order to understand the\ntrue meaning of the Gospels, one has to penetrate those passages which\nare completely simple, clear and understandable. Tolstoi advises all\nthose who wish to understand the true meaning of the Gospels to mark\neverything which is for them completely clear and understandable with\na blue pencil and marking at the same time with a red one, around\nthe words marked in blue, the words of Christ Himself as differing\nfrom the words of the Apostles. It is those places marked by the\nred pencil which will give the reader the essence of the teaching\nof Christ. Tolstoi in his own copy of the Gospels made such marks\nwhich he mentions later in the Journal with the words: \u201cMarked the\nGospels.\u201d\n\n[112] Hadji Murad, one of the boldest and most remarkable leaders of\nthe Caucasian mountaineers who played a big r\u00f4le in the struggle of\nthe mountaineers with the Russians in the Forties of the Nineteenth\nCentury. In 1852 he was killed in a skirmish with the Cossacks.\nTolstoi heard much about him as early as the beginning of the Fifties,\nwhen he himself took part in the fight with the mountaineers. A\nmonth after the above-mentioned note in the Journal, Tolstoi made a\nrough sketch of his story, _Hadji Murad_, on which he worked with\ninterruptions until 1904. This story was printed for the first time\nin his _Posthumous Literary Works_ (published by A. L. Tolstoi,\nVolume III, 1912.) It is interesting to compare the introduction to\nit with the above note of Tolstoi\u2019s in his Journal.\n\n[113] As in the copy at the disposal of the editors.\n\n[114] Afanasie Afanasevich Fet (Shenshin) (1820\u20131892), a Russian lyric\npoet and translator and friend of the Tolstoi family. Concerning\nthe relations of Tolstoi with him, see _My Recollections_, by Fet\n(Volume II, 1890) and _The Biography of L. N. Tolstoi_ by Biriukov.\nIn the letter of November 7, 1866, Tolstoi wrote to Fet: \u201cYou are a\nman whose mind, not to speak of anything else, I value higher than\nany one of my acquaintances\u2019 and who in personal intercourse is the\nonly one who gives me that bread by which it is _not alone_ that man\nlives.\u201d Later Tolstoi and Fet became estranged from each other.\n\n[115] Kant, the German philosopher (1724\u20131804). For the opinions of\nTolstoi about him see the Journal, February 19, and September 22,\n1904, and September 2, 1906; August 8th, 1907; March 26, 1909. _Kant\u2019s\nThoughts_, selected by Tolstoi, were published by _Posrednik_,\nMoscow, 1906.\n\n[116] As a sixth sense, Tolstoi recognised the muscular sense. See\nthe note of October 10, 1896.\n\n[117] S. I. Tanyeev.\n\n[118] The Shenshins--Tula landlords who lived on their estate,\nSudakovo, five versts from Yasnaya Polyana.\n\n[119] Prosper St. Thomas, tutor of Tolstoi and his brothers. The\nincident mentioned in the Journal produced a tremendous impression on\nTolstoi. \u201cIt may have been that this incident was the cause of all\nthe horror and aversion to all kinds of violence which I experienced\nthroughout life,\u201d Tolstoi wrote afterwards in his recollections. (See\nP. Biriukov: _The Biography of L. N. Tolstoi_, Moscow, issued by\n_Posrednik_, Volume I, pages 99\u2013100.) In Tolstoi\u2019s story _Boyhood_,\nSt. Thomas is pictured under the name of Saint Jerome. The incident\nmentioned here is described in Chapters XIV, XV and XVI of that\nstory.\n\n[120] Written in English in the original.\n\n[121] Tolstoi, together with Countess S. A. Tolstoi, visited\nhis sister, Countess Maria Nicholaievna, living in the convent\nof Shamordino near the Optina Desert. In his letter to her of\nSeptember 13, 1896, Tolstoi wrote, \u201cWith great pleasure and emotion\nI recall my stay with you.\u201d\n\n[122] The story, _Hadji Murad_. See Note 112.\n\n[123] Count Sergei Lvovich, with his wife, Countess Maria\nConstantinovna (born Rachinsky, who died in 1899); Count Ilya Lvovich,\nwith his wife, Countess Sophia Nicholaievna, and Count Leo Lvovich,\nwith his wife, the Countess Dora Fedorovna.\n\n[124] The Dutchman, Van-der-Veer, refused military service, as he\ndeclared in his letter to the Commander of the National Guard, on\nthe grounds that he hated every kind of murder of men as well as of\nanimals, especially murder at the order of other people. The military\nauthorities sentenced him to three months\u2019 solitary confinement.\nLater Van-der-Veer for several years published a magazine with a\nChristian tendency called _Vrede_.\n\n[125] Van-der-Veer\u2019s letter, with the appendix by Tolstoi under the\ntitle \u201cThe Beginning of the End\u201d was printed in the edition of _The\nFree Press_, 1898, England, later in Russia in the _Obnovlenia_,\nPetrograd, 1906, which was soon confiscated.\n\n[126] Alexandra Mikhailovna Kalmikov, a noted worker for popular\neducation, who turned to Tolstoi with the request that he express\nhimself in regard to the order then given by the Minister of the\nInterior to close the committees on illiteracy. In answer to her\nletter, Tolstoi expressed his opinion about the activity of the\nRussian Government in general and about the methods of resisting it\nused by the Liberals. His answer, under the title of \u201cA Letter to the\nLiberals,\u201d in revised form was printed in full in the publication\nof _The Free Press_: \u201cConcerning the Attitude Towards the State\u201d\n(England, 1898) and with omissions in the publication of _Obnovlenia_\n(Petrograd, 1906,) which was confiscated.\n\n[127] _Ioga\u2019s Philosophy. Lectures on Rajah Ioga or Conquering\nInternal Nature, by Sw\u00e2mi Vivek\u00e2nanda_, New York, 1896.\n\n[128] \u201cThe Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,\u201d discovered in 1883. A\ndocument of the Christian literature of the First Centuries. Tolstoi\ntranslated it from the Greek and twice wrote a preface to it: in\n1885 and twenty years later, in 1905. The passage mentioned in the\nJournal reads this way: \u201cIt is not good to love only those who\nlove you. Heathens do the same. They love their own and hate their\nenemies and therefore they have enemies, but you should love those\nwho hate you and then you will have no enemies.\u201d\n\n[129] Daniel Pavlovich Konissi, a Japanese, converted to the Greek\nChurch, who studied in the Kiev Theological Academy, then came to\nMoscow and here made the acquaintance of Tolstoi. Later he became\nprofessor in the University in Kioto. Translated _Lao-Tze_ from the\nChinese into the Russian (this translation was printed at first\nin _Problems of Philosophy and Psychology_ and later in separate\npamphlet, _Lao-Se_, Tao-Te-King, Moscow, 1913.) For D. P. Konissi\nsee article of I. Alexeev, \u201cThe Skies Are Different--the People Are\nthe Same\u201d (in the paper, _Nov_, 1914, No. 154.)\n\nAbout the Japanese who visited him, Tolstoi wrote to Countess S. A.\nTolstoi, September 26th: \u201cThis morning the Japanese arrived.\nVery interesting, fully educated, original and intelligent and\nfree-thinking. One an editor of a paper, evidently a very rich man\nand an aristocrat there, no longer young; the other one, a little\nman, young, his assistant, also a literary man\u201d (_Letters of Tolstoi\nto his Wife_, Moscow, 1913, page 507).\n\n[130] Peter Vasilevich Verigin, the leader of the Dukhobors, when\nin exile in the town of Obdorsk, in the province of Tobolsk, wrote\nto Tolstoi about his life and expounded his views on the printing\nof books. Tolstoi\u2019s reply, written on October 14, 1896, in which he\nanswered the objections of Verigin against the printing of books,\nwas printed in the book, _The Letters of the Dukhobor Leader, P. V.\nVerigin_, published by _The Free Press_, 1901, England. See also\nthe letter of P. V. Verigin on his acquaintance with Tolstoi printed\nin the International Tolstoi Almanac compiled by P. A. Sergienko\n(issued by _Kniga_, 1909).\n\n[131] _Further in Tolstoi\u2019s manuscript, one page has been crossed\nout._ A note by M. L. Obolensky in the copy in possession of the\neditors.\n\n[132] This letter was printed at first in an issue of _The Free\nPress_, No. 8, 1898, England, and later in Russia in _Obnovlenia_,\nPetrograd, 1906, and was confiscated.\n\n[133] Brother of Tolstoi, Count S. N. Tolstoi.\n\n[134] A peasant of the province of Kharkov in the district of Sumsk,\nPeter Vasilevich Olkhovik. Refused military service October 15,\n1895, at recruiting, in the city of Bielopolie, province of Kharkov.\nWas sentenced by the Vladivostok military court to three years in\na disciplinary battalion. The letters of Olkhovik to his relatives\nand acquaintances about his refusal were published by _The Free\nPress_, 1897, England, and in 1906 in Russia by _Obnoblenia_ (and\nwere confiscated). Influenced by Olkhovic, the private, Cyril Sereda,\nalso refused military service, with whom Olkhovic became friendly\non the steamer on the way to Siberia, where he was appointed for\nservice. Both of them were turned over to the Irkutsk disciplinary\nbattalions. Tolstoi\u2019s letter to the commanding officer of the\nregiment, in which he asks him \u201cas a Christian and as a kind man to\nhave pity on these people ...\u201d was printed at first also in _The Free\nPress_ and afterwards in various publications in Russia. (See the\nComplete Works of Tolstoi, published by Sytin: subscribed edition,\nVolume XX, popular edition, Volume XXII.) On the effect that Tolstoi\u2019s\nletter produced on the officer of the regiment, Tolstoi himself\nwrote the following in a letter to P. A. Boulanger, March 29, 1898:\n\u201cRecently I was surprised, and very pleasantly, by a letter from a\nman exiled administratively from Verkholensk, who writes that the\ncommanding officer of the disciplinary battalion in Irkutsk openly\ntold Olkhovich and Sereda that my appeal for them saved them from\ncorporal punishment and shortened their sentence. Let a thousand\nletters pass in vain: if but one has such a result, then one ought\nto write unceasingly.\u201d The fate of P. V. Olkhovich was as follows:\nFrom the disciplinary battalion he was exiled for eighteen years to\nthe district of Yakutsk, where he lived together with the exiled\nDukhobors until 1905, when together with them he went to America.\nAt the present moment he is living in California.\n\n[135] Edward Carpenter, a noted contemporary English thinker, some of\nwhose works Tolstoi valued highly. Carpenter\u2019s article, \u201cContemporary\nScience,\u201d was later translated into Russian by Countess Tolstoi and\nprinted with a preface by Tolstoi in the magazine _Sieverni Viestnik_\n(1898, No. 3), later it was issued separately (_Posrednik_, Moscow,\n1911).\n\n[136] Count Sergei Lvovich Tolstoi (born, 1863), eldest son of\nTolstoi.\n\n[137] To the Ekaterinograd disciplinary battalion were sentenced the\nDukhobors (41 in number) who had refused military service, while being\nin actual military service ... See _The Dukhobors in the Disciplinary\nRegiment_, published by _The Free Press_, 1902, England, where was\nprinted also the letter of Tolstoi to the commanding officer of the\nregiment. Stating those religious convictions of the Dukhobors for\nwhich they suffered persecutions and calling their acts ..., Tolstoi\nasked the commanding officer to do all that he could to lighten\ntheir fate. The letter of Tolstoi produced a softening effect on\nthe commanding officer.\n\n[138] Vladimir Vasilevich Stasov (1824\u20131906), a critic of art and\nmusic and the librarian of the Imperial Public Library in Petrograd, a\nfriend of the Tolstoi family. When, after Stasov\u2019s death, his friend,\nthe sculptor, I. Y. Ginzburg, asked Tolstoi to write his recollections\nof him, in the compilation, \u201cTo The Memory of V. V. Stasov,\u201d Tolstoi\nin his letter of November 7, 1907, replied that it was difficult\nfor him to write about Stasov on account of \u201cthe misunderstanding\u201d\nwhich had taken place between them: \u201cthe misunderstanding consisted\nin that Vladimir Vasilevich Stasov loved and valued prejudicially\nin me that which I did not value and could not value in myself, and\nin his goodness forgave me that which I valued and value in myself\nabove everything else,--that by which I lived and live. With every\nother man such a misunderstanding would lead, if not to hostility\nthen to a coolness, but the gentle, kind, spontaneous, warm nature\nof Vladimir Vasilevich and at the same time, his childlike clarity,\nwas such, that I could not help succumbing to his influence and\nloving him without any thought of the difference of our points of\nview. I shall always remember our good friendly relationship with\nemotion.\u201d\n\n[139] Nicholai Nicholaievich Gay, the son of the old friend of\nTolstoi, N. N. Gay.\n\n[140] These thoughts were called forth in Tolstoi by a letter received\non October, 1896, from V. V. Rakhmanov, who, being acquainted with\nthis work of Tolstoi, found it written in a cold and didactic tone\nand advised Tolstoi to abandon it.\n\n[141] See Journal, Oct. 20, 1896. Thoughts 9 and 10.\n\n[142] This served as a beginning to Tolstoi\u2019s book, _What Is Art?_\ncompleted by him only in 1898.\n\n[143] The initials I. G. C. in the original.\n\n[144] The Spaniard, Demetrio Zanini, wrote from Barcelona to Tolstoi\nthat the members of a certain club, who were his admirers, decided\nto offer him a present of a splendid inkwell, money for the purchase\nof which was being collected by subscription. At the request of\nTolstoi, his daughter, Tatiana Lvovna, wrote to Zanini, saying that\nhe preferred this money to be used for some good work. In answer to\nthis, Zanini informed Tolstoi that they had already collected about\n22,500 francs. Tolstoi explained in a letter to him the miserable\ncondition of the Dukhobors and suggested using the money collected\nfor their help.\n\n[145] A close friend of Tolstoi, Senator Alexander Mickailovich\nKuzminsky, president at this time of the St. Petersburg District\nCourt. The finance-Minister, S. Y. Witte, wanted to communicate with\nTolstoi through A. M. Kuzminsky, hoping to call forth his approval\nin the matter of his introducing the government sale of vodka and\nthe founding of temperance societies. Tolstoi\u2019s letter to A. M.\nKuzminsky, in which he answered Witte\u2019s proposal in the negative,\nwith the omission of the harsh opinions concerning General Dragomirov\n(the author of the periodical, _The Soldier\u2019s Manual_, which was\nbeing displayed in the barracks) was printed in the bulletin of the\nTolstoi Museum Society, 1911, Nos. 3 to 5.\n\n[146] This article has remained unfinished and up to the present\nhas not been printed anywhere.\n\n[147] Ilya Efimovich Repine, an old acquaintance of Tolstoi and\none of his most favourite Russian painters. On the occasion of the\ncelebration of his twenty-fifth year of artistic work, I. E. Repine\nwrote a letter in the _Novoe Vremia_, 1896, No. 7435, Nov. 7th,\nexpressing gratitude to all those who honoured him, in which among\nother things he said, when comparing the work of artists with the work\nof teachers, officials, bookmakers, doctors, agricultural workers,\n\u201cWe are the lucky ones, our work is play.\u201d\n\n[148] Ivan Michailovich Tregubov, a friend and follower of Tolstoi,\nlater a noted student of religious sects.\n\n[149] Ivan Ivanovich Gorbunov (Posadov), an adherent of Tolstoi\u2019s\nviews and a close friend of his; an active contributor and from\n1897 the editor-publisher of _Posrednik_, and his brother, Nicholai\nIvanovich, a performer (pianist and reader).\n\n[150] Paul Alexandrovich Boulanger, a friend and adherent of Tolstoi\u2019s\nviews, author of several works on Oriental religions published by\n_Posrednik_.\n\n[151] Gabriel Andreevich Rusanov (1844 to 1907), friend and adherent\nof Tolstoi\u2019s views; a small landowner in the province of Voronezh.\nUntil 1884 he was a member of the Kharkov district court. In his\nwill, among other things, he wrote the following: \u201cAlready at the\nage of fourteen or fifteen (now I am about fifty-seven) I ceased to\nbe Orthodox and lived until the age of thirty-eight as an atheist. At\nthirty-eight, thanks to the greatest of men, Leo Tolstoi, I acquired\nfaith in God and believed in the teaching of Christ. Tolstoi gave me\nhappiness. I became a Christian.\u201d For several decades G. A. Rusanov\nwas confined to his arm-chair with an incurable disease--consumption\nof the spinal cord; notwithstanding his illness, he preserved his\nfull freshness of mind up to the end of his life, reading much and\nbeing possessed of a rich memory. A splendid student in Russian\nand foreign literature, and noted for his extraordinary artistic\ninstinct, Tolstoi valued his opinions, especially in regard to his\nown literary writings.\n\n[152] Alexander Borisovich Goldenweiser, friend and follower of\nTolstoi, professor in the Moscow Conservatory. Tolstoi valued his\npiano playing highly and loved it very much. Towards the end of\nTolstoi\u2019s life, A. B. Goldenweiser visited him often and took a\nclose interest in his life. In 1910, according to Tolstoi\u2019s wish,\nhe acted in the capacity of witness to his will.\n\n[153] Chromatic phantasy and fugue by Bach.\n\n[154] Anton Stepanovich Arensky (1861\u20131906), a celebrated Russian\ncomposer, later personally acquainted with Tolstoi.\n\n[155] See Note 144. Receiving a letter from Zanini that the collection\nreached to 31,500 francs, Tolstoi in his letter to him of December 6,\n1896, asked that this money be transferred through the Tiflis bank to\nhis Caucasian friends, who were in charge of helping the Dukhobors.\nAt the end of his letter he wrote that he was touched by \u201cthis sign\nof sympathy\u201d which the Spaniards expressed for him in this unusual\nway. This money, though, was never received by Tolstoi, nor was the\ninkwell. (See _Letters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, Moscow,\n1913, page 516.)\n\n[156] This story of F. F. Tistchenko under the title, _Daily Bread_\n(A true tale of the sufferings of a village School teacher), was\nprinted with a letter of Tolstoi in _Knizhki Nedieli_, 1897, No. 10,\nand later in the collection of _Tales_ by Tistchenko.\n\n[157] Princess Gorchakov, a distant relative of Tolstoi, a\nlady-in-waiting, and principal of one of the Moscow gymnasiums.\n\n[158] Anatol Fedorovich Koni, a well-known jurist, a member of\nthe Imperial Council and a writer. Became acquainted with Tolstoi\nin the eighties and wrote recollections of him (see his book, _On\nthe Path of Life_, Volume II, 1913). He gave Tolstoi the theme for\n_Resurrection_ (see Note 23).\n\n[159] Maria Fedorovna Kudriavtsev, an adherent of Tolstoi\u2019s views.\n\n[160] _The Appeal_, under the title _Help_, was written and signed\nby P. I. Biriukov, I. M. Tregubov and V. G. Chertkov. This was an\nappeal to society to render assistance to the persecuted Dukhobors\n\u201cby money sacrifices, so as to ease the sufferings of the old, the\nsick and the young, as well as by lifting one\u2019s voice in defence of\nthe persecuted.\u201d _The Appeal_ was spread by the authors in manuscript\nand in typewritten copies and among other things was delivered to\nmany persons of high position. Tolstoi wrote the appendix to it,\nin which he explained the significance of the act of the Dukhobors\ntowards the realisation of Christianity in our life. _Help!_ was\nprinted with Tolstoi\u2019s appendix by _The Free Press_ (1897, England).\nThe appendix is printed also in the _Full Collected Works of Tolstoi_,\npublished by Sytin, subscribed edition, Volume XVI, popular edition,\nVolume XIX.\n\n[161] The editors were unable to ascertain the author of the history\nof music which Tolstoi was reading.\n\n[162] Jean Batiste Faure, the celebrated French singer and composer\n(in the second half of the Nineteenth Century), author of Tolstoi\u2019s\nfavourite duet, \u201cThe Crucifix.\u201d\n\n[163] Vasili Stepanovich Perfileev, a former Moscow Governor, a\nfriend of Tolstoi in the fifties and sixties, and a distant relative\nof the Tolstois.\n\n[164] An omission in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[165] This theme was not executed by Tolstoi. A work under a similar\ntitle begun by him in 1883 was printed in Volume III of _The\nPosthumous Literary Works of Tolstoi_, issued by A. L. Tolstoi.\n\n[166] Katiusha Maslov and Nekhliudov, the principal characters of\nthe novel.\n\n[167] Alexander Ivanovich Arkhangelsky (1857\u20131906), an adherent\nof Tolstoi\u2019s views, about whom after his death in the letter of\nOctober 26, 1906, Tolstoi wrote: \u201cThis was one of the best men\nI ever happened to know in my life.\u201d A. I. Arkhangelsky was a\nveterinary surgeon in the district of Bronnitsk, Province of Moscow.\nLater, becoming acquainted with the works of Tolstoi, he left his\nposition, considering it impossible to apply against the peasants\nthe compulsory measures required of him as veterinary surgeon, and\nbecame a watch-maker, by which he supported himself until his death.\nHis work, _Whom to Serve?_ is devoted to explaining the question of\nthe incompatibility ... with the service to God. When he read this\nwork in manuscript in 1895, Tolstoi wrote Arkhangelsky that \u201cit will\ndo the people much good and will advance the word of God.\u201d This work\nwas issued only in 1911 in the Russian language by the publishing\nhouse, \u201c_Vozrozhdenie_,\u201d in Bourgas (Bulgaria). The same publishing\nhouse issued a biography of A. I. Arkhangelsky compiled by Kh. N.\nAbrikosov. Extracts from _Whom to Serve_ signed by the pseudonym,\n\u201cBuka,\u201d were printed by Tolstoi in _The Reading Circle_. It should\nbe also mentioned that the publication of the _Veterinary Manual_\ncompiled by Arkhangelsky was suspended at one time by the censor,\nwho demanded that it include the compulsory regulations. Protesting\nagainst this, Arkhangelsky wrote a remarkable letter to I. I. Gorbunov\nwhich Tolstoi included in his _Archives of L. N. Tolstoi_, No. 5.\nThis letter formed the basis of the article, \u201cWhom To Serve.\u201d Later\nthe veterinary manual was issued by Posrednik.\n\n[168] Prince Ilya Petrovich Nakashidze, a Georgian writer, a close\nadherent of Tolstoi\u2019s ideas.\n\n[169] Tolstoi had the intention of writing (but did not write) an\nintroduction to the Russian translation of the Philosophical Work of\nA. A. Spier, which was to have appeared in _Problems of Philosophy\nand Psychology_.\n\n[170] Tolstoi was considering at this time an appeal against the\nexisting social-political order.\n\n[171] An omission in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[172] Stepan Andreevich Behrs, Tolstoi\u2019s brother-in-law, author of\n_Recollections About Count L. N. Tolstoi_ (Smolensk, 1894), now dead.\n\n[173] V. G. Chertkov and P. I. Biriukov, and later also I. M.\nTregubov, were exiled after a search of their homes: V. G. Chertkov\nabroad--P. I. Biriukov to Bausk in Courland, and I. M. Tregubov to\nGoldingen, also in Courland. The cause of exiling was the writing\nof an appeal to help the persecuted Dukhobors (see Note 160) and\ntheir activity in behalf of the Dukhobors and the persecuted sects\nin general. See the memoirs of P. I. Biriukov, \u201cThe Story of My\nExile,\u201d printed in the publication _O Minuvshen_ (Petrograd, 1909).\nThese memoirs contain several letters by Tolstoi to Biriukov.\n\n[174] Tolstoi went to take leave of the Chertkovs who were then\nliving in Petrograd.\n\n[175] Nicholai Alexandrovich Yaroshenko (1846\u20131898), a well-known\nartist, to whose brush belongs also the portrait of Tolstoi, painted\nin 1895.\n\n[176] Countess Alexandra Andreevna Tolstoi (1817\u20131904), a second\ncousin of Tolstoi, lady-in-waiting to the Empress. Tolstoi in his\nyouth was on friendly terms with her. His correspondence with the\nCountess A. A. Tolstoi, with the addition of a memoir by her, was\npublished by the Tolstoi Museum Society, Petrograd, 1911. In reference\nto this meeting with her, mentioned by Tolstoi in the Journal, see\nthe memoirs (pages 71, 72 of the above mentioned publication). About\nthis same meeting and about the visit to Petrograd in general,\nTolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov the following (February 15, 1897):\n\u201cSt. Petersburg gave me a most joyous impression. Of course the\nprincipal thing was the meeting at your house. The depressing\nimpression was my conversation with A. A. Tolstoi. The terrible thing\nwas not only the coldness, but the cruelty and the forcing oneself\ninto one\u2019s soul and the violence, the very same which had estranged\nus. What a bad belief it is, which makes good people so cruel and\ntherefore so insensible to the spiritual condition of others. Believe\nword for word as I do, otherwise if you are not exactly my enemy,\nstill you are a stranger.\u201d It should be noted that from the autumn\nof 1895, for the course of several years, Tolstoi did not write at\nall to the Countess A. A. Tolstoi.\n\n[177] In considering Tolstoi\u2019s opinions concerning women found in the\nJournal, one should be particularly careful to avoid misunderstanding.\nFirst, Tolstoi, wishing from natural delicacy to make his remarks\nimpersonal, often generalised his private impressions and observations\nfrom intercourse with separate individuals, and therefore these\nremarks in reality carried no reflection whatever against all women\nin general.\n\nSecond, even in those instances where Tolstoi consciously expressed\nhimself adversely about women in general, he had in mind the most\ncommonplace modern woman with her adverse qualities.\n\nBut in his mind he absolutely discriminated in favour of the\nintelligent, religious woman whom seldom he happened to meet in\nlife and who always attracted his attention. So, for instance, he\nvalued very highly the distant relative who brought him up, T. A.\nErgolsky, for her self-sacrificing life; Mmes. M. A. Schmidt and\nL. F. Annenkov he respected for their true religious lives, and among\nthe women writers he especially valued an American, Lucy Mallory,\nfor her exceptional writings, from which he selected many thoughts\nfor _The Reading Circle_. For women of this type he always had the\ngreatest respect, recognising fully their merits and their great\nsignificance to humanity. In his literary works, Tolstoi, as is\nknown, frequently reproduced the highest type of woman (for instance,\nPashenka in _Father Sergius_, or the old woman, Maria Semenovna in\n_The Forged Coupon_). Also in his other writings, Tolstoi did not\nalways express himself adversely about women, as can be seen, for\ninstance, from the following extracts:\n\n\u201cOh, how I would like to show to woman the whole significance of\nchaste women. The chaste woman (not in vain is the legend of Mary)\nwill save the world.\u201d (Journal, August 3, 1898.)\n\n\u201cOne of the most necessary tasks of humanity consists in the bringing\nup of chaste women.\u201d (Journal, August 24, 1898.)\n\n\u201cThe virtues of men and women are the same; temperance, truthfulness,\nkindness; but in the woman, these same virtues attain a special\ncharm.\u201d (_The Reading Circle_, June 2.)\n\n\u201cMen cannot do that highest, best work, which brings men more than\nanything else nearer to God--the work of love, the work of complete\nself-surrender to him whom you love, which good women have done so\nwell and so naturally, are doing, and will do. What would happen\nto the world, what would happen to us men, if women had not that\nquality and if they did not exercise it ... Without mothers, helpers,\nfriends, comforters, who love in a man all that is best in him, and\nwho with a suggestion hardly to be noticed, call forth and support\nall the best in him--without such women it would be bad to live in\nthis world. Christ would not have had Mary and Magdalene; Francis of\nAssisi would not have had Clara; the Decembrists would not have had\ntheir wives with them in exile; the Dukhobors would not have had their\nwives who did not hold their husbands back, but supported them in\ntheir martyrdom for truth, there would not have been those thousands\nand thousands of unknown women, the very best, as everything that\nis unknown, the comforters of the drunken, the weak, the debauched,\nthose for whom the consolations of love are more necessary than for\nany one else. In this love, whether it is directed to Kukin or to\nChrist, is the principal, great and irreplaceable strength of women.\u201d\n(Appendix to Chekhov\u2019s story, _Dushechka_.)\n\n[178] _On Life_--a religious-philosophic work by Tolstoi, written by\nhim in 1887 and printed in all his collected works. An abbreviation\nof this work and an exposition of it written in simple language for\nplain readers was made by an American, Bolton Hall, and was approved\nby Tolstoi and printed under the title, _Life, Love and Death_. Later\na translation of this under the title, _True Life_, appeared in an\nissue of the Ethical Artistic Library, Moscow, 1899. See article\nof Bolton Hall in the _International Tolstoi Almanac_ compiled by\nP. A. Sergienko (Kniga, 1909).\n\n[179] See _Letters of L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, Moscow, 1913,\npages 518 to 519.\n\n[180] Tolstoi made a mistake of one year: the battle against the\nCaucasian mountaineers in which he took part in the capacity of\nan artillerist, took place February 18, 1853. (See P. Biriukov\u2019s\n_Biography of Tolstoi_, Volume I, page 226.) Nine years after the\nabove mentioned note, February 18, 1903, Tolstoi wrote to Rusanov:\n\u201cTo-day it is fifty-three years since hostile enemy shells struck\nthe wheel of that cannon which I directed. If the muzzle of the gun\nfrom which the shell emerged had deviated 1-10,000ths of an inch\nto one side or another, I would have been killed and I would no\nlonger have lived. What nonsense. I would have existed in a form\nnow inconceivable to me.\u201d\n\n[181] _What Is Art?_\n\n[182] Matthew Arnold (1822\u20131888), a well-known English poet, critic\nand student of literature. Shortly before his death, Arnold printed\nan article in _The Fortnightly Review_, devoted to the critical\nanalysis of _Anna Karenin_ and some of the religious philosophic\nwritings of Tolstoi. (See _Novoe Vremia_, December 11, 1887, the\narticle, \u201cAn English Critic on Leo Tolstoi.\u201d) The thought quoted by\nTolstoi was expressed by Arnold in his article, \u201cThe Problems of\nModern Criticisms\u201d (a Russian translation was issued by _Posrednik_).\nTolstoi valued the writings of Arnold highly, especially his book,\n_Literature and Dogma_, of which a Russian translation was published\nby _Posrednik_ under the title, _Wherein Lies the Essence of\nChristianity and Judaism_ (Moscow, 1907).\n\n[183] Tolstoi, for the sake of an airing, rode about ten versts to\na dressmaker, for the dress of Nadezhda Mikhailovna Yushkova.\n\n[184] Jules and Leo Edwardovich Konius, the violinist and the pianist.\n\n[185] Countess T. L. Tolstoi and Count Mikhail Adamovich Olsuphiev\nperformed two small plays, _Feminine Nonsense_ by I. L. Stcheglov\nand _The Lady Agreeable In All Respects_.\n\n[186] According to the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[187] Evidently a mistake in the copy in possession of the editors.\nThis extract refers not to Book VII, but to Book VI of _Politics_.\nThe quotation cited by Tolstoi reads in the Russian translation of\nProf. S. A. Zhebelev in this way: \u201cIn a state enjoying the best\norganisation, and uniting in itself men absolutely just, and not\nrelatively just (in relation to this or that political system),\nthe citizens should not lead a life such as is led by craftsmen\nor merchants (such a life is ignoble and is contrary to virtue);\nthe citizens of the state planned by us should likewise not be\nagricultural workers, because they will be in need of leisure for\nthe development of their virtue.\u201d Aristotle\u2019s _Politics_: Works of\nthe Petrograd Philosophic Society, Petrograd, 1911, pages 318, 319.\n\n[188] An omission in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[189] The editor knows nothing about the acquaintanceship of Tolstoi\nwith Madame Shorin.\n\n[190] Countess A. M. Olsuphiev, who had been on friendly terms with\nTolstoi. In a note to V. G. Chertkov, written on a piece of proof\nof _Resurrection_, June 8, 1899, Tolstoi communicated: \u201cI have a\nsorrow. Anna Mikhailovna Olsuphiev died.\u201d\n\n[191] A village near Nicholskoe, as well as the village Shelkovo,\nmentioned below.\n\n[192] A young lively girl, whom Tolstoi met at the Chertkovs\u2019 when\nthey lived in the summer of 1896 near Yasnaya Polyana. Being arrested\non suspicion of revolutionary activity and imprisoned in the fortress\nof Peter and Paul, she committed suicide by setting herself on fire.\n\nIn the letter to V. G. Chertkov, Tolstoi wrote:\n\n\u201cIn Petersburg on February 12th the following occurred: Vietrova,\nMaria Fedosievna, whom you know and whom I knew, a student confined\nin the House of Detention before Trial in the strike case, little\nconnected with it, was transferred to the fortress of Peter and\nPaul. There, as they say and surmise, after inquiry and violation\n(that is still unestablished) she poured kerosene on herself, set\nfire to it and on the third day died. Her comrades who visited her,\nkept on bringing her things, which were accepted, and only after two\nweeks, were they told that she had burnt herself. The youth, all the\nstudents, up to three thousand persons (there were some also from\nthe Theological Seminary) gathered in the Kazan Cathedral for the\nservice of the dead. They were not permitted, but they themselves\nbegan to sing \u201cEternal Memory\u201d and with wreaths, intended to march\non the Nevsky Prospect, but were not permitted, and they went along\nKazan Street. Their names were taken and they were let free. Every\none is indignant. I receive letters and people come and tell me\nabout it. I feel great pity for all who take part in these affairs,\nand I have a greater and greater desire to explain to people how\nthey ruin themselves simply because they neglect that law (or they\ndo not know it) which was given by Christ and which frees from such\ndeeds and from the participation in them.\u201d\n\nTolstoi approached A. F. Koni for advice, whether it were possible to\npublish what was authentically known about this terrible case, and\nsecondly about \u201cwhat to do in order to resist\u201d this kind of event?\n\n[193] _Two lines crossed out by Tolstoi._ A note by M. L. Obolensky\nin the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[194] The Englishman, Aylmer Maude, translator of many works of\nTolstoi into English. The agricultural colony which Tolstoi mentions\nwas being founded at that time in England in the town of Purleigh\nin Essex. Maude settled in the neighbourhood of the colony and\nsupported it materially. Maude himself and several representatives\nof this colony visited Tolstoi at this time. He wrote and published\nin England, a biography of Tolstoi, _The Life of Tolstoi_, by Aylmer\nMaude, two volumes, London, 1908 to 1910. Unfortunately this most\ndetailed biography of Tolstoi in English, contains among other things\nthe most perverted information about Tolstoi and an absolutely\nincorrect interpretation of his views, as well as of some of his\nacts. Tolstoi himself, learning before his death of the contents\nof some of these chapters which were sent to Yasnaya Polyana in\nmanuscript, found the interpretation of the relation among people\nnear to him so incorrect that he wrote about it to Maude.\n\n[195] I. M. Tregubov, sentenced to exile by administrative order, was\nliving in the Caucasus among the Dukhobors, far from the centres of\nadministration, and remained still free. (See entry of following day.)\n\n[196] This search was made in connection with I. M. Tregubov\u2019s\nthings, who was wanted at that time, and which were left by him in\nA. N. Dunaev\u2019s apartment.\n\n[197] That is, in England at the V. G. and A. K. Chertkovs.\n\n[198] _Further in Tolstoi\u2019s manuscript two pages are cut out._ Note\nof M. L. Obolensky in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\nIn reference to the mood during the month mentioned by him as \u201cbad\nand unproductive\u201d Tolstoi wrote to Chertkov (April 30, 1897): \u201cI\nwill not say that I have been depressed, because when I ask myself,\n\u2018Who am I? For what am I?\u2019 I answer myself satisfactorily, but I\nhave no energy, and I feel as if Lilliputian hairs were laid over\nme and I have less and less initiative and activity.\u201d\n\n[199] In the beginning of June of that year, Tolstoi decided to\nleave the conditions of his life which tortured him and wrote a\nletter to his wife about this. But later he changed his mind and on\nthe envelope of this letter made an inscription: \u201cIf I will make\nno special provision about this letter, then give this after my\ndeath to S. A.\u201d This letter he gave afterwards for safe-keeping to\nhis son-in-law, Prince N. L. Obolensky, who did deliver it, as was\ndesignated, after Tolstoi\u2019s death. At that time it was printed in\ndifferent publications. (See _Letters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his\nWife_, March, 1913, pages 524 to 526.)\n\n[200] In his letter to V. G. Chertkov of July 12, 1896, Tolstoi\ninformed him of his illness: \u201cAbout a week ago when I began to answer\nletters, I fell terribly ill with a bilious attack, so that I could\nonly answer one letter. My illness was very painful, but it passed\naway quickly. I am now vigorous and healthy.\u201d\n\n[201] Tolstoi\u2019s daughter, Maria Lvovna, married to Prince N. L.\nObolensky.\n\n[202] Tolstoi wrote about him to A. C. Chertkov (July 12, 1897): \u201cA\nyoung peasant, Shidlovsky, came to me from the province of Kiev, a\nman with a very lively spirit.\u201d\n\n[203] In his letter to Chertkov of July 23, 1897, Tolstoi wrote:\n\u201cLatterly I have begun again to make entries in the Journal--a sign\nthat I have revived somewhat spiritually and no longer feel myself\nalone.\u201d\n\n[204] William Crookes, a well-known English physicist and chemist,\na follower of spiritualism. A detailed report about this speech was\nprinted in the _Novoe Vremia_ of 1897, under the title, \u201cOn the\nRelativity of Human Knowledge.\u201d\n\n[205] M. P. Novikov gave Tolstoi his notes, through his brother, in\nwhich he described all the persecutions which he had to undergo for\nhis friendship with Tolstoi. The notes up to this time have not yet\nbeen printed.\n\n[206] Paul Carus, editor of a Chicago magazine, _The Open Court_,\ndevoted to the scientific explanation of religious questions. (See\nhis article, \u201cA Tribute to Tolstoi,\u201d printed in the _International\nTolstoi Almanac_, compiled by P. A. Sergienko, _Kniga_, 1909.)\n\n[207] Evgenie Ivanovich Popov, friend and adherent of Tolstoi\u2019s\nideas, author of the book, _The Life and Death of E. N. Drozhin_\n(see Note 38), several other works on vegetarianism, the simple\nlife, mathematics, etc.\n\n[208] The family of Count I. L. Tolstoi.\n\n[209] Vasili Vasilevich Longinov, later Rector of the Kharkov\nTheological Seminary.\n\n[210] In a letter to the Chertkovs of August 8, 1897, Tolstoi wrote:\n\u201cI feel weak also from the fact, that we have a pile of visitors\nhere ... all this wastes time and strength and is useless. I thirst\nterribly for silence and peace. How happy I would be if I could end\nmy days in solitude and principally, in conditions, not repulsive\nand torturing to my conscience. But it seems that it is necessary.\nAt least, I know no way out.\u201d\n\n[211] Peter Alexeevich Bulakhov, a peasant from the province of\nSmolensk, belonging to the sect of the Old-Believers, the followers\nof which avoid military service.\n\n[212] Mikhail Alexandrovich Stakhovich, afterwards a member of\nthe Council of Empire, an old friend of the Tolstoi family, and\nprobably his sister, Sophia Alexandrovna, or his brother, Alexander\nAlexandrovich (1858\u20131915).\n\n[213] Probably--Vasili Alexeevich Maklakov, a well-known lawyer,\nafterwards a member of the Duma, and his brother, Alexei Alexeevich,\na well-known Moscow physician.\n\n[214] Ilya Yakovlovich Ginsburg, a well-known Russian sculptor, who\nmade several busts and statues of Tolstoi.\n\nMikhail Nicholaievich Sobolev, instructor in the Moscow University,\nliving at this time with the Tolstois as a teacher to Count M. L.\nTolstoi.\n\nN. A. Kasatkin, a well-known Russian painter.\n\n[215] In regard to this letter of the Japanese, Tolstoi in a letter\nof August 8, 1897, wrote: \u201cRecently I received a letter from Crosby\nwith an enclosure of a letter from a Japanese who lived with him in\nNew York. The Japanese read _The Gospel in Brief_, and writes that it\nexplained to him the meaning of life and that he is now going home to\nJapan, in order to apply these beliefs to his life and to the life\nof others and to establish _settlements_ there. A splendid letter\nwhich touched me deeply and gave me joy. The same truth evidently\nis accessible and necessary to every one.\u201d\n\n[216] Count L. L. Tolstoi (born in 1869), Tolstoi\u2019s third son, and\nhis wife, the Princess Dora Fedorovna (born Westerlund).\n\n[217] B. N. Leontev, at one time calling himself a follower of\nTolstoi, committed suicide in 1909.\n\n[218] In the _Russkia Viedomosti_ (No. 211, 1897), in the report of\nthe missionary congress which took place in Kazan in August, 1897,\nin which many high representatives of the hierarchy participated,\nit was stated among other things, that for combating the spread of\nsects and dissensions, the congress considered it necessary to adopt\nthe following measures: To forbid the dissenters to open schools\nfor their children and to close all the schools existing at the\npresent moment; to declare the adherence to a particularly obnoxious\nsect as a compromising circumstance and to thus give the right to\npeasant communities to expel from their midst members discovered as\nbelonging to an obnoxious sect and to exile them to Siberia. For the\nsake of combating dissensions and sects, still other measures were\nsuggested and discussed at the congress, which among others were: The\nsoliciting of the passing of a law, by which it would be possible to\ntake away by force the children of the dissenters and sectarians, and\nthe establishing of asylums in every diocese for bringing them up\nin the orthodox faith.... The Archbishop of Riazan, Meletie, called\nthe attention of the congress to another very important measure, and\nto his mind, a very useful one for the success of missionary work:\nthe confiscation of the property of the dissenters and sectarians.\n\n[219] P. A. Boulanger was sent abroad for continuing the affair of\nhelping the Dukhobors, for which V. G. Chertkov, P. I. Biriukov and\nI. M. Tregubov were exiled before him.\n\n[220] In his letter to the Swedish papers (not yet printed in\nRussia) Tolstoi wrote that the Nobel prize ought to be awarded to\nthe Dukhobors, as people who have done their utmost towards the\nestablishment of universal peace. This letter, dated August 27, 1898,\nwas printed in P. I. Biriukov\u2019s paper: _Svobodnaia Mysl_ (Geneva),\nNo. 4, 1899.\n\n[221] Arthur St. John, an Englishman, a former officer in the India\nservice, came to Moscow to deliver the money donated for the benefit\nof the Dukhobors by English Quakers. Wishing to come into personal\nrelation with the Dukhobors, he went to the Caucasus, where he was\narrested and sent out of Russia. Later, he went with the Dukhobors\nto America and lived with them a long time.\n\n[222] The Molokans, from the province of Samara, district of Buzuluk,\ncame twice (in April and September, 1897) to Tolstoi to ask him that\nhe help them get back the children taken from them by the police and\nplaced in orthodox monasteries. (See Tolstoi\u2019s letter about this\nto the editor of the _Peterburgskaia Viedomosti_, printed in that\npaper in October, 1897, and reprinted in the _Collected Works of\nTolstoi_, edited by Sytin, Popular Edition, Volume XXII. See also,\narticle of A. S. Prugavin, \u201cLeo Tolstoi and the Malakans of Samara,\u201d\nin his book, _On Leo Tolstoi and the Tolstoians_, Moscow, 1911.)\n\n[223] About the children taken away from the Molokans. The rough\ndraft of this letter is now in the Petrograd Tolstoi Museum.\n\n[224] Count A. V. Olsuphiev, Adjutant General. In letters to him\nand to the two other persons mentioned below, Tolstoi asked their\ncollaboration in freeing from the monasteries, the children taken\nfrom the Molokans.\n\n[225] Charles Heath. An Englishman now dead, a former instructor of\nEnglish language and literature in a law school, and later one of\nthe tutors of the Emperor, Nicholas II.\n\n[226] Mme. E. I. Chertkov, the widow of an Adjutant General, a\nwell-known follower of the \u201cEvangelist\u201d teaching or what is known\nas The Pashkov Evangelist Doctrine. The mother of V. G. Chertkov.\n\n[227] The Swede, Langlet, who previously had given detailed\ninformation to Tolstoi about the Nobel prize. He was a guest at\nYasnaya Polyana at this time.\n\n[228] The last sentence was marked off in the original.\n\n[229] To V. G. Chertkov, during the time of his enforced two-year\nsojourn abroad, Tolstoi from time to time actually sent extracts of\nhis Journal. But in general, Tolstoi, for reasons which will be given\nat the proper time and place, found it later necessary to change\nhis decision not to give his Journal to be copied in its entirety\nto any one; the confirmation of this can be found in the fact that\nthe present issue of the Journal is being printed from a transcript\nmade according to Tolstoi\u2019s wishes. When V. G. Chertkov returned to\nRussia, Tolstoi continually gave him his Journals to copy in their\nentirety.\n\n[230] In the letter to A. C. Chertkov of October 13, 1897, Tolstoi\nwrote: \u201cHow many people are there with whom one does not speak\nunreservedly, because you know that they are drunk. Some are drunk\nwith greed, some with vanity, some with love, some simply with\ndrugs. Lord forfend us from these intoxications. These intoxications\nplace no worse boundaries between people than religion, patriotism,\naristocracy do, and prevent that union which God desires.\u201d\n\n[231] V. G. Chertkov lived through hard times in England; his\ncondition naturally reflected itself upon his family, among which\nnumber was his sister-in-law, O. K. Dieterichs, who was their guest\nat this time.\n\n[232] Tolstoi sent to the editor of the _Peterburgskaia Viedomosti_\na letter in regard to the children taken away from the Samara\nMolokans, and about those measures which were suggested as a means\nof fighting the sectarians and Old-Believers which were made in the\nmissionary congress in Kazan. This letter was printed in No. 282,\nof October 15th.\n\n[233] Protestant ministers of various localities in Holland: L. A.\nBeller, A. De-Kuh and I-Kh. Klein, at a meeting in Grevenhagen,\ndefinitely expressed themselves against war and military service.\n\n[234] N took an adverse attitude to Chertkov\u2019s social work among\nEnglishmen. Chertkov fell ill with pneumonia.\n\n[235] To Moscow to be copied.\n\n[236] V. D. Liapunov (1873\u20131905), peasant-poet of Tula. Working in\nTula, Liapunov in the autumn of 1897 came to Tolstoi that he judge\nhis poetry. Tolstoi was very much pleased with the poems, contrary to\nhis custom, for in general he did not like poetry. Tolstoi proposed\nthat Liapunov stay in his house to help copy his manuscripts.\n\n[237] Afanasi Aggeev, a free-thinking peasant from the village of\nKaznacheevka, 4 versts from Yasnaya Polyana. In 1903 he was sentenced\nby the Tula District Court to exile in Siberia for life for the\npublic utterance of words insulting to the Orthodox Faith. He died\nin 1908.\n\n[238] N. Y. Grot (1852\u20131899), professor at the Moscow University,\nauthor of numerous articles on philosophic questions and editor\nof the magazine, _Problems of Philosophy and Psychology_. Tolstoi\nsubmitted his work, _What Is Art?_ to Grot to be printed in his\nmagazine. Shortly before his death, at the request of Grot\u2019s brother,\nTolstoi wrote his recollections about him, which were printed,\ntogether with his letter to Grot, in the compilation, _N. Y. Grot, in\nSketches, Recollections and Letters by Comrades and Pupils, Friends\nand Admirers_, Petrograd, 1911, and in the _Full Collected Works\nof L. N. Tolstoi_, issued by Sytin, subscribed edition, Volume XV;\nPopular Edition, Volume XXIV.\n\n[239] A. P. Ivanov (died 1912), ex-officer and old scribe, with whom\nTolstoi became acquainted at the time of the census of 1862, having\nfound him among the Moscow tramps. He led a vagabond life, coming or\ntramping from time to time to Yasnaya Polyana to help Tolstoi copy\nhis manuscripts.\n\n[240] Prince D. A. Khilkov (1858\u20131915), who at this time was in\naccord with Tolstoi in several questions of a more external nature,\nformerly an officer of the Hussars and afterwards of the Cossacks,\na landlord in the district of Sumsk, province of Kharkov. In the\neighties, he resigned from military service and sold for a trifle his\n400 dessiatines of land, the only personal property he had at the\ntime, to the peasants of the village of Pavlovok; in 1889, on account\nof his propaganda against religion, he was exiled by administrative\norder to Zakavkaz. In 1893 Khilkov and his wife suffered a great\nsorrow: their children were taken away from them by order of the\ngovernment (following the manipulations of Khilkov\u2019s mother),\nand they were given over to this lady for bringing up, she having\nabsolutely no sympathy with the opinions of her son. Afterwards,\nwhen a strong movement among the Dukhobors began in the Caucasus,\nKhilkov was sent over to the Baltic Provinces, where he lived up to\n1899, at which time it was decided that he be sent abroad. In his\nsojourn abroad, his convictions underwent a change to the side of\nthe violent revolutionaries. But when Khilkov returned to Russia in\n1905, he absolutely abstained from every political activity. In the\nbeginning of the Russian-German War, Khilkov entered the army as a\nvolunteer and in October, 1914, was killed at Lvov (Lemberg).\n\n[241] A peasant from Yasnaya Polyana, now dead, who was well-lettered\nand loved to read.\n\n[242] The clergy who came carried the icon to the churches, in the\nparish of which stood Yasnaya Polyana. According to the order of\nthe clergy, the elder of Yasnaya Polyana called a village meeting\nand ordered every one to go to church and meet the icon which was\nafterwards carried from house to house in all the households of\nthe village. Concerning Tolstoi and the icon, see his letter to\nCountess S. A. Tolstoi, which evidently by mistake is dated 1898\n(_Letters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, Moscow, 1913, page 558).\n\n[243] N. N. Miklukha-Maklai (1847\u20131887), a well-known Russian\ntraveller, living many years among the Tuzemts of New Guinea and\nother islands. In his letter to Miklukha-Maklai in the middle of the\neighties, Tolstoi wrote that he considered him remarkable, not for\nwhat every one else considered him remarkable, but that \u201che could\nfind manifestations of humanity among the wildest men on the globe.\u201d\n\n[244] Such a type was afterwards portrayed by Tolstoi in his story\n_The Forged Coupon_, under the name of the housekeeper, Vasili.\n(See _Posthumous Literary Works of L. N. Tolstoi_, issued by A. L.\nTolstoi, Volume I.)\n\n[245] Every group of people is always inferior to the elements which\ncompose it.\n\n[246] The work by M. O. Menshikov, _Concerning Holy Love and\nSex Love_, was printed in _Knizhki Nedieli_ in 1897, No. 11. In\nChapters IV and V of this work, Menshikov wrote about the struggle\nof the two principles: The many-gods and the One-God; Tolstoi was\nprobably pleased with the following lines: \u201cThe great teaching about\nOne-God wiped out, together with the idols, the very conception\nof separate gods; the gods disappeared but their elements--the\npassions--remained, until now the overwhelming majority of\nChristians who profess by word in the One-God, in reality bow to a\n_plurality_.... (Italics made by the author.) Notwithstanding the\nthousand year rule of the Gospels, we, in an overwhelming majority\nare more sincerely idolaters than Christians--of course without\nsuspecting it.... Nihilist, Godless, paganized, the contemporary\ngeneration accepts as an undoubted law, that the development of man\nconsists in enlarging the number of needs and refining them to the\npoint of a cult. Is this not a new plurality of gods, an idolatry?\u201d\n\n[247] In his book, _What Is Art?_\n\n[248] St. John, Chapter XIV, Verse 2.\n\n[249] Chapter I, Verse 24, St. Paul to the Colossians.\n\n[250] See letter of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife, March, 1913,\npage 535 (No. 583) and page 537 (No. 585).\n\n[251] See letter of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife, March, 1913,\npages 536\u2013537.\n\n[252] About this time Tolstoi wrote to an acquaintance of his: \u201cYou\nknow Mme. M. A. Schmidt. She lives near us, straining every effort,\nnotwithstanding her weak health and her age (about 50), to work to\nsupport herself. (She constantly helps people) and it is impossible\nto see her without a softening of the heart and ... envy. She is\nalways joyous, calm and graceful.\u201d\n\n[253] In the _Novoe Vremia_ (November 19, 1897, No. 7,806) there\nappeared an article by V. V. Rozanov: \u201cGraceful Demonism\u201d in which,\nin an ironical tone, he criticised Menshikov\u2019s article, \u201cOn Sex\nLove,\u201d which was printed in _Knizhki Nedieli_ (1897, Nos. 9\u201311).\nIn his words later on, Tolstoi speaks of his deeply loved brother,\nNickolai Nickolaievich (1823\u20131860). In his _Recollections_, Tolstoi\nrelates the incident as follows: \u201cI remember how once, a very stupid\nand bad man, an Adjutant General, who was hunting with him, laughed\nat him and how my brother, glancing at me, smiled kindly,\u201d evidently\nfinding great satisfaction in this. (Biriukov, _Biography of L. N.\nTolstoi_, Vol. I, Moscow, 1911, pages 43\u201344).\n\n[254] A. Maude translated _What Is Art?_ into English.\n\n[255] The letter of N. Y. Grot is printed, I think, in Tolstoi\u2019s\nbook, _What Is Art?_\n\n[256] Grigori Antonovich Zakharlin (1829\u20131895), a well-known professor\nin the Moscow University, in his day, one of the most popular Moscow\nphysicians.\n\n[257] Countess Maria Nicholaievna Tolstoi (1830\u20131912), Tolstoi\u2019s only\nsister. As a young girl, she married her second cousin, Count V. P.\nTolstoi; some time later she separated from him and soon after she\nbecame a widow. When her daughters were married (Mme. V. V. Nagornov,\nPrincess E. V. Obolensky and Mme. E. S. Denisenko) Countess Tolstoi,\nunder the influence of the well-known Father Ambrose, of the Optina\nDesert, entered the convent of Shamordino (in the province of Kaluga)\nand later took the veil. In this convent she spent the rest of her\nlife.\n\n[258] Monk Ambrose, the celebrated holy man of the Optina Desert,\ndied in 1891, at the age of 80. About Tolstoi\u2019s visits to the Optina\nDesert see fragment of notes made by S. A. Tolstoi under the title\n_My Life_ (_Tolstoi Annual_, 1913, Petrograd, 1914).\n\n[259] Dushan Petrovich Makovitsky, then editor in Hungary (in\nRuzhomberg), of the Slavic publication which corresponded to the\npublication _Posrednik_ issued in Moscow, in which Tolstoi and some\nof his friends took a most active interest.\n\n[260] In this place, in the original Journal, a page had been entered\nin Tolstoi\u2019s hand; evidently the beginning of a letter. This was\nits contents:\n\n\u201cYou ask me a question which I now for twenty years have been trying\nto solve.\n\n\u201cIt always seems to us--when the simple truth is that we ought to\nlead a Christian life, and when it is disclosed to us how terribly\nfar from that life is the life we lead--it always seems to us that\nwe for the moment find ourselves in an exceptionally disadvantageous\ncondition for beginning that new life, which opens itself to us:\nTo one, it is a mother, to another a wife, to a third, children,\nto a fourth, business; this one bought a bull, or the other has a\nwedding which interferes from his going to the feast. And we usually\nsay to ourselves, \u2018Oh, if it were not so,\u2019--looking at it as on an\naccidental hindrance and not as on the unavoidable conditions of\nChristian life, as on the law of gravitation in problems of activity.\n\n\u201cBeauty which discloses to us the kingdom of God blinds us so, that\nwe immediately want to enter it and we forget that this is not the\nprogramme of life, but the ideal; and that the programme of life\nconsists in struggle and in effort to attain the kingdom of God, to\napproach it.\n\n\u201cAnd when you understand this, then the attitude towards activity\nis changed....\u201d\n\n[261] The village of Dolgoe, province of Tula, district of Krapevensk,\nnineteen versts from Yasnaya Polyana. The Yasnaya Polyana house in\nwhich Tolstoi was born stands there. In the fifties this house was\nsold to a neighbouring landlord, Gorobov, who took it from Yasnaya\nPolyana to Dolgoe, where it remained until 1913, when it was destroyed.\n\n[262] Nicholai Ilich Storozhenko (1836\u20131906), professor in the Moscow\nUniversity, author of numerous books and articles on Russian history\nand general literature.\n\n[263] Tolstoi probably asked N. A. Kasatkin for examples of true\nart in painting.\n\n[264] N\u2019s stories seemed to be about some of the Chertkovs\u2019 difficult\nexperiences in England.\n\n[265] Prince S. N. Troubetskoi (1862\u20131905), professor of philosophy in\nthe Moscow University, took an active part in the magazine, _Problems\nof Philosophy and Psychology_, and became after N. Y. Grot\u2019s death,\nthe editor of it. Tolstoi, as was said above, gave his work, _What\nIs Art?_ to this magazine.\n\n[266] Of these subjects Tolstoi, as much as can be judged, made use\nof the following: the first, _Father Sergius_, 1898; the second,\n_The Posthumous Memoirs of the Monk, Fedor Kuzmich_, 1905; the\nfourth, _Korni Vasiliev_, 1905; fifth, _The Resurrection of Hell\nand Its Destruction_, 1902; sixth, _The Forged Coupon_, 1902\u20131904;\nseventh, _Hadji Murad_, 1898, 1902\u20131904; the tenth, _Resurrection_,\n1898\u20131899; and the thirteenth, _The Divine and the Human_, 1903\u20131904;\nthe twelfth subject, _Mother_, was begun by Tolstoi in the beginning\nof the nineties (Introduction to _The Story of a Mother_, or _A\nMother\u2019s Notes_).\n\n[267] It was disagreeable to Tolstoi that the foreign publishers, who\nwished to print the first edition of his book, _What Is Art?_ made the\ncondition that it should appear everywhere simultaneously and that it\nshould not be published anywhere first, not even in Russia. Tolstoi,\nbeing little acquainted with the conditions of foreign publication,\ndid not understand at first how unavoidable these demands were for\na simultaneous publication of books in various countries, and he\nwas disagreeably embarrassed that he had to absolutely forbid the\nappearance of the book in Russia before the day arranged for foreign\npublication. Later, realising the affair more closely, Tolstoi saw\nthe necessity of these conditions of the publishers.\n\n[268] I.e., he entirely finished the work _What Is Art?_ and gave\nit to _Problems of Philosophy and Psychology_.\n\n[269] V. G. Chertkov, being exiled from Russia, settled in England,\nwhere he founded the publication, _The Free Press_, in which the\nworks of Tolstoi were printed, as well as of authors near to him in\npoint of view which could not be printed in the Russian papers. He\nalso arranged for the translations of the new works of Tolstoi into\nthe important European tongues. The telegram which Tolstoi mentions\nmust have been about the English translation of _What is Art?_\n\n[270] Sofron Pavlovich Chizhov, a peasant from the district of Umansk,\nin the province of Kiev, because of his spreading of views adverse\nto the orthodox religion, was exiled by administrative order, first\nto Poland and then to eastern Siberia. His _Memoirs_ were printed\nin _The Free Press_, No. 10, 1904. Tolstoi often wrote to Chizhov\nin exile, expressing his joy that he bears all oppression \u201clike a\nman, with patience and with love.\u201d Chizhov has remained in Siberia\nfor life and at present is living near Yakutsk.\n\n[271] As in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[272] See Note 267.\n\n[273] In a letter to Chertkov, January 18, 1898, Tolstoi wrote:\n\u201cLetters with threats have, of course, no effect, but they are\nunpleasant, in this sense, that there should be people who hate\nfutilely. I am always ready to die and that is _the thing_. I thought\na little while ago: ... that when one is healthy one ought to try to\nlive better on the outside, but when one is ill then learn to die\nbetter. Besides, these letters haven\u2019t even this merit: they are so\nstupidly written that they have been conceived evidently only to\nfrighten.\u201d\n\n[274] Concerning this illness, Tolstoi, mentioning it in his letter\nto the Chertkovs, December 28, 1897, said: \u201cThe illness was the\nusual one, biliousness, and has now passed away.\u201d\n\n[275] Tolstoi began and finished this drama only in 1900.\n\n[276] Tolstoi\u2019s brother-in-law, A. A. Behrs.\n\n[277] Sergei Mickailovich Soloviev (1820\u20131879), the Russian historian,\nthe father of the philosopher, Vladimir Sergeevich, and the novelist,\nVsevolod Sergeevich Soloviev.\n\n[278] The preface to the English edition, _What Is Art?_ In his\nletter to Chertkov, December 27, 1897, Tolstoi wrote:\n\n\u201cWouldn\u2019t such a preface be suitable?\n\n\u201cThe book which is about to appear cannot be published in its\nentirety in Russia on account of the censor, and therefore it is\nbeing published in England in translation, the correctness of which\nI have not the least doubt of. The five chapters printed in Russia\nin the magazine _Problems of Philosophy and Psychology_ have already\nsuffered several deletions and changes; the following chapters,\nespecially those which explain the essence of my point of view on\nart, will surely not be permitted in Russia and therefore I ask\nall those who are interested in this book to judge it only by this\npresent edition.\u201d\n\n[279] Nicholas Evgrafovich Phedoseev, a political exile, who went by\n_\u00e9tape_ with the Dukhobors exiled to Siberia. In his letter Fedosiev\ntold Tolstoi about the interviews given to him by the Dukhobors\nthemselves, concerning the suffering those who were sent to the\nEkaterinograd disciplinary battalion had to undergo, and he also\ngave him information about the Dukhobors in Siberia. This letter\nwas printed in Leaflets of _The Free Press_, 1898, No. I.\n\n[280] \u201cI received a letter through the Chertkovs,\u201d wrote Tolstoi,\nJanuary 18, 1898--_from G. Bedborough, the publisher of The Adult_,\na letter with questions about sex-problems and a very light-headed\nprogram.\n\n[281] Written in English, in the original.\n\n[282] Ilya Efimovich Repine. Concerning this visit, Tolstoi wrote to\nChertkov, January 21, 1898: \u201cOne of the recent pleasant impressions\nwas the meeting with Repine. I think we made a good impression on\neach other.\u201d\n\n[283] Countess Alexandra Lvovna Tolstoi (born, 1884), Tolstoi\u2019s\nyoungest daughter.\n\n[284] The literary work conceived and written by Tolstoi only in 1902:\nThe Legend of the Destruction of Hell by Christ and Its Resurrection\nby the Devils, arranging the teaching of Christ so that it improve\nthe evil life of people.\n\n[285] As in the copy at the disposal of the editors.\n\n[286] Michail Fedorovich Gulenko, serving in the department of the\nMoscow-Kursk Railroad, and at this time one of the most active\ncontributors to _Posrednik_.\n\n[287] Leopold Antonovich Sullerzhitsky, later one of the managers\nof the Moscow Artistic Theatre. In the Tolstoi family he was often\ncalled for short, Suller.\n\n[288] A poem by V. D. Liapunov, printed at first with a letter by\nTolstoi in the magazine, _Russkaia Mysl_ (1898, No. 1): and later in\nthe book, _V. D. Liapunov, a Young Poet_, \u201cLibrary of Leo Tolstoi,\u201d\nedited by P. I. Biriukov, Moscow, 1912.\n\n[289] In _Paths of Life_ Tolstoi expresses this thought more exactly:\n\u201cThat which we consider for ourselves as evil, is in most cases a\ngood which is not yet understood by us.\u201d In another place he says\nin speaking of the same problem: \u201cWe must distinguish between our\nconceptions of evil in general, \u2018objective\u2019 evil, as philosophers\nsay, an outer one, and between evil for each man individually,\na \u2018subjective\u2019 evil, an inner one. There is no objective evil.\nSubjective evil is a departure from reason, it is indeed death.\u201d (A\ncombination, _The Four Gospels Harmonized, Translated and Studied_,\nChapter III.) See also Journal of May 28, 1896, thought 1.\n\n[290] _One word illegible._ Note by Prince Obolensky in the copy in\npossession of the editors.\n\n[291] To avoid misunderstanding as to whom this remark of Tolstoi\u2019s\nrefers, it is proper here to cite an extract from another one of his\nwritings: \u201cThey say that defence is impossible under non-resistance;\nbut the Christian does not need any defence. All that an evil-doer\ncan do is to deprive one of property, to kill, and a Christian is\nnot afraid of that. The Christian not worrying about what to eat,\nwhat to drink, what to wear, and knowing that without the will of the\nFather not a hair will fall from his head, the Christian has no need\nto use violence against the evil-doer. The evil-doer can do nothing\nto him.\u201d (From the rough draft of _The Kingdom of God Within Us_,\n1890\u20131893, with later corrections by Tolstoi made during a revision\nof his _Complete Collection of Thoughts_.)\n\n[292] Jean Grave, a contemporary French writer, of anarchical\ntendencies.\n\n[293] Shortly before that, February 14, 1898, Tolstoi wrote to V. G.\nChertkov: \u201cAbout myself I can say that I would be satisfied with my\nspiritual state, if I were not dissatisfied with my small external\noutput. The causes are: Ill health, as well as the bustle of city\nlife (although now for about three days I have been well).\u201d\n\n[294] The twentieth, the concluding chapter of _What Is Art?_ is\ndevoted to a criticism of contemporary science from the standpoint\nof Christian philosophy.\n\n[295] Anatol Ivanovich Pharesov, the democratic fiction writer and\npublicist.\n\nAlexander Kapitonovich Malikov, who lived in the seventies in Orel,\npreached the doctrine of \u201cGod-humanity,\u201d consisting in this, that each\nman ought to be re-born morally and exalt the divine principle which\nwas in him. Malikov was absolutely opposed to all violent methods of\nfighting evil. In 1875 Malikov with a small circle of persons who\nshared his opinions (fifteen in all) emigrated to America; where in\nthe State of Kansas he established an agricultural community on the\nbasis of the doctrine professed by him. When two years later the\ncommunity fell apart, Malikov returned to Russia. He died in 1904 at\nthe age of sixty-two. See about him the article of A. S. Prugavin,\n\u201cLeo Tolstoi and the Man-Gods,\u201d and the book on _Leo Tolstoi and\nthe Tolstoians_, Moscow, 1911.\n\n[296] The agricultural colony, Georgia, issued a magazine with a\nChristian tendency, called _Social Gospel_. Among the members of\nthis colony was Crosby. There were about one hundred colonists. In\nthis letter, addressed to George Howard Gibson, Tolstoi expressed\nhis opinion on agricultural societies in general.\n\n[297] At this time, the Dukhobors received permission from the\nRussian authorities to emigrate. Tolstoi addressed himself to\nRussian, European and American society with an appeal, in which he\nsummoned them to help the Dukhobors with money as well as with direct\nassistance in the difficulties of emigration. The appeal to Russian\nsociety was printed among other places in the _Full Collected Works\nof Tolstoi_, published by Sytin, subscribed and popular editions,\nVolume XVIII; and the letter to the English newspapers was printed\nin _The Free Press_, No. I (1898, England), in the article of P. I.\nBiriukov and afterwards reprinted in his book _The Dukhobors_.\n\n[298] When _What Is Art?_ was already printed in the _Problems of\nPhilosophy and Psychology_ and submitted to the censorship there came\nan order from Petrograd to submit it to the theologic censorship.\nThe theologic censor not only crossed out many passages, but in some\nplaces made changes which perverted the very thought of the author.\nIn the preface to the English translation of this work, Tolstoi\nexpressed regret that, contrary to his custom, he consented at the\nrequest of N. Y. Grot to print this work with the censor deletions\nand softenings. And he also speaks about the harm of every kind of\ncompromise.... This preface was printed in Russian in _The Free\nPress_, No. 1.\n\n[299] At this place in the Journal there was a diagram composed of\nflowing lines, irregularly drawn. As the editors did not have the\noriginal of the Journal, but used the copy made by Prince Obolensky,\nit was impossible to make an exact facsimile of the original diagram.\n\n[300] In his letter to V. G. Chertkov, Tolstoi wrote: \u201c... This\nhappened: In the morning they told me that two men came from the\nCaucasus. They were the Dukhobors, P. V. Planidin, an acquaintance\nof yours, and Chernov. They came, naturally, without passports to\ngive me information and to find out everything pertaining to their\naffair. After talking with these dear friends and finding out\neverything, I decided to send them to Petersburg.... They went, spent\nthe day there, and returned.... They are touchingly instructive.\u201d\n\u201cThe principal reason for Planidin\u2019s and Chernov\u2019s coming,\u201d Tolstoi\nwrote April 6th, \u201cwas to ask some one of our friends to go to visit\nVerigin in Obdorsk.\u201d\n\n[301] Ivan Petrovich Brashnin, a typical old-fashioned Moscow\nmerchant, a dealer in raw silks; his family consisted of his wife and\ntwo sons. A. N. Dunaev introduced him to Tolstoi in the eighties. He\nwas then over 60. He had wanted to make his acquaintance, because\nthe views of Tolstoi were near to his soul; in spite of his former\nstrict orthodoxy he warmly accepted the views of Tolstoi. Being\nsincere and straight-forward, he rejected the ... teaching and became\na convinced follower of the pure Christian teaching. He spoke with\ngreat pleasure and emotion about his visits and talks with Tolstoi,\nwhich gave him the greatest joy.\n\nA few years prior to his death he became a strict vegetarian. Before\nhis death he refused the viaticon of the priest and the rites of\nconfession and the sacrament.\n\nIn his letter to A. C. Chertkov of March 30, 1898, Tolstoi wrote\nhim about his last visit to Brashnin:\n\n\u201cYou know there is an old man, a rich merchant, Brashnin, who is\nnear to us in spirit. I have already known him for about fifteen\nyears. He has cancer of the liver, so the doctors have found out. I\nvisited him once in the winter. He was very weak, thin, yellow, but\non his feet. One morning about a week ago A. N. Dunaiev came to me\nwith the news that Brashnin is dying and that he had sent a boy to\nask that I take leave of him. We went and found him dying. My first\nwords were: \u2018Is he calm?\u2019 Absolutely. He was in full possession of\nhis memory, had a clear mind, thanked me, and took leave of me and\nI of him, as people do before going on a journey. With sadness we\nspoke about the ... I said that we will see each other again. He\ncalmly answered, \u2018No more.\u2019 He took leave and thanked us for our\nvisit. Everything was so simple, peaceful and earnest.\u201d\n\n[302] The article on war and on military service was called forth by\nthe request of two foreign papers to the representatives of political\nand social workers, and the representatives of science and art, to\nexpress themselves on whether war was necessary in our time, what\nwere the consequences of militarism and what were the means that\nled the quickest way to a realisation of universal peace.\n\n[303] The former estate of Count I. L. Tolstoi in Cherni, the\nprovince of Tula, to which Tolstoi went to help the famine-stricken\npeasants. As in the year 1891 when Tolstoi helped the famine-stricken\npeasants of the province of Riazan, he considered the establishment\nof soup-kitchens as the most sensible form of help, for which he set\nhimself to work upon his arrival in Grinevka. On May 2, 1898, in his\nletter to the Countess S. A. Tolstoi, Tolstoi wrote in reference to\nhis activity that \u201cthe work which was being done was necessary and\nis advancing. There is no famine, but the need is killing, cropless,\nvery difficult, and it helps us to see it.\u201d (_Letters of Tolstoi to\nhis Wife_, Moscow, 1913, pages 542 and 543.)\n\n[304] April 21, 1898, by order of the Minister of the Interior, the\n_Russkia Viedomosti_ was suspended for two months \u201cfor the collection\nof contributions in aid of the Dukhobors and for evading the executive\norders of the Moscow Governor-General.\u201d The regulation of the Moscow\nGovernor-General which the newspaper did not fulfil was to give over\nfor disposal to the authorities the money contributed through the\neditorial offices for the aid of the Dukhobors. The editors could\nnot do that, because the money had already been sent to Tolstoi.\n\n[305] Lopashino, as well as Sidorovo, Kamenka, Gubarevka, Bobriki,\nMichails Ford, Kukuevka, which are mentioned below, are villages\nnear to Grinevka where Tolstoi established soup-kitchens for the\nfamine-stricken.\n\n[306] For an orderly organisation of aid for the needy, Tolstoi had\ncollected the necessary detailed information concerning the number of\nsouls and the economic condition of each household in the suffering\nvillages.\n\n[307] See Note 136.\n\n[308] The Tsurikovs and Ilinskys--neighbouring landlords.\n\n[309] Tolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov on that day: \u201cI haven\u2019t\nwritten for a whole week, but I feel pretty well. It seems to me\nthat after the Moscow bustle my impressions are finding their place,\nthe necessary thoughts are coming forth.\u201d\n\n[310] See _Letters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, March, 1913,\npages 543 and 544.\n\n[311] I.e., at his son\u2019s, Count S. L. Tolstoi, on his estate of\nNicholskoe, near the station of Bastyevo.\n\n[312] V. G. Chertkov then wrote an article, \u201cWhere is Thy Brother?\nAbout the attitude of the Russian Government to the People Who Cannot\nBecome Murderers,\u201d in the defence of the oppressed Dukhobors. This\narticle was published in _The Free Press_ (England, 1898).\n\n[313] G. R. Lindenberg, one of Tolstoi\u2019s co-workers in aid of the\nfamine-stricken, an artist.\n\n[314] The name of this teacher is Gubonin. Together with Lindenberg\nhe came to Tolstoi from Poltava.\n\n[315] _The Appeal_ served as the beginning of two articles on the\nlabour question: _Should it really be so_, and _Where is the way\nout?_ upon which Tolstoi worked during the year 1898 and revised it\nonce again for printing in 1900.\n\n[316] The deceased, N. N. Strakhov.\n\n[317] The county seat of the province of Orel.\n\n[318] A railroad station on the Moscow-Kursk Railroad.\n\n[319] Tolstoi speaks here of gymnastic exercises which he sometimes\ntook (see entry of May 11, 1898).\n\n[320] Tolstoi used to receive contributions in aid of the\nfamine-stricken from various people.\n\n[321] In this article under the title, \u201cIs There Famine or No\nFamine?\u201d Tolstoi answers the following questions: 1. Is there in the\ncurrent year a famine or is there not a famine? 2. To what is due\nthe oft-repeated need of the people? 3. What is to be done in order\nthat this need be not repeated? These were printed with omissions\nin the newspaper, _Russ_, of July 2 and 3, of 1898 and in full in\nLeaflets of _The Free Press_, No. 2 (England, 1898).\n\n[322] The Countess S. N. Tolstoi (born Philosophov), wife of Tolstoi\u2019s\nson, Count I. L. Tolstoi.\n\n[323] Neighbouring landlords near Grinevka.\n\n[324] After a tiring, long ride by horse, Tolstoi arrived at the\nLevitskys\u2019, and fell ill of severe dysentery.\n\n[325] Tolstoi was forced to stop his work in aid of the famine-stricken,\nas the Tula Governor forbade all non-residents without his permission\nto establish and help in the construction of soup-kitchens. Without\nthese people it was impossible to continue the work. (See article\n\u201cIs There Famine or No Famine?\u201d)\n\n[326] The well-known Swedish physician, Ernest Westerlund, and his\nwife--parents of the wife of Count L. L. Tolstoy, Dora Fedorovna--who\narrived from Sweden to visit her.\n\n[327] The novel, _Father Sergius_, which Tolstoi wrote from 1890\u20131891.\n\n[328] I.e., from V. G. and A. K. Chertkov.\n\n[329] The story, _The Forged Coupon_, begun by Tolstoi as early as\nthe end of the eighties and only begun again by him at the end of\n1902.\n\n[330] N. S. Lieskov (1831\u20131895), a well-known writer. In the last\nyears of his life he shared in many respects the views of Tolstoi.\nThe story of Lieskov mentioned by Tolstoi is called _The Hour of\nthe Will of God_.\n\n[331] Five years later, in 1903, Tolstoi worked this theme out in\na story entitled _Three Problems_.\n\n[332] The christening of the first child of Count L. L. Tolstoi.\n\n[333] About this time Tolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov: \u201cMy sickness\nat first began as dysentery, then I had very great pains and fever\nand weakness. Now everything has passed.\u201d\n\n[334] Prince E. E. Ukhtomsky, the editor and publisher of the\nPetrograd _Viedomosti_.\n\n[335] \u201cIs There Famine or No Famine?\u201d\n\n[336] The weekly newspaper issued in Petrograd by S. F. Sharapov.\n\n[337] This was done in those places where Tolstoi organised aid to\nthe famine-stricken.\n\n[338] I. C. Dieterichs, a former Cossack artillery officer, who held\nthe same views as Tolstoi, a brother of Madame A. C. Chertkov, and\nhis sisters, Maria and Olga Constantinovna.\n\n[339] There occurred in England at this time, some misunderstandings\nbetween several friends of Tolstoi, who had to be convinced by\nexperience that having the same point of view is far from being of\none mind. The misunderstandings were later smoothed over.\n\n[340] The contemporary French novelist.\n\n[341] See Note 339.\n\n[342] Elizabeth Picard, a Quaker, wrote an open letter to the\nwell-known English publisher, Stead, editor of the magazine _War\nAgainst War_, which preached universal peace, and which at the same\ntime was against those persons who refused military service.\n\n[343] C. T. Willard of Chicago offered himself as mediator in the\nemigration of the Dukhobors to America. Tolstoi sent his letter\nto England to V. G. Chertkov, whose house at this time was the\nheadquarters for all communications concerning the emigration of\nthe Dukhobors.\n\n[344] V. P. Gaideburov, from 1894 on, editor and publisher of\n_Nediela_.\n\n[345] In English in the original.\n\n[346] This intention was carried out by Tolstoi, at least in regard\nto _Resurrection_, which he gave to the publication _Niva_, edited by\nA. F. Marx, who paid twelve thousand roubles for the first printing.\nThe money was used by Tolstoi in aid of the emigrating Dukhobors.\n\nOriginally, Tolstoi suggested selling the copyright of three of\nhis novels, _The Devil_, _Resurrection_, and _Father Sergius_, to\nEnglish and American papers on advantageous terms. Then he decided\nnot to publish _The Devil_. At first he thought that he would not\nmake a final revision of _Resurrection_ and of _Father Sergius_, but\nwould give them over to be printed straight away, just as they were\nwritten. But later he re-read _Resurrection_ and little by little\nbegan to work on it with such absorption \u201cas he had not experienced\nin a long time.\u201d Later Tolstoi decided to give only _Resurrection_\nfor the benefit of the Dukhobors and did not begin to work on _Father\nSergius_.\n\n[347] Arvid J\u00e4rnefelt. The well-known Finnish writer who held the same\nopinions as Tolstoi. After graduating from Helsingfors University,\nhe prepared himself for the career of magistrate, but becoming\nacquainted with the writings of Tolstoi, he brusquely changed his\nlife. He learnt the trade of cobbler and locksmith and later, at\nthe end of the nineties, he bought a plot of land and began to till\nthe soil, not ceasing his literary labours, however. He translated\nmany works of Tolstoi into Finnish. The novels of J\u00e4rnefelt are _My\nNative Land_, _Children of the Earth_ and several stories which are\ntranslated into Russian. The acquaintance of J\u00e4rnefelt with Tolstoi\nbegan with his sending his book called _My Awakening_ to Tolstoi in\n1895. It was in Finnish, and with it he sent a translation of one\nof his chapters: \u201cWhy I Did Not Undertake the Post of Judge.\u201d This\nchapter, together with an accompanying letter by J\u00e4rnefelt, Tolstoi\nincluded in his manuscript No. 4, _Archives of L. N. Tolstoi_.\n\nTolstoi\u2019s letter to J\u00e4rnefelt, mentioned in the Journal, is as\nfollows:\n\n  \u201cAlthough we have never seen each other, we know and love each\n  other, and therefore I boldly turn to you with a request to do me\n  a great service.\n\n  \u201cThe matter which I bring before you ought to remain unknown to\n  any one except to us, and therefore speak to no one about this\n  letter, but answer me (Station Kozlovka on the Moscow-Kursk\n  Railway), where you are now, and whether you are ready to help me.\n  I am writing thus briefly, because I have little hope that with\n  the insufficient address, my letter will reach you.\n\n                                                 \u201cLEO TOLSTOI.\u201d\n\nIn explanation of this letter J\u00e4rnefelt communicated the following to\nthe editors: \u201cI quickly answered Tolstoi\u2019s question. I was convinced\nthat he wanted to leave Yasnaya and to plan an escape. But when we\nmet later in Moscow in 1899, Tolstoi immediately said: \u2018Yes, yes,\nyou understood me, but the temptation passed by me in time.\u2019 And\nthen glancing about him with a deep sigh of pain he said, \u2018You will\nexcuse me, J\u00e4rnefelt, that I live as I do, but probably it is as it\nought to be.\u2019 And we did not speak any more about this matter.\u201d\n\nAnd so, in his letter to J\u00e4rnefelt of December 16, 1898, i.e., still\nbefore this meeting with him, Tolstoi wrote: \u201cIf I should ever meet\nyou, which I want to very much, I will then tell you what kind of\nhelp I expected from you. Now the temptation which forced me to seek\nhelp from you has passed.\u201d\n\nIn his letter to V. G. Chertkov of July 21st of that year, i.e.,\nthree days after the above mentioned note in the Journal, Tolstoi\nwrote: \u201c_Read this to no one._ I teach others, but do not know how\nto live myself. For how many years have I given myself the question,\nIs it fitting that I continue to live as I am living, or shall I go\naway?--and I cannot decide. I know that everything is decided by\nrenouncing oneself and when I attain that then everything is clear.\nBut they are rare moments.\u201d\n\n[348] See Note 347.\n\n[349] A collection in the church Slavonic tongue, _Love of Good_, or\n_Words and Chapters of Sacred Sobriety_, collected from the writings\nof the Saints and God-inspired fathers. In his library, Tolstoi had\na volume of _Love of Good_ with a great many notes in the margin\nmade in his own hand.\n\n[350] With I. I. Gorbunov, who came for a short time to Ovsiannikovo\nto his brother, who lived there at this time, the actor N. I.\nGorbunov. At this meeting, Tolstoi said to I. I. Gorbunov that it\nwas the gentlemanly state of his life that had become more agonising\nto him, that he was \u201cashamed to look in the eyes of his lackeys\u201d and\nthat he wanted to go away. He said among other things that he was\nthinking of going away with I. I. Gorbunov to Kaluga (where Gorbunov\nlived at that time)--and further than that, he still had another\nplan ... perhaps it was the plan about which Tolstoi had written a\nlittle while before to J\u00e4rnefelt. (See Note 347.)\n\n[351] Tolstoi\u2019s brother, Count Serge Nicholaievich.\n\n[352] Tolstoi\u2019s sister, Countess M. N. Tolstoi.\n\n[353] The English authorities of the Island of Cyprus asked a money\nguarantee of about two hundred and fifty roubles for each man from\nthe Dukhobors emigrating there, so that in case of need they would\nnot have to be supported at the government expense. At that time it\nbecame known, that in Russia several influential governmental persons\nhad begun to zealously urge the government to send the Dukhobors to\nManchuria for the Russification of those Chinese borders adjacent\nto Russia. It was necessary to hurry with the emigration of the\nDukhobors; the English Quakers pulled them out of their helpless\nposition, who first of all persuaded the English Government to\ndecrease the guarantee from two hundred and fifty roubles to one\nhundred and fifty for each man, and afterwards in several days,\ncollected among themselves a guarantee of one hundred thousand\nroubles, which, together with the fifty thousand roubles which were\ncontributed at that time by various people, made up the necessary\nsum for giving the guarantee for the whole party of Dukhobors. In\nhis letter to the Dukhobors of August 27, 1898, Tolstoi ended thus:\n\u201cMay God help you to accomplish His will with Christian manhood,\npatience and faithfulness, in establishing this change in your life.\u201d\n\n[354] M. N. Rostovtzev, the daughter of Madame M. D. Rostovtzev, a\nland-lady of Voronezh, and a follower of Tolstoi, on coming from\nthe Chertkovs, was arrested on the border because, at the custom\nexamination some pieces of proof of a forbidden book were found on\nher. She was soon freed.\n\n[355] The interruption in receiving letters from V. G. Chertkov was\ncaused by the secret police looking through them. Therefore Chertkov\nwas forced to carry on a part of this far-distant correspondence\nthrough a circuitous address. In the letter to him at the end of\nAugust, 1898, Tolstoi, informing Chertkov that one of his letters\nwas kept back a month, wrote: \u201cYesterday I received your letter\nof August 5th. It is terribly vexing, this interference with our\ncommunications which now have become so specially important. And\nwhat is it for?\u201d\n\n[356] See Note 355.\n\n[357] L. A. Sullerzhitsky went to the Caucasus to help the Dukhobors\narrange for their emigration abroad.\n\nThe first group of Dukhobors, to the number of 1,126 persons, who\nhad suffered the most from exile, hunger and illness, left on the\n6th of August, 1898, for the Island of Cyprus while other lands be\nfound and sufficient money collected for the transportation of those\nremaining to a more suitable place.\n\nAt the request of Tolstoi, L. A. Sullerzhitsky later accompanied a\ngroup of Dukhobors to Canada. He wrote a book about this journey, _In\nAmerica With the Dukhobors_, issued by _Posrednik_, Moscow, 1905.\n\n[358] The sister of Tolstoi, Countess Maria Nicholaievna. A month\nlater, September 30, 1898, Tolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov: \u201cYesterday\nmy sister, M. N., left, with whom I spent a very friendly month,\nnever having been so loving.\u201d\n\n[359] V. A. Kuzminsky, a niece of Countess S. A. Tolstoi.\n\n[360] Countess Vera S. Tolstoi, a niece of Tolstoi, daughter of\nCount S. N. Tolstoi.\n\n[361] Tolstoi\u2019s seventieth birthday, celebrated August 28, 1898.\n\n[362] According to the contract with the publisher of _Niva_, A. F.\nMarx, Tolstoi at the conclusion of the contract, received the whole\nof his royalty for only the first 200 pages of _Resurrection_.\n\n[363] In regard to the false rumours which were reaching Tolstoi\nat this time, about the affairs of the emigrating Dukhobors.\n\n[364] One of the Dukhobors exiled to Siberia, V. N. Pozdniakov, was\nsent by his brethren to the leader of the Dukhobors, P. V. Verigin,\nwho was then in exile in the village of Obdorsk in the province of\nTobolsk. Receiving a letter of instructions from Verigin for the group\nin general, he brought this letter to his brethren in the Caucasus\nand on his way reached Yasnaya Polyana. He showed Tolstoi marks on\nhis body from ill-treatment he had suffered three years before.\n\n[365] Herbert Archer, an English co-worker with V. G. Chertkov, who\nwent at his request to Tolstoi to transmit information to him with\nregard to the Dukhobors and to dissipate the false rumours about\nthem which had reached Tolstoi from outsiders. About this time, in\nhis letter to Countess S. A. Tolstoi, Tolstoi wrote about Archer:\n\u201cHe looks insignificant, but he is a very good man and a remarkably\nclever one.\u201d (_Letters of Count L. N. Tolstoi to his Wife_, March,\n1913, page 555.)\n\n[366] This thought Tolstoi changed in the following form for _The\nReading Circle_: \u201cNow I consider as myself my body with its senses,\nbut then something entirely different is being formed in me. And\nthen the whole world will become different, since the whole world\nis not something different, only because I consider myself such a\nbeing separated from the world and not another. But there may be\nan innumerable quantity of beings separated from the world.\u201d _The\nReading Circle_, issued by _Posrednik_, Volume I, Moscow, 1911, for\nApril 16.\n\n[367] Tolstoi\u2019s son, S. L. Tolstoi, and L. A. Sullerzhitsky went to\nthe Caucasus to accompany the remaining Dukhobors to Canada. Tolstoi\nin order to protect them from the oppression of the authorities wrote\na letter to the commander-in-chief of the Caucasus, Prince G. S.\nGolitsin.\n\n[368] Tolstoi sometimes could not remember which thought from his\npocket note-book he had written out into the Journal and which one\nhe had not. This explains the fact that several thoughts are entered\nwithout any changes at all in the Journal, in places not far from\none another.\n\n[369] In the eighties and nineties the Tolstois went yearly from\nYasnaya Polyana to Moscow to spend the winter.\n\n[370] Princess E. V. Obolensky, niece of Tolstoi, daughter of his\nsister, Countess Maria Nicholaievna.\n\n[371] In the finished form, the novel had 129 chapters.\n\n[372] In another place Tolstoi says: \u201cPlaying the fool (like Christ)\ni.e., the purposeful representing of yourself as worse than you are,\nis the highest quality of virtue.\u201d (Journal, May 29, 1893.)\n\n[373] An omission in the copy in possession of the editors.\n\n[374] Tolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov as early as December 13, 1898:\n\u201cI absolutely cannot occupy myself with anything else than with\n_Resurrection_. Just like a shell, when it gets to the earth, falls\nmore and more quickly, in the same way I now, when I am nearing\nthe end, I cannot think--no, not that I cannot: I can and even do\nthink--but I don\u2019t want to think about anything else but about it.\u201d\n\n[375] At this time the emigration of the Dukhobors to Canada had not\nyet been accomplished. Tolstoi took an active part in the affair: he\naddressed various people with the request for contributions for this\npurpose, he carried on a correspondence with friends in England in\nregard to a place of settlement for the Dukhobors, he sent letters\nto the authorities to try to remove obstacles which were in their\nway, he saw agents who suggested places of settlement, he carried\non a correspondence with the Dukhobors themselves, etc.\n\n[376] February 15, 1899, Tolstoi wrote to V. G. Chertkov: \u201cMy\nback hurts all the time and I am weak and I am disgusted with\n_Resurrection_, which I can\u2019t touch.\u201d\n\n[377] The retired officer addressed himself to Tolstoi with the\nquestion whether the Gospels were not against military service.\nTolstoi\u2019s answer was printed in the leaflets of _The Free Press_,\nNo. 5, 1899, and in 1906 in Petrograd in the publication,\n_Obnovlenia_, No. 130 (which was confiscated).\n\n[378] A group of representative Swedish intellectuals addressed\nthemselves to Tolstoi with a letter as to the means of attaining\nuniversal peace. In this letter on the one hand, they expressed the\nthought that universal disarmament could be attained by the surest\npath of each separate individual refusing to take part in military\nservice, and on the other hand, they acknowledged that the Peace\nConference fixed for The Hague at the instigation of the Russian\nGovernment was useful to the attainment of universal peace....\n\n[379] In the middle of February, 1898, the students of the University\nof Petrograd, in the form of a protest against the beating of\npeople in the streets, decided on the day of the student holiday,\nFebruary 8th, as a peaceful-minded group of students, to cease work.\nThey were soon joined by students of other higher schools in Petrograd\nand later in Moscow, Kiev, Kharkov, Jurev, Odessa, Tomsk, Kazan, Riga\nand Novaia Alexandria. In this way the studies of several thousand\nmen and women students were suspended. The representatives of the\nMoscow and Petrograd student bodies came to Tolstoi with the purpose\nof obtaining his opinion and sympathy for the student movement.\n\n[380] Sinet, an artist, who refused military service on religious\ngrounds and was sent to the Algerian disciplinary battalion and\nwho escaped from there. Tolstoi called Sinet the first religious\nFrenchman, therefore, because he was the first Frenchman he met who\nbelieved truly as he did.\n\n[381] In his letter to V. G. Chertkov of July 9, 1899, Tolstoi wrote,\n\u201cThe matter of the translations worry me. I can imagine, therefore,\nhow they worry you. To-day I thought this: To drop all contracts with\nthe translators and print the following in the newspaper....\u201d Further\non Tolstoi expounds the project of his letter to the newspapers, that\nhe, in the matter of translation, decided to destroy the contracts\nwith the publishers of the translations and to refuse the royalty of\nthe first printing of these translations. And yet the need of the\nDukhobors was so great that \u201chaving no means of employing cattle,\nthey have hitched themselves and their wives to the plough and are\nploughing with human power to till their land.\u201d For this reason,\nTolstoi drops his plan: \u201cI ask all the publishers who will print\nthis novel and the translators of it, as well as the readers of the\nnovel, to remember those people for whom this publication has been\nbegun and as far as their strength and their desire go, to help the\nDukhobors by giving their mite to the Dukhobor fund in England.\u201d\n\n[382] Taking no part in 1899, in the work of organising help for\nthe famine-stricken peasants, Tolstoi directed the contributions\nreceived for this purpose from various people, to be sent to those\nwho were occupied on the spot in giving help to the inhabitants.\n\n[383] Originally in English.\n\n[384] This thought was maintained in the book then being read by\nTolstoi: _Vergleichenden Uebersicht der Vier Evangelien_, von S. G.\nVerus, Leipzig, 1897. In the letter of Biriukov of August 1, 1899,\nTolstoi wrote thus about the significance of Verus\u2019 book: \u201cThis\nsupposition or probability is the destruction of the last suburbs\nwhich are susceptible to attacks from the enemy, so that the fortress\nof the moral teaching of the good, flowing not from a source which is\nonly temporary and local, but from a totality of the whole spiritual\nlife of humanity, be unshaken.\u201d\n\n[385] Countess S. N. Tolstoi.\n\n[386] See Note 384.\n\n[387] This thought is developed more in detail by Tolstoi in the\n_Legend of the Stones_ (see _The Reading Circle_, Volume II).\n\n[388] Alfred B. Westrup. _Plenty of Money._ N. Y., 1899.\n\n[389] Countess O. C. Tolstoi, born Dieterichs, first wife of A. L.\nTolstoi.\n\n[390] The artist, Julia Ivanovna Igumnov, who lived a long time\nin Yasnaya Polyana. At this time she helped Tolstoi to copy his\nmanuscripts and his letters.\n\n[391] A. D. Arkhangelsky, a student in the Moscow University, who\nlived as a teacher in Tolstoi\u2019s house.\n\n[392] These chapters on _Resurrection_ were sent to the publishing\nhouse of _Niva_ to be set up.\n\n[393] An interrogation point in the copy at the disposal of the\neditors.\n\n[394] Living at this time with the Tolstois in Moscow, Countess O. K.\nTolstoi, in a letter to V. G. Chertkov on November 22nd, 1899,\ndescribed Tolstoi\u2019s illness in this way: \u201cYesterday we lived through\na terrible evening and night. In the evening after dinner, Tolstoi\nwent to his room to lie down, and after several minutes we were\nall attracted by terrible groans from him ... he was taken with\nsevere stomach pains which were very severe from four o\u2019clock in\nthe morning to seven in the evening. He suffered terribly and at\nfirst nothing helped.\u201d Tolstoi suffered especially from vomiting\nwhich lasted twenty-eight hours. His doctors were P. S. Usev and\nProf. M. P. Cherinov. \u201cBoth medicine and feeding,\u201d another person\nwrote to Chertkov from Moscow, December 5, 1899, \u201cis given now by\nentreaty and persuasion, now by tears and now by deception, which is\neven more depressing than tears. To-day everything is better: pains\nand appetite and strength.\u201d Tolstoi got out of bed December 6th and\nlittle by little began to walk. But the following days he had pain\nand felt weakness.\n\n[395] An omission in this place in the copy in possession of the\neditors.\n\n[396] This word in the original is underlined twice.\n\n[397] From Derzhavin\u2019s Ode, \u201cGod.\u201d\n\n[398] The exact title of the book by M. A. Engelhardt is _Progress,\nAs an Evolution of Cruelty_, issued by F. F. Pavlenkov, Petrograd,\n1899. To the author of this book, M. A. Engelhardt (1858\u20131882),\nTolstoi wrote, in 1882, a very remarkable letter on the problem of\nnon-resistance to evil by violence.\n\n[399] The journal, _Niva_.\n\n[400] The novel, _The Forged Coupon_.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX\n\n\n\n\nA SHORT SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF TOLSTOI AT THE END OF THE NINETIES\n\nBY CONSTANTINE SHOKOR-TROTSKY\n\n\nThe present volume of Tolstoi\u2019s Journal covers a period from\nOctober 28, 1895, to December, 1899. During this time Tolstoi made\nin all 170 entries[a1] in the Journal, the greatest number of them\nfalling in the year 1897, and the smallest in 1899. During certain\nmonths, Tolstoi made no entries whatever. There were nine such months\nin the four years; April and August, 1896; June, 1897; September,\nOctober and December, 1898; March, May and August, 1899. The greatest\nnumber of interruptions in the entries was caused by ill health,\nsometimes also by intensive work and sometimes on account of spiritual\ndepression.\n\n[a1] Of the 170 entries in the present edition, the editors have\nomitted 102 places (1,707 words) because of their intimate character,\nand 55 places (1,102 words) on account of the censor. Besides this,\nin the Notes, one place (9 words) has been omitted on account of\nits intimate character and 14 places (245 words) on account of the\ncensor.\n\n\nI\n\nIMPORTANT EVENTS\n\nOf important outer events which had more or less significance for\nTolstoi, and to which he responded during this time, the following\nare to be mentioned:[a2]\n\nIn the first two months of 1896, Tolstoi notes in his Journal and\nin private letters the death of several people more or less near to\nhim: his relative, N. M. Nagornov; the well-known philosopher, N. N.\nStrakhov, to whom he was bound by an old friendship; an old woman,\nAgatha Michailovna, a former maid of his grandmother, who lived all\nher life in Yasnaya Polyana; the Yasnaya Polyana peasant, Phillip\nEgorov, who had been a coachman for many years at the Tolstois\u2019, and\nthe steward, at one time; the wife of a professor, Olga Storozhenko.\n\nIn March and April of the same year, according to his own words, the\nimportant events of his life were: making the acquaintance of the\npeasant, M. P. Novikov; the arrest of his friend, a woman doctor,\nM. M. Kholevinsky, because she gave his forbidden works to the\nworking people; hearing Wagner\u2019s Opera, \u201cSiegfried,\u201d which aided him\nin clarifying his conception of true art; becoming acquainted with\nthe works of the noted philosopher, A. A. Spier, which were sent to\nhim by the latter\u2019s daughter.\n\nIn May, in Moscow at the time of the Coronation, the unfortunate\ncatastrophe which took place on the Khodinka field, the reports of\nwhich produced a strong impression on Tolstoi.\n\nIn October of this same year, two Japanese came to Tolstoi, whose\nvisit was both interesting and pleasant for him.\n\nIn February, 1897, several friends of Tolstoi were subjected to\ngovernmental prosecution for their intercession in behalf of the\npersecuted Dukhobors: P. I. Biriukov was exiled to the city of Bausk\nin Courland, V. G. Chertkov was exiled abroad and I. M. Tregubov\nsome time later was exiled to Goldingen in Courland.\n\nIn February of that year there was the tragedy of an acquaintance of\nTolstoi; Miss M. F. Vietrov burning herself, who had been imprisoned\nin the Fortress of Peter and Paul.\n\nIn July of that year Tolstoi\u2019s daughter, Maria Lvovna, who stood\nespecially near to him, was married to Prince N. L. Obolensky.\n\nIn September, P. A. Boulanger, a friend, was exiled abroad for his\nactivity in behalf of the Dukhobors.\n\nAt the end of October the noted American writer, Henry George, died,\nwhose works and whose personality Tolstoi valued very highly.\n\nIn November Dr. D. P. Makovitsky, a follower of Tolstoi, came for a\nshort visit from Hungary; later becoming a close friend, he remained\nwith Tolstoi uninterruptedly until the latter\u2019s death.\n\nIn December, Tolstoi received several anonymous letters with threats\nof assassination.\n\nIn February, 1898, the Dukhobors received permission to emigrate from\nRussia, which Tolstoi for two years had worked hard to accomplish. In\nApril of that year the Moscow merchant, I. P. Brashnin, a follower\nof Tolstoi, died.\n\nIn April and May there was famine in several districts of Tula, and\nTolstoi occupied himself energetically for some time to aid the\nfamine-stricken. He established soup-kitchens, collected money, etc.\n\nIn May of that year, the _Russkia Viedomosti_ was suppressed for\ncollecting funds in behalf of the Dukhobors.\n\nIn July, Tolstoi decided to finish his novel, _Resurrection_, \u201cso\nthat it could be published for the benefit of the Dukhobors.\u201d\n\nIn October, the Dukhobor, V. N. Pozdniakov, visited Tolstoi, coming\nsecretly from his exile in Yakutsk to the Caucasus to see his\nco-religionists before their emigration to America.\n\nIn this same month the peasant, T. M. Bondarev, died, who had lived\nmany years in exile in Siberia, for whose book on _The Labor for\nBread_ Tolstoi wrote a preface, and with whom he corresponded.\nTolstoi only learned of his death in December.\n\nIn 1899 there were almost no external events.\n\nIn November of that year, Tolstoi\u2019s eldest daughter, Tatiana Lvovna,\nwas married to M. S. Sukhotin.\n\n[a2] The compilation of facts concerning the important events in\nTolstoi\u2019s life were not only made from his Journal but from letters\nto various individuals.\n\n\nII\n\nTHE PLACES THAT TOLSTOI LIVED IN AND VISITED\n\nBetween 1896\u20131899 Tolstoi lived principally in Yasnaya Polyana. There\nhe generally not only spent most of the summer, but often all of\nautumn and sometimes even up to January. In Moscow, he generally\nspent the winter months--from November or December until April and\nsometimes until May. Besides this, for short periods, Tolstoi would\ngo to other places. Thus, in August, 1896, he visited his sister, the\nnun, Countess M. N. Tolstoi, living in the convent of Shamordino.\nAt times during these years he visited his brother, Count S. N.\nTolstoi, who lived on his estate in Pirogovo in the province of Tula\n(in May, July and October, 1896, in November, 1897, in August and\nNovember, 1898, and in May, 1899).\n\nBesides this, from February to March, 1896, and from February to\nMarch, 1897, he visited his friends, the Olsuphievs, on their estate,\nNicholskoe, near Moscow; once he spent two weeks with them, another\ntime a whole month with an interruption. The interruption was caused\nby his sudden trip to Petrograd (in February, 1897) to take leave\nof his friends, Chertkov and Biriukov, who were being exiled.\n\nAt the end of 1897, Tolstoi visited the village Dolgoe, and saw the\nhouse in which he was born and in which he spent his childhood and\nboyhood and which in the fifties was sold to be transferred to this\nvillage.\n\nThe month of May of 1898, Tolstoi spent in Grinevka, the estate of\nhis son, Count I. L. Tolstoi. While living there, he took charge of\nthe aid to the famine-stricken. From Grinevka he went by horse to\nvisit his friend, the landlord, Levitsky, where he fell seriously\nill and spent ten days.\n\n\nIII\n\nWHAT TOLSTOI WROTE\n\nFrom the period of November, 1895, to 1899 Tolstoi worked on the\nfollowing manuscripts:[a3]\n\n\nA. FICTION\n\n1. The novel _Resurrection_ (November, 1895\u2013February, 1896,\nJanuary\u2013February, 1897, July\u2013December, 1898, and all of 1899).\n\n2. The drama _The Light That Shines in Darkness_ (December,\n1895--planned it; January\u2013April, 1896; October, 1896, and July\u2013August,\n1897--planned it).\n\n3. The novel _Hadji Murad_ (September, 1896; March\u2013April,\n1897--planned it; September, 1897\u2013June, 1898).\n\n4. The story _Father Sergius_ (June, 1898; August, 1898--planned\nit). Besides this, there are indications that he planned during this\nperiod:\n\n5. The story _Who is Right?_ (November, 1897).\n\n6. _Notes of a Madman_ (December, 1896, January, 1897).\n\n7. The drama _The Living Corpse_ (December, 1897).\n\n8. The novel _The Forged Coupon_ (June, 1898, December, 1899).\n\n\nB. ESSAYS\n\n1. _The Christian Doctrine_ (November\u2013December, 1895, May\u2013July,\nSeptember\u2013December, 1896).\n\n2. _Shameful_ (December, 1895).\n\n3. _A Letter to the Italians_ (_About the Abyssinians_, unfinished,\nMarch\u2013April, 1896).\n\n4. _What Is Art?_ (May\u2013July, 1896--planned it; November, 1896\u2013April,\n1897, July, 1897\u2013February, 1898).\n\n5. _How To Read the Gospels and in What Is Their Essence_ (July,\n1896).\n\n6. _The Beginning of the End_ (September\u2013October, 1896).\n\n7. _On War_ (unfinished--November\u2013December, 1896).\n\n8. The Appendix to _The Appeal_, by P. Biriukov, I. Tregubov and\nV. G. Chertkov--_Help!_ (December, 1896).\n\n9. _The Appeal_ (unfinished, January\u2013April, 1897, September,\n1897\u2013April, 1898--planned it; May\u2013July, 1898).\n\n10. Preface to the essay by Edward Carpenter, _Contemporary Science_\n(October, 1897\u2013February, 1898).\n\n11. Preface to the English edition of _What Is Art?_ (April, 1898).\n\n12. _Carthago delenda est_ (April, 1898).\n\n13. _Is There Famine or No Famine?_ (May\u2013June, 1898).\n\n14. _Two Wars_ (August, 1898).\n\n\nC. LETTERS\n\n(Those important according to volume and contents).[a4]\n\n1. To P. V. Verigin (on the harm and benefit of printing).\nNovember 21, 1895.\n\n2. John Manson (\u201cPatriotism and Peace\u201d). December, 1895.\n\n3. Ernest Crosby (\u201cOn Non-resistance\u201d). December, 1895\u2013February,\n1896.\n\n4. To M. A. Sopotsko (\u201cOn the Church Deception\u201d). March 16, 1896.\n\n5. To the Ministers of Justice and the Interior (on the subject of\nthe arrest of Mme. M. N. Kholevinsky). April 20, 1896.\n\n6. To Madame A. M. Kalmikov (\u201cA Letter to the Liberals\u201d).\nAugust\u2013September, 1896.\n\n7. To E. Schmidt (\u201cTo the editor of a German paper\u201d). October 12,\n1896.\n\n8. To P. V. Verigin (an answer to the objections to printing).\nOctober 14, 1896.\n\n9. To the commander of the Irkutsk Disciplinary Battalion (on\nthe refusal of P. Olkhovik and C. Sereda from military service).\nOctober 22, 1896.\n\n10. To the Commander of the Ekaterinograd Disciplinary Battalion (on\nthe refusal of the Dukhobors from military service). November 1,\n1896.\n\n11. To the Countess S. A. Tolstoi (on leaving Yasnaya Polyana).\nJuly 8, 1897.\n\n12. To the Swedish papers (with the suggestion that the Nobel prize\nbe awarded to the Dukhobors). August\u2013September, 1897.\n\n13. To the Emperor (about the Molokans). October, 1897.\n\n14. To the _Peterburgskaia Viedomosti_ (about the Molokans). October,\n1897.\n\n15. To the _Russkia Viedomosti_ (about aid for the famine-stricken).\nFebruary 21, 1898.\n\n16. To G. H. Gibson--of the American colony Georgia (on agricultural\ncommunities). March, 1898.\n\n17. To the Russian papers (on the Dukhobors). March 20, 1898.\n\n18. To the English papers (on the Dukhobors). March 18, 1898.\n\n19. To N (\u201cA letter to an officer\u201d). December, 1898\u2013January, 1899.\n\n20. To the Swedish Group (on the means for attaining universal\npeace). January\u2013February, 1899.\n\n21. To Prince G. M. Volkonsky (\u201cOn the Transvaal War\u201d). December 4,\n1899.\n\n22. To A. I. Dvoriansky (\u201cOn religious education\u201d). December 13,\n1899.\n\n\nD. THEMES\n\n(Mentioned in the Journal)[a5]\n\n1. \u201cOn Religious Education\u201d (February 13, 1896, in answer to a letter\nof V. S. Grinevich).\n\n2. \u201cThe story of what a man lives through in this life who committed\nsuicide in a past life\u201d (February 13, 1896).\n\n3. \u201cPictures of Samara life: the steppe, the struggle between the\nnomadic patriarchal principle and the agricultural culture\u201d (June 19,\n1896).\n\n4. \u201cHadji Murad\u201d (July 19, 1896, under the same title).\n\n5. \u201cSuicide of the old man, Persianninov\u201d (September 14, 1896).\n\n6. \u201cThe substitution of a child in an orphan asylum\u201d (September 14,\n1896).\n\n7. \u201cA wife\u2019s deception of her passionate, jealous husband: his\nsuffering, struggle and the enjoyment of forgiveness\u201d (November 22,\n1896).\n\n8. \u201cA description of the oppression of the serfs and later the same\noppression through land ownership, or rather, the being deprived of\nit\u201d (November 22, 1896).\n\n9. \u201cNotes of a madman\u201d (December 26, 1896).\n\n10. \u201cThe theme: A passionate young man in love with a mentally\ndiseased woman\u201d (July 16, 1897).\n\n11. The theme \u201cIn _pendant_ to Hadji Murad\u201d: \u201cAnother Russian outlaw,\nGrigori Nicholaev\u201d ... (November 14, 1897).\n\n12. \u201cSergius\u201d (December 13, 1897, \u201cFather Sergius\u201d).\n\n13. \u201cAlexander I\u201d (December 13, 1897, \u201cPosthumous notes of the monk,\nFedor Kuzmich\u201d).\n\n14. \u201cPersianninov\u201d (December 13, 1897).\n\n15. \u201cThe story of Petrovich--a man who died a pilgrim\u201d (December 13,\n1897, \u201cKorni Vasiliev\u201d).\n\n16. \u201cThe legend of the descent of Christ into Hell and the\nresurrection of Hell\u201d (December 13, 1897, \u201cThe resurrection of Hell\nand its destruction\u201d).\n\n17. \u201cThe Forged Coupon\u201d (December 13, 1897, under the same title).\n\n18. \u201cA substituted child\u201d (December 13, 1897).\n\n19. \u201cThe drama of the Christian resurrection\u201d (December 13, 1897).\n\n20. \u201cResurrection--the trial of a prostitute\u201d (December 13, 1897,\n_Resurrection_).\n\n21. \u201cAn outlaw killing the defenceless\u201d (December 13, 1897).\n\n22. \u201cMother\u201d (December 13, 1897).\n\n23. \u201cAn execution in Odessa\u201d (December 13, 1897, _Divine and human_).\n\n24. \u201cA bit of fiction, in which would be clearly expressed the flowing\nquality of man: that he, one and the same man, is now an evil-doer,\nnow an angel, now a wise man, now an idiot, now a strong man, now\nthe most impotent being\u201d (March 21, 1898).\n\n25. \u201cEverything depends, to what one directs one\u2019s consciousness\u201d\n(November 14, 1898).\n\n26. \u201cOn why the people are corrupted\u201d (November 25, 1898).\n\n[a3] This list has been compiled not only from Tolstoi\u2019s Journal,\nbut from other sources. As far as can be judged from the Journal,\nTolstoi during some months, while busied with the revision of some\none of his manuscripts, would at the same time not write but only\nconsider some other bit of work; this kind of creative work is noted\nin the list as \u201cplanned.\u201d\n\n[a4] All these letters have been printed, if not in Russia then\nabroad; in those instances where a letter has been printed under a\ndefinite title, that title is enclosed in quotation marks.\n\n[a5] In parentheses I have given the dates in which he mentions\nthe theme and the final title of the theme as it was developed.\n\n\nIV\n\nREFLECTIONS ON TOLSTOI\u2019S THOUGHTS IN THE JOURNAL\n\nBesides the above mentioned literary labours of Tolstoi, his thought\nlife ought to be mentioned which at first found expression in his\nnote-book and from which later he would transcribe those thoughts\ninto his Journal which appeared to him valuable. These thoughts were\nsometimes, as we say, absolutely accidental, sometimes they were\ncalled forth by conversations with various people and sometimes they\nwere the responses to outer events. The greater part of them came\nin connection with some work on hand or one which he was planning,\nor were for some inner clarification or spiritual discussion of\nproblems which, above all, agitated and interested him.\n\nOf the thoughts which came in connection with his works on hand from\n1896 to 1899, a sufficiently important number can be pointed out\nas auxiliary thoughts for the thinking over and working out of his\n\u201cCatechism\u201d (or the \u201cChristian Doctrine\u201d); such were a number of\nthoughts about faith, Christian doctrine, sin, etc. A great number\nof thoughts on art appeared in connection with his contemplated\nwork, _What Is Art?_ On the conclusion of this work there are almost\nno thoughts on art in the Journal. Many thoughts were entered for\n_The Appeal_, _i.e._, for the purpose of including them in the\ncontemplated manuscript but which was never finished in that form.\nRarely, thoughts are met in the Journal which are in connection\nwith his work on some literary topic.\n\nBesides the thoughts which appeared in connection with his writings,\none meets in the Journal, as was said above, such thoughts which\nappeared during the period of intense clarification of the various\nproblems of his personal and family life. In connection with the\nobservations which he lived through and experienced, Tolstoi quite\noften wrote down his own spiritual state, his personal sufferings\nand the right attitude that he should take towards them.\n\nAt one time, he was occupied especially with the problem of the\nphilosophic definition of time and space and he wrote down his\nthoughts on this theme quite often. At another time, he was interested\nin the problem of error, of whether the outer world was such as it\nappeared. Quite often he noted his thoughts on the themes: On God,\non the meaning of life, on the difference between the spiritual and\nthe animal life, on reason, on prayer. Quite often, at this time,\nthoughts came to him about the given work of God, about service\nto God, about love in general and about love towards enemies in\nparticular.\n\nBesides this, there are scattered in the whole Journal for the four\nmentioned years, various thoughts on the sex-problem--on falling in\nlove, on women, on marriage--and also quite a number of thoughts on\nillness, on death, on the unjust life of the rich, on memory and on\nmany other subjects. Sometimes one finds thoughts in the Journal\nwhich appear in connection with the books that he was reading; for\ninstance, there are several thoughts called forth by the reading of\nthe philosophic works of Schopenhauer and Spier. The fact that there\nare few notes in the Journal about the books that had been read or\nwere being read is, of course, no sign that Tolstoi read little. It\nis sufficient to open his book, _What Is Art_, to convince oneself\nas to the enormous amount of books that were read and studied by\nTolstoi on the one theme of art alone for this work; nevertheless,\nthere are very few of them mentioned in the Journal.\n\n\nV\n\nSOME FEATURES FROM THE SPIRITUAL DOMAIN OF TOLSTOI\u2019S LIFE[a6]\n\nIn due time, when absolutely all Tolstoi\u2019s Journals and letters\nand all his writings which have not yet appeared will be printed,\nand also when all the unused material about him, that literary\ninheritance in all its enormous volume, will be made use of, then\nit will be possible to carefully study the great process of the\n_growth of Tolstoi\u2019s soul_. At the present moment, when a great\nnumber of Tolstoi\u2019s writings and the reminiscences about him are not\nyet published, it is impossible to really penetrate the whole depth\nand breadth of Tolstoi\u2019s spirit. At present, it is only possible\nto throw light on the general characteristics of several separate\nsides of his inner life, in one or several of its periods.\n\nTherefore, this short sketch of Tolstoi\u2019s life at the end of the\nnineties, which deals not only with his outer but with his inner\nlife, does in no way intend to give an exhaustive exposition of his\nvaried and complicated spiritual states. In the description which\nis here placed of _several features_ of Tolstoi\u2019s spiritual life,\nthe principal attention is given to that state, which for over\nthree years almost constantly dominated Tolstoi, in connection with\none of the most lasting and torturing periods of intense spiritual\nsuffering in the domain of his domestic life. Such periods happened\nto Tolstoi even before, in the seventies and in the eighties and in\nthe very last years of his life.\n\nOf course, the description of only one feature of Tolstoi\u2019s inner\nlife, cannot be an indication that he had not other kinds of spiritual\nstates, not connected with his home life. The numerous and extensive\nentries in the Journal testify that Tolstoi often experienced states\nof high religious exaltation and of intimate spiritual union and\nfusion with God, as well as states of the earnest seeking of the path\ntowards perfection, flowing from a sharp discontent with himself\nand a repentance for his errors and weaknesses (quite often the\nstates were called forth by spiritual suffering). In this sketch\nare emphasised and brought forth the logical connection of at least\none most torturing feature of his inner life, which is reflected in\ndisconnected brilliant entries in his Journal--features which show\nthe cross that he bore for the last thirty years of his life. The\ntime has not yet come for a full description of all the sides and\nconditions of Tolstoi\u2019s life, and therefore the intimate places have\nbeen omitted in the present edition of the Journal. In consequence,\nthe reader will not find an exhaustive description in these chapters\nof the personal life of Tolstoi which is connected with his family\nrelations.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nFrom 1895 to 1899 Tolstoi lived through much spiritual suffering\nand struggle, and during this time he was ill quite often. If one\ncarefully followed all the entries in the Journal, then it would\nclearly be seen that almost all his severe illnesses came after\ndepressing inner experiences.\n\nWith the strength of his deep religiousness, Tolstoi invariably\nstrove to use, in the best spiritual sense, all the trials which\nwere given to him as his lot, physical as well as spiritual, and\nthrough intense inner labour he generally at the end succeeded in\nconverting all his sufferings, to use his own language, to the joy\nof fulfilling the will of God.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nAt the end of 1895, Tolstoi was earnestly occupied with the plot of\nhis drama, _The Light that Shines in Darkness_; this plot agitated\nhim so that he even dreamed of it and he raved about it in his sleep.\nThis can be easily understood in view of the fact that there are\nmany autobiographic elements in this drama.\n\nAnd so he wrote in the Journal that he \u201clived through much,\u201d in\nreading over, at the request of his wife, his journals for the past\nseven years.[a7]\n\nAt the same time, Tolstoi complains several times in his Journal\nof his general indisposition, of his weakness, and of his lack of\nenergy.\n\nIn the course of the three years, from 1896 to 1898, Tolstoi often\nexperienced a fall of spirit, strong attacks of sorrow and torturing\nagony. The greatest part of his suffering was caused by the lack of\nunderstanding of several people near to him, either for his point\nof view or for his inner life,[a8] and because of the \u201cemptiness of\nhis surrounding life.\u201d[a9]\n\nHe even felt \u201chatred\u201d for himself[a10] and he was burdened by his\npart in the \u201cunjust, idle, luxurious[a11] life.\u201d But here the thought\nwould come to him that he had to suffer humiliation,[a12] and at\ntimes he created supplementary thoughts, which in fun he called\n\u201cprescriptions\u201d for his spiritual suffering.[a13]\n\nOn December 2, 1896, Tolstoi wrote in his Journal: \u201cThis is my\ncondition ... oh, this luxury, this richness, this absence of care\nabout the material life!...\u201d\n\nThe thought that this indeed was his task, given to him, had a calming\neffect. He tried to look on the conditions in which he was placed\nas upon a test of humbleness, \u201chumiliation.\u201d But \u201cin chains, in a\nprison, one can pride oneself on one\u2019s humiliation\u201d--he wrote--\u201cbut\nhere it is only painful, unless one accepts it as a trial sent by\nGod.\u201d[a14] The calm state which was created through the influence\nof these thoughts was only short-lived. His heart began soon again\nto pain and he \u201cwants to cry over himself, over the remnant of his\nlife which is being futilely ruined.\u201d[a15]\n\nHis surrounding life[a16] which tortured him called forth long periods\nof agony, dejection and fall of spirits. But with the thoughts about\nlove towards enemies,[a17] there came to him the urge to look upon\nhis work, as the work of love which was given to him, and again\npeace possessed him, \u201cbecause a loving one.\u201d[a18] But soon again\nthis peace became principally an outer one, and within himself he\nagain wavered.[a19] Again he is \u201cashamed and depressed because of\nthe consciousness of the lawlessness of his life.\u201d[a20]\n\nAfter a month, he makes an entry in his Journal, but tears it out,\nputting only the words, \u201cA bad and sterile month\u201d and adds, \u201cHave\ntorn out, burned, what I have written in heat.\u201d[a21] Then for a\nlong time he wrote nothing, and during this time he \u201clived through\nmuch that was difficult and good.\u201d[a22] On the 8th of July he wrote\nhis very famous letter to his wife, which she received after his\ndeath,[a23] which began with the words, \u201cIt is already a long time\nthat I am tortured by the lack of harmony between my life and my\nbeliefs\u201d and in which further on he wrote about his decision to do\nthat which \u201che had wanted to do for a long time: to go away.\u201d But\nno matter how difficult the conditions of his family life were at\nthis time, they were not yet sufficiently ripe to bring him over to\na definite decision to leave his family, and to fulfil his ancient\ndream of life in more simple conditions among working people. And\nin view of the fact that he decided to change his decision, he gave\nthe above-mentioned letter for safe-keeping to his son-in-law,\nPrince N. L. Obolensky, with the request to give it to the one\ndesignated, when he was no longer among the living. Although Tolstoi\nremained this time in Yasnaya Polyana, his life among master-class\nconditions did not cease to burden him even for a short time, and\nhe felt himself alone,[a24] he often experienced sorrow as before,\nand in spirit he felt \u201csolemn,\u201d \u201cgloomy.\u201d[a25]\n\nAt the end of that year (1897), he wrote the thought in his Journal,\nof the tragedy of the situation of \u201ca man kindly disposed wishing\nonly the good\u201d but who in return meets only \u201chissing malice and the\nhatred of people.\u201d[a26] And soon again he writes in his Journal\nthat he is in an agonised, sad, crushed state,[a27] which, however,\nhe is trying to fight off with all his strength. (\u201cThe house is\ndepressing but I want to and will be joyous.\u201d[a28]) But this inner\nstruggle in spiritual isolation was of course not easy, and demanded\ngreat spiritual strength before it could be fully successful. He was\nconstantly tortured by the injustice of his surrounding life and his\nown almost futile situation in this life; and he becomes \u201cat times\ngood and calm, at times uneasy and not good.\u201d[a29] In this state he\noften wants to cry,[a30] and only in time does his condition become\nless agitated and sometimes even entirely calm.\n\nIn the summer of 1898, Tolstoi was twice seriously ill. After these\nillnesses he entered in his Journal the joy of getting well and a\nclearness of thinking. Soon after this he underwent new spiritual\nexperiences and in July, 1898, he again considered going away from\nthe conditions of life in Yasnaya Polyana which were depressing and\nwhich were against his philosophy. He then wrote a letter to A. A.\nJ\u00e4rnefelt and made a note in the Journal that he has no strength to\nwithstand the customary temptation,[a31] _i. e._, the desire to go\naway; it was to J\u00e4rnefelt that he turned with the request to help\nhim in his plan of going away which he was then considering. But\nthis time also, \u201cthe temptation passed,\u201d as he wrote him later. And\nagain his life flowed on as before.\n\nThe thought of \u201cgoing away\u201d came to Tolstoi more than once, both early\nand late, but he considered it a temptation because it would have\nbeen spiritually much more easy for him to go away than to refrain\nfrom this step. As he expressed himself once, he believed that when\nthere is a doubt in one\u2019s soul, as to which one of two possible steps\none should take, then it were better to give preference to that one\nin which there is the greatest self-sacrifice.\n\nIn 1899, Tolstoi felt himself spiritually improved and notwithstanding\nhis severely undermined health, he occupied himself much and\nfruitfully with _Resurrection_. In the autumn of that year he made\nthe entry in the Journal, \u201cI have wrought for myself a calm which is\nnot to be disturbed: not to speak and to know that this is necessary:\nthat it is under these conditions one ought to live.\u201d[a32]\n\nOnly ten years later, the circumstances arose which freed Tolstoi\nfrom the consciousness of the moral responsibility to remain in the\nconditions of his home life. And having come to the conclusion of\nthe absolute inevitability of going away, he dared, only ten days\nbefore his end, to freely give himself to his cherished wish to\nchange the outer conditions of his life.\n\n[a6] I consider it absolutely necessary to mention that this\nexposition has been carefully revised by V. G. Chertkov, who, having\nbeen connected with Tolstoi by a friendship of many years, was\nclosely acquainted with the home conditions of his outer life, as\nwell as with the most intimate characteristic of his inner life.\n\n[a7] November 5, 1895, page 5.\n\n[a8] May 17, 1896, page 46.\n\n[a9] May 28, 1896, page 52.\n\n[a10] June 26, 1896, page 60.\n\n[a11] June 19, 1896, page 58.\n\n[a12] July 31, 1896, page 69.\n\n[a13] October 20, 1896, page 83; November 5, page 88, and November 20,\n1897, page 171.\n\n[a14] December 20, 1896, page 108.\n\n[a15] December 21, 1896, page 108.\n\n[a16] January 18, 1897, page 117.\n\n[a17] March 1, 1897, page 135.\n\n[a18] March 9, 1897, page 136.\n\n[a19] April 4, page 137, and April 9, 1897, page 139.\n\n[a20] April 4, 1897, page 137.\n\n[a21] May 3, 1897, page 139.\n\n[a22] July 16, 1897, page 140.\n\n[a23] This letter was published in many editions among others in\nthe Letters of Tolstoi to his Wife, Moscow, 1913, pages 524\u2013526.\n\n[a24] July 16, 1897, page 140.\n\n[a25] July 17, page 142; October 22, page 162; November 28, page 176,\nand further.\n\n[a26] November 28, 1897, page 177.\n\n[a27] December 2, 1897, page 177.\n\n[a28] December 13, 1897, page 182.\n\n[a29] January 13, 1898, page 195.\n\n[a30] April 12, 1898, page 219.\n\n[a31] July 17, 1898, page 244.\n\n[a32] September 28, 1899, page 277.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n  \u201cAbout Patriotism,\u201d Tolstoi\u2019s letter to Manson, _pp._ 19, 394;\n      _note_ 36.\n  Abrikosov, Kh. N., _note_ 167.\n  Adam, Paul, _p._ 238; _note_ 340.\n  _Adult, the_, a magazine, _p._ 193; _note_ 280.\n  Africa, _p._ 166.\n  Agatha Michailovna, maid to Tolstoi\u2019s grandmother, _p._ 388.\n  Aggeev, Aphanasi, _p._ 162; _note_ 237.\n  Akime, peasant, _p._ 59.\n  Alexander I, Emperor, _p._ 182.\n  Alexander Petrovich, _see_ Ivanov.\n  Alexeev, I., _note_ 129.\n  Algerian Disciplinary Battalion, _note_ 380.\n  Ambrose, Holy Man of Optina, _p._ 176; _notes_ 257, 258.\n  America, _pp._ 14, 16, 241, 286; _notes_ 40, 96, 134, 177, 178,\n      221, 295, 343, 357.\n  American, the, _see_ Hall.\n  Americans, the, _p._ 61.\n  Amsterdam, _note_ 18.\n  Andrusha, _see_ Tolstoi, A. L., Count.\n  _Anna Karenin_, Tolstoi\u2019s novel, _note_ 182.\n  Annenkov, K. N., _note_ 104.\n  Annenkov, _pp._ 60, 144, 240, 243; _notes_ 104, 177.\n  \u201cAphorisms,\u201d Schopenhauer, _p._ 8; _note_ 24.\n  Aphremovs, landlords, _p._ 232; _note_ 323.\n  \u201cAppendix, the\u201d (by L. Tolstoi) to Chekhov\u2019s story, _Dushechka_\n      (_Darling_), _note_ 177.\n  \u201cAppendix, the\u201d (by L. Tolstoi) to E. I. Popov\u2019s book, _Life and\n      Death of E. N. Drozhin_, _note_ 38.\n  Archer, _p._ 256; _note_ 365.\n  Archives, Tolstoi\u2019s, manuscript edition of the Nineties, _notes_ 7,\n      167, 347.\n  Arensky, A. S., _p._ 96; _note_ 154.\n  Aristophanes, _p._ 81.\n  Aristotle, _p._ 130.\n  Arkhangelsky, A. I., _p._ 113; _note_ 167.\n  Arkhangelsky, Andre Dimitrievich, _p._ 289; _note_ 391.\n  Arnold, Matthew, _note_ 182.\n  Azov Sea, _p._ 218.\n\n\n  Baburino village, _p._ 59; _note_ 103.\n  Bach, Johann Sebastian, _pp._ 55, 103, 104, 128; _note_ 153.\n  Bacon, Francis, _p._ 166.\n  \u201cBallade,\u201d Chopin\u2019s, _p._ 96.\n  Barcelona, _note_ 144.\n  Bastyevo, station, _p._ 230; _notes_ 311, 318.\n  Bausk, Province of Courland, _p._ 389; _note_ 173.\n  Bavarian, the, _p._ 255.\n  Bazhenov, I. R., _p._ 6; _note_ 17.\n  Bedborough, editor of _The Adult_, _p._ 193; _note_ 280.\n  Beethoven, Ludvig, _pp._ 55, 60, 80, 102, 103, 128, 152.\n  \u201cBeginning of the End, the,\u201d article by L. Tolstoi (preface to\n      the letter of a Hollander), _pp._ 70, 393; _note_ 125.\n  Behrs, A. A., _p._ 186.\n  Behrs, S. A. (\u201c_Stepa_\u201d), _p._ 122.\n  Beller, L. A., _p._ 160.\n  B\u00e9nard, _p._ 130.\n  Berkeley, George, _p._ 75.\n  Bieli, Constantine, _see_ Zyabrev.\n  Bielinsky, V. G., _p._ 43; _note_ 79.\n  Bielopolie, Province of Kharkov, _note_ 134.\n  \u201cBigarrure\u201d by Arensky, _p._ 96.\n  Biography of L. N. Tolstoi, compiled by P. I. Biriukov, _notes_ 2,\n      34, 85, 102, 114, 119, 180, 253.\n  Biriukov, P. I. (Posha), _pp._ 7, 8, 53, 58, 108, 125, 127, 136,\n      145, 146, 185, 195, 230, 237, 389; _notes_ 9, 19, 23, 137,\n      160, 173, 219, 236, 257, 297, 353, 384.\n  Black Sea, the, _p._ 218.\n  \u201cBlunders of Fear, the,\u201d an article by M. O. Menshikov, _p._ 37;\n      _note_ 74.\n  Bobriki, village, _p._ 228; _note_ 305.\n  Boccaccio, _p._ 223.\n  Bochkarev, _p._ 5; _notes_ 11, 14.\n  Bondarev, T. M., _pp._ 53, 185, 390; _note_ 90.\n  Boulanger, P. A., _pp._ 95, 136, 144, 146, 160, 161, 171, 195,\n      237, 389; _notes_ 34, 134, 150, 219.\n  Bourgas, Bulgaria, _note_ 167.\n  _Boyhood_, Tolstoi\u2019s novel, _note_ 119.\n  Brahmins, _p._ 75.\n  Brashnin, I. P., _pp._ 219, 389; _note_ 301.\n  Bronnitsk, district of (Province of Moscow), _note_ 167.\n  Budapest, _note_ 56.\n  Buddha, _p._ 81.\n  Bulakhov, P. A., _pp._ 144, 195; _note_ 211.\n  Bulgaria, _p._ 237; _notes_ 46, 167.\n  \u201cBulletins of the Tolstoi Museum Society,\u201d _note_ 145.\n  Buzuluk, district of (Province of Samara), _note_ 222.\n\n\n  California, _note_ 134.\n  Canada, _notes_ 357, 367, 375.\n  Carpenter, _pp._ 85, 206; _note_ 135.\n  \u201cCarthago Delenda Est,\u201d article by L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 219, 221,\n      393; _note_ 302.\n  Carus, editor, _The Open Court_, _p._ 143; _note_ 206.\n  \u201cCatechism,\u201d _see_ \u201cChristian Doctrine, the.\u201d\n  Caucasus, _pp._ 258, 390; _notes_ 9, 195, 221, 240, 300, 357,\n      364, 367.\n  Chekhov, A. P., _p._ 186; _note_ 177.\n  Cherinov, M. P., _note_ 394.\n  Cherni (Province of Tula), _p._ 231; _note_ 303.\n  Chernigovitz (Vishnecsky), F. V., _note_ 24.\n  Chernishevsky, N. G., _p._ 43; _note_ 81.\n  Chernov, a Dukhobor, _note_ 300.\n  Chertkov, A. C. (Galia), _pp._ 56, 174, 175, 181, 237; _notes_ 34,\n      42, 97, 202, 230, 301, 338.\n  Chertkov, E. I., _p._ 149; _note_ 226.\n  Chertkov, V. G., _pp._ 19, 25, 31, 61, 87, 89, 106, 124, 133,\n      140, 142, 144, 152, 153, 158, 160, 161, 173, 178, 181, 183,\n      186, 189, 195, 198, 226, 237, 247, 253, 256, 369, 393, 400;\n      _notes_ 34, 48, 54, 80, 160, 173, 176, 190, 192, 200, 219,\n      226, 229, 231, 234, 240, 264, 269, 278, 293, 300, 309, 312,\n      333, 343, 347, 355, 358, 365, 374, 376, 381, 394.\n  Chertkovs (the \u201c_Exiles_,\u201d \u201cto England,\u201d \u201cfrom England\u201d),\n      _pp._ 14, 56, 65, 70, 100, 124, 139, 182, 233; _notes_ 107,\n      174, 192, 197, 198, 203, 210, 273, 280, 282, 328, 354.\n  Chicago, _notes_ 206, 343.\n  China, _p._ 212; _note_ 353.\n  Chizhov, S. P., _p._ 185; _note_ 270.\n  Chopin, _p._ 96.\n  Chorvatia, _note_ 46.\n  Christ, _pp._ 13, 60, 64, 65, 81, 141, 169, 201, 221, 240, 243,\n      245, 276, 277, 397; _notes_ 111, 151, 177, 192, 284, 372.\n  Christian, _pp._ 105, 221.\n  \u201cChristian Doctrine, the,\u201d by L. Tolstoi (\u201cCatechism,\u201d \u201cDeclaration\n      of Faith\u201d), _pp._ 5, 8, 14, 25, 29, 31, 32, 35, 37, 52, 56,\n      58, 61, 70, 74, 85, 87, 90, 262, 393, 398; _notes_ 4, 83,\n      95, 108, 190, 262.\n  Christianity, _pp._ 74, 85, 163, 164, 213, 220, 221, 234.\n  \u201cChromatic Fantasy and Fugue,\u201d by Bach, _p._ 96; _note_ 153.\n  Clara, St., _note_ 177.\n  Collected Works of L. N. Tolstoi, edited by P. I. Biriukov,\n      published by Sytin,\n    subscribed edition (20 volumes), _notes_ 5, 27, 111, 134, 160,\n      238, 297, 331;\n    popular edition (24 volumes), _notes_ 5, 27, 64, 111, 134, 160,\n      222, 238, 297.\n  Commander, the, of the Ekaterinograd (\u201cCaucasian\u201d) Disciplinary\n      Battalion, _pp._ 89, 394; _note_ 137.\n  Commander, the, of the Irkutsk Disciplinary Battalion, _pp._ 85,\n      394; _note_ 134.\n  \u201cConcerning the Attitude towards the State,\u201d by L. N. Tolstoi,\n      _note_ 126.\n  \u201cContemporary Science,\u201d article by Carpenter, _p._ 85; _note_ 135.\n  Conversation with Nicodemus, _p._ 40.\n  Copernicus, _p._ 83.\n  Corinthians, the message of the Apostle Paul to the, _p._ 232.\n  Corneille, _pp._ 25, 30.\n  \u201cCorpse, the,\u201d _see_ \u201cThe Living Corpse.\u201d\n  \u201cCorrespondence of L. N. Tolstoi with N. N. Strakhov,\u201d _note_ 47.\n  \u201cCorrespondence of L. N. Tolstoi with the Countess A. A. Tolstoi,\u201d\n      _note_ 176.\n  \u201cCoupon,\u201d _see_ _The Forged Coupon_.\n  Cracow, _note_ 53.\n  Crookes, William, _p._ 143; _note_ 204.\n  Crosby, _pp._ 16, 19, 21, 144, 185, 240, 394; _notes_ 37, 40,\n      215, 296.\n  \u201cCrucifix,\u201d duet by Faure, _p._ 104; _note_ 162.\n  Cyprus, _notes_ 353, 357.\n\n\n  \u201cDaily Bread,\u201d story by F. F. Tischenko, _p._ 96; _note_ 156.\n  Dante Alighieri, _p._ 103.\n  Darwin, Charles, _p._ 74.\n  Davydov, N. V., _p._ 21; _note_ 49.\n  Decadents, the, _pp._ 102, 144.\n  \u201cDeclaration of Faith, the,\u201d _see_ \u201cChristian Doctrine, the.\u201d\n  Deibner, A., the publisher, _note_ 36.\n  De-Kuh, _note_ 233.\n  Demenka, village, _p._ 60; _note_ 107.\n  Denisenko, E. S., Tolstoy\u2019s niece, _note_ 257.\n  Derzhavin, G. R., _note_ 397.\n  Descartes, Ren\u00e9, _pp._ 83, 89.\n  Desert of Optina, the, _notes_ 121, 257, 258.\n  _Devil, the_, Tolstoy\u2019s story, _note_ 346.\n  Dieterichs, the, _pp._ 237, 244.\n  Dieterichs, J. K., _note_ 338.\n  Dieterichs, M. K., _note_ 338.\n  Dieterichs, O. C., _see_ Tolstoi, O. C., Countess.\n  _Divine and the Human, the_, Tolstoy\u2019s story, _note_ 266.\n  Dobroliubov, N. A., _p._ 43; _note_ 81.\n  Dolgoe, the town, _p._ 180; _note_ 261.\n  Don, district of the, _note_ 90.\n  Dragomirov, M. I., _p._ 91; _note_ 145.\n  Drozhin, E. N., _p._ 16; _notes_ 38, 207.\n  Dubrovin, M. N., _p._ 198.\n  Dubrovsky, _p._ 198.\n  Dukhobors, _pp._ 5, 91, 114, 117, 148, 193, 211, 222, 240, 243,\n      247, 253, 256, 269, 389, 390, 394, 395; _notes_ 9, 130,\n      134, 144, 155, 160, 173, 177, 195, 219, 220, 221, 240, 279,\n      297, 300, 304, 312, 343, 346, 353, 357, 363, 364, 365, 367,\n      375, 381.\n  Dumas, Alexander, _note_ 96.\n  Dunaev, A. N., _pp._ 6, 95, 136, 139, 237, 243; _notes_ 15, 196, 301.\n  Duniasha, the peasant girl, _p._ 157.\n  Dushan, _see_ Makovitsky.\n  Dvoriansky, A. P., the teacher, _p._ 395.\n\n\n  Egorov, F. R., _p._ 388.\n  Egypt, _note_ 37.\n  Ekaterinograd (\u201cCaucasian\u201d) Disciplinary Battalion, The, _pp._ 87,\n      89, 394; _notes_ 137, 279.\n  Elias, the prophet, _p._ 64.\n  Engelhardt, M. A., _p._ 293; _note_ 398.\n  England, _pp._ 14, 185, 212, 233, 240; _notes_ 27, 31, 36, 38,\n      80, 91, 125, 130, 132, 160, 195, 197, 231, 240, 264, 269,\n      278, 297, 312, 321, 339, 342, 343, 353, 375, 379, 381.\n  Englishmen, The, _pp._ 61, 166.\n  English papers, _p._ 211.\n  Epictetus, _pp._ 242, 261.\n  \u201cEpilogue, the (by L. Tolstoi) to the appeal \u2018Help!\u2019\u201d _pp._ 100,\n      393; _note_ 160.\n  Ergolsky, T. A., _note_ 177.\n  Ertel, A. I., _p._ 21; _note_ 50.\n  \u201cL\u2019Esthetique d\u2019Aristotle,\u201d B\u00e9nard, _p._ 130.\n  Europe, _p._ 164.\n  Europeans, the, _p._ 71.\n  Evgenie Ivanovich, _see_ Popov, E. I.\n  Exiles, the, _see_ Chertkovs.\n\n\n  Factory hands, _p._ 100.\n  \u201cFamine or No Famine,\u201d the article by Tolstoi (\u201cOn the People\u2019s\n      Condition\u201d), _pp._ 232, 236, 393; _notes_ 321, 325, 335.\n  Famine-Stricken, The, _pp._ 222, 270, 390, 391, 395; _notes_ 303,\n      305, 306, 313, 320, 321, 325, 337, 382.\n  _Father Sergius_, a story by L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 182, 233, 236, 243,\n      392, 396; _notes_ 177, 266, 327, 346.\n  Faure, Jean Baptiste, _p._ 104; _note_ 162.\n  Fet (Shenshin), A. A., _p._ 64; _notes_ 24, 114.\n  Fire Refugees, The, _p._ 60.\n  _Forged Coupon, the_, Tolstoi\u2019s story (_Coupon, The_), _pp._ 182,\n      234, 296, 392, 397; _notes_ 177, 244, 266, 329, 400.\n  _Fortnightly Review_, an English magazine, _note_ 182.\n  Fortress of Peter and Paul, _p._ 389; _note_ 192.\n  Four Gospels, harmonized, translated and studied, Tolstoi\u2019s work,\n      _note_ 289.\n  Francis of Assisi, _note_ 177.\n  \u201cFree Press, the,\u201d _pp._ 64, 270; _notes_ 7, 297, 298.\n  Free Press, The, publishing house of A. and V. Chertkov, _notes_ 4,\n      9, 31, 38, 91, 125, 126, 130, 132, 134, 160, 269, 312.\n  Frenchman, the, _p._ 6.\n\n\n  Gaideburov, V. P., _p._ 240; _note_ 344.\n  Galia, _see_ Chertkov, A. C.\n  Galileo, _p._ 83.\n  Gay, N. N., the artist, _notes_ 80, 139.\n  Gay, N. N., the artist\u2019s son (\u201cKolechka,\u201d \u201cKolichka\u201d), _pp._ 87,\n      269, 271, 283.\n  Gendarme, _p._ 56; _note_ 98.\n  Geneva, _note_ 220.\n  George, Henry, _p._ 56; _notes_ 37, 96.\n  Georgia, the American agricultural colony, _pp._ 211, 395;\n      _note_ 296.\n  Germans, the, _pp._ 144, 212, 273.\n  Germany, _note_ 66.\n  Gibson, _p._ 395; _note_ 296.\n  Gill\u2019s Factory, _p._ 33; _note_ 70.\n  Ginzburg, I. J., _p._ 144; _notes_ 138, 214.\n  \u201cGod,\u201d Derzhavin\u2019s Ode, _note_ 397.\n  Goethe, Wolfgang, _pp._ 54, 103, 128; _note_ 94.\n  Gogol, N. V., _note_ 79.\n  Goldenweiser, A. B., _pp._ 96, 144; _note_ 152.\n  Goldingen (government of Courland), _p._ 389; _note_ 173.\n  Golitsin, G. S., prince, _p._ 258; _note_ 367.\n  Gorbunov (Posadov), I. I., _pp._ 124, 199, 244; _notes_ 149,\n      167, 350.\n  Gorbunov, N. I., _notes_ 149, 350.\n  Gorbunovs, _pp._ 95, 244.\n  Gorchakov, E. S., Princess, _p._ 100; _note_ 157.\n  Goremykin, I. L., _note_ 64.\n  Gorokhov, the landlord, _note_ 261.\n  _Gospel in Brief, The_, by L. Tolstoy, _note_ 215.\n  Gospels, the, _pp._ 60, 61, 128, 151, 166, 179, 263; _note_ 111.\n  Granovsky, T. N., _p._ 43; _note_ 78.\n  Grave, _p._ 206; _note_ 292.\n  Grevenhagen, the Dutch city, _note_ 233.\n  Grinevich, V. S., _pp._ 22, 395; _note_ 54.\n  Grinevka, the estate of Count I. L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 221, 223, 226,\n      228, 230, 231, 391; _notes_ 303, 305, 323.\n  Grot, N. J., _pp._ 162, 163, 171, 173, 176, 199; _notes_ 238, 255,\n      265, 298.\n  Gubarevka, village, _pp._ 226, 228.\n  Gubonin (\u201cThe Teacher\u201d), _p._ 226; _note_ 314.\n  Gulenko, M. F., _p._ 199; _note_ 286.\n  Gulliver, _p._ 164.\n  Gusev, N. N., _note_ 237.\n\n\n  _Hadji-Murad_, _pp._ 62, 70, 85, 136, 137, 152, 158, 164, 166,\n      172, 174, 182, 186, 195, 198, 210, 216, 219, 226, 230, 392,\n      396; _notes_ 112, 122, 266.\n  Hadji Murad, a Caucasian mountaineer, _pp._ 62, 70, 182, 216;\n      _note_ 112.\n  Hague Peace Conference, _note_ 378.\n  Hall (\u201cAmerican, the\u201d), _p._ 125; _note_ 178.\n  Heath, _p._ 149; _note_ 225.\n  \u201cHelp!\u201d the appeal by P. I. Biriukov, I. M. Tregubov, and V. G.\n      Chertkov, _notes_ 160, 173.\n  Helsingfors, _note_ 347.\n  Herzen, A. I., _p._ 43; _note_ 80.\n  Hindus, the, _pp._ 71, 83.\n  History of Music, the, _p._ 103.\n  Holland, _p._ 7; _note_ 233.\n  Hollander, the, _see_ Vanderveer.\n  Holy Scriptures, _p._ 128.\n  Homer, _p._ 103.\n  _Hour of the Will of God_, a story by N. S. Lieskov, _note_ 330.\n  \u201cHow to read Gospels and in what is their essence,\u201d by L. Tolstoi,\n      _pp._ 61, 393; _note_ 111.\n  Hungary, _pp._ 178, 389; _notes_ 8, 45, 46, 259.\n\n\n  Igumnov, J. I. (\u201cJulie\u201d), _p._ 289; _note_ 390.\n  Ilinsky, a landowner, _p._ 226; _note_ 308.\n  Ilya, Iliusha, _see_ Tolstoi, I. L., Count.\n  \u201cL\u2019individu et la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9,\u201d by Jean Grave, _p._ 206.\n  Initials, the, substituting names and surnames, _see_ N, NN.\n  \u201cInternational Tolstoi Almanac, the, on Tolstoi,\u201d compiled by\n      P. A. Sergienko, _notes_ 56, 130, 178, 206.\n  Introduction to _The Story of a Mother_ by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 266.\n  _Ioga\u2019s Philosophy_, by Vivek\u00e2nanda, _p._ 71; _note_ 127.\n  Irkutsk, _note_ 134.\n  Irkutsk, the disciplinary battalion of, _p._ 394; _note_ 134.\n  Ivan Mikhailovich, _see_ Tregubov.\n  Ivanov, Alexander Petrovich, _p._ 163; _note_ 239.\n  Iversk, ikon of, _p._ 275.\n\n\n  Jacob, _p._ 81.\n  Japan, _p._ 212.\n  Japanese, the, _note_ 215.\n  Japanese, the (plural), _pp._ 74, 80.\n  J\u00e4rnefelt, A. A., _pp._ 244, 406; _notes_ 347, 350.\n  Joseph, biblical, _p._ 81.\n  Juriev (Dorpat), a city, _note_ 379.\n  Jushkova, N. M., _p._ 129; _note_ 183.\n\n\n  Kalmikov, Mme. A. M., _pp._ 70, 87, 394; _note_ 126.\n  Kaluga, _note_ 350.\n  Kamenka, a village, _p._ 226; _note_ 305.\n  Kansas (in America), _note_ 295.\n  Kant, Immanuel, _pp._ 65, 75, 83; _note_ 115.\n  Karma, _p._ 152.\n  Kasatkin, N. A., _pp._ 144, 180; _notes_ 214, 263.\n  Kashai, in Hungary, _note_ 8.\n  Katiusha Maslov, heroine of _Resurrection_, _see_ Maslov.\n  Kazan, _pp._ 94, 146, 163, 185; _notes_ 218, 232, 379.\n  Kaznacheevka, a village, _note_ 237.\n  Kenworthy, _pp._ 5, 14, 19, 21, 25, 276; _note_ 7.\n  Kh., N. l., _p._ 198.\n  Khaliavka, a peasant woman, _p._ 59.\n  Kharkov, _p._ 5; _notes_ 151, 209, 379.\n  Kharkov, Province of, _notes_ 134, 240.\n  Khilkov, D. A., Prince, _pp._ 163, 165, 240, 253; _note_ 240.\n  Khiriakov, A. M., _note_ 34.\n  Khodinka, a square in Moscow, _pp._ 58, 388; _note_ 89.\n  _Khodinka_, a story by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 89.\n  Kholevinsky, M. M., _pp._ 31, 388, 394; _note_ 63.\n  Kiev, _pp._ 140, 243; _notes_ 129, 202, 270, 379.\n  _Kingdom of God Within Us, the_, L. Tolstoi\u2019s book, _note_ 291.\n  Kioto, a Japanese city, _note_ 129.\n  Klein, I-Kh., _note_ 233.\n  _Knizhki Nedieli_, a magazine, _notes_ 74, 156, 246, 253.\n  Kolasha, Kolia, _see_ Obolensky, N. L., Prince.\n  Kolechka, Kolichka, _see_ Gay, N. N.--son.\n  _Konevsky_, _see_ _Resurrection_.\n  Koni, A. F., _pp._ 100, 136; _notes_ 23, 158, 192.\n  Konissi, D. P., _p._ 74; _note_ 129.\n  Konius, Julius, and Leo Eduardovich, _p._ 129; _note_ 184.\n  _Korni Vasiliev_, a story by L. Tolstoi, _p._ 397; _note_ 266.\n  Kozlovka (or Kozlova Zasieka), a station, _note_ 347.\n  Krapivensk, the district of, _notes_ 84, 261.\n  Kronstad, John of, _see_ Sergiev.\n  Kudinenko, F., _p._ 20; _note_ 43.\n  Kudriavtsev, M. F., _p._ 100; _note_ 159.\n  Kukevka, a village, _p._ 230; _note_ 305.\n  Kukin (from Chekhov\u2019s _Dushechka_), _note_ 177.\n  Kursk, Province of, _note_ 38.\n  Kuzminsky, A. M., _p._ 91; _notes_ 22, 145.\n  Kuzminsky, T. A. (\u201cAunt Tanya\u201d), _pp._ 8, 246; _note_ 22.\n  Kuzminsky, V. A., _p._ 253; _note_ 359.\n\n\n  Langlet (\u201cThe Swede\u201d), _p._ 150; _note_ 227.\n  Lao-Tse, _note_ 129.\n  Lawyer, _p._ 60.\n  _Leaflets of the Free Press_, a publication by A. and V. Chertkov,\n      _notes_ 27, 45, 279, 321, 377.\n  Lebon, _p._ 212.\n  Leipzig, _note_ 384.\n  Letter to M. A. Engelhardt, A, (\u201cOn Non-resistance\u201d), _note_ 398.\n  \u201cLetter to the Italians, a\u201d (\u201cOn Abyssinians\u201d), by L. Tolstoi,\n      _pp._ 29, 393; _note_ 59.\n  \u201cLetter to the Liberals, a,\u201d by L. Tolstoi (\u201cTo Mme. Kalmikov\u201d),\n      _pp._ 70, 87, 394; _note_ 126.\n  \u201cLetter to the Officer, a,\u201d by L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 270, 395;\n      _note_ 377.\n  \u201cLetter to a Peasant, a,\u201d by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 96.\n  \u201cLetter to the Russian Public, a,\u201d (\u201cOn Dukhobors\u201d), _note_ 297.\n  \u201cLetter to the Swedish Newspapers, a\u201d (\u201cOn the Nobel prize and\n      the Dukhobors,\u201d \u201cThe Swedish Letter,\u201d \u201cTo Stockholm\u201d), by\n      L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 148, 149, 158, 395; _note_ 220.\n  Letter to the Swedish papers, a, _pp._ 270, 395; _note_ 278.\n  Letters of Count Tolstoi to His Wife, _p._ 404; _notes_ 66, 129,\n      155, 179, 199, 242, 250, 251, 303, 310, 365.\n  Letters (unpublished), fragments of these letters are cited in\n      the editorial notes.\n  Leo, _see_ Tolstoi, L. L., Count.\n  Leontev, B. N., _p._ 146.\n  Levitsky, the landlord, _pp._ 232, 391; _note_ 323.\n  Liapunov, V. D. (\u201cViacheslav\u201d), _pp._ 160, 199; _notes_ 236, 288.\n  Liberals, the, _p._ 272.\n  Lieskov, N. S., _p._ 235; _note_ 330.\n  _Light that Shines in Darkness, The_, Tolstoi\u2019s drama (\u201cDrama\u201d),\n      _pp._ 14, 19, 20, 29, 85, 113, 141, 392, 402; _note_ 35.\n  Lindenberg, G. R., _p._ 226; _notes_ 313, 314.\n  \u201cLiving Corpse, the,\u201d Tolstoi\u2019s play (\u201cThe Corpse\u201d), _p._ 186.\n  Lombroso, C\u00e6sar, _p._ 146.\n  London, _notes_ 7, 80, 194.\n  Longinov, V. V., _p._ 144; _note_ 209.\n  Lopashino, a village, _p._ 223; _note_ 305.\n  _Love for the Good_, _p._ 244; _note_ 349.\n  Lvov (Lemberg), the capital of Galicia, _note_ 240.\n\n\n  Magdalene, _note_ 177.\n  Maklakov, A. A., _note_ 213.\n  Maklakov, V. A., _note_ 213.\n  Maklakovs, _pp._ 144, 146.\n  Makovitsky, D. P. (\u201cDushan\u201d), _pp._ 20, 175, 178; _notes_ 45, 259.\n  Malikov, A. K., _p._ 210; _note_ 295.\n  Mallarm\u00e9, Stephane, _p._ 54; _note_ 93.\n  Mallory, Lucy, _note_ 177.\n  Manager of the Moscow Little Theatre, _note_ 10.\n  Manchuria, _note_ 353.\n  Manson (\u201cThe Englishman\u201d), _pp._ 14, 394; _note_ 36.\n  _Maria_ (a peasant woman), _p._ 59.\n  Maria Alexandrovna, _see_ Schmidt, M. A.\n  Maria Nicholaievna, _see_ Tolstoi, M. N.\n  Marx, A. F., the publisher, _notes_ 346, 362.\n  Marx, Karl, _pp._ 33, 248.\n  Marxists, the, _p._ 248.\n  Mary, _p._ 252; _note_ 177.\n  Masha, _see_ Obolensky, M. L., Princess.\n  Mashenka, _see_ Tolstoi, M. N., Countess.\n  Maslov, Katiusha, heroine of _The Resurrection_ (_Konevsky_),\n      _pp._ 51, 113; _notes_ 6, 166.\n  Materialists, the, _pp._ 83, 242.\n  Maude, A. F., _pp._ 139, 144, 167, 173, 175, 176, 195;\n      _notes_ 194, 254.\n  _Mayak, the_, children\u2019s magazine, _note_ 102.\n  Mediterranean, the, _p._ 218.\n  Medusov, _p._ 100.\n  Meletie, the archbishop of Riazan, _note_ 218.\n  Menshikov, M. O., _pp._ 37, 167, 173, 199, 236, 240; _notes_ 74,\n      246, 253.\n  \u201cMenteur,\u201d by Corneille, _p._ 30.\n  Michael-Angelo, _pp._ 55, 103.\n  Mikhailo, a harness-maker, _pp._ 53, 56.\n  Mikhail\u2019s Ford, a village, _p._ 228; _note_ 305.\n  Miklukha-Maklai, N. N., _p._ 166; _note_ 243.\n  Minister of the Interior, the (I. L. Goremykin), _pp._ 31, 394;\n      _notes_ 64, 126, 304.\n  Minister of Justice, the (N. V. Muraviev), _pp._ 31, 394; _note_ 64.\n  Minusinsk, district of (Province of Yeniseisk), _note_ 90.\n  Mohammed, _p._ 92.\n  Molokans, the, _pp._ 148, 149, 395; _notes_ 222, 223, 224, 232.\n  Morosov, V. S., a peasant from Yasnaya Polyana, _note_ 102.\n  Moscow, _pp._ 8, 14, 19, 20, 21, 24, 31, 35, 53, 90, 95, 96, 99,\n      100, 101, 107, 109, 117, 136, 137, 139, 163, 171, 176, 180,\n      181, 183, 185, 186, 189, 194, 198, 199, 202, 206, 210, 213,\n      219, 222, 269, 286, 291, 292, 296, 388, 390; _notes_ 13, 28,\n      29, 49, 57, 61, 71, 78, 88, 129, 152, 157, 163, 213, 221,\n      235, 238, 239, 256, 262, 265, 286, 301, 304, 347, 369.\n  Moscow, Court of, _notes_ 40, 53, 398.\n  Moses, _pp._ 74, 92, 243, 245.\n  _Mother\u2019s Notes, a_, by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 266.\n  Mtsensk, Province of, _p._ 230; _note_ 317.\n  Muraviev, N. V., _note_ 64.\n  Myasoyedov, G. G., _p._ 32; _note_ 68.\n\n\n  N, an army officer, _p._ 53.\n  N, the artist, who refused to enter military service, _pp._ 9,\n      20, 53; _note_ 29.\n  N, the journalist, _p._ 21.\n  N, a revolutionist, _p._ 35.\n  N, \u201ca type for a drama,\u201d _p._ 135.\n  N, NN (as written by Tolstoi in the original), _pp._ 273, 279.\n  N, NN, A, B, V, G, Z, (the initials, substituted for the names\n      omitted by the editors), _pp._ 37, 53, 58, 60, 98, 102, 129,\n      131, 135, 142, 147, 160, 181, 183, 186, 205, 237, 245, 395;\n      _notes_ 234, 264.\n  Nagornov, N. M., _pp._ 19, 20, 388; _note_ 42.\n  Nagornov, V. V., Tolstoi\u2019s niece (\u201cVaria\u201d), _p._ 228; _notes_ 42, 257.\n  Nakashidze, I. P., Prince, _pp._ 114, 136, 198.\n  Napoleonic Wars, _p._ 212.\n  Nazarenes, the, _p._ 20; _note_ 46.\n  Nekhliudov, Dimitri, hero of _Resurrection_, _Konevsky_, _p._ 113;\n      _notes_ 6, 166.\n  _New Collection of Letters of L. N. Tolstoi_, compiled by P. S.\n      Sergienko, _notes_ 53, 398.\n  New Guinea, _note_ 243.\n  Newton, Isaac, _p._ 83.\n  New York, _p._ 95, _notes_ 127, 215, 388.\n  Nicholaev, in Kazan, _p._ 185.\n  Nicholaev, Grigori, an outlaw, _pp._ 166, 396.\n  Nicholaev, _note_ 96.\n  Nicholai, _see_ Tolstoi, N. N., Count.\n  Nicholas II, Alexandrovich, ex-Emperor, _pp._ 21, 149, 395;\n      _notes_ 49, 225.\n  Nicholas I, Pavlovich, Emperor, _p._ 43.\n  Nicholskoe, estate of the counts Olsuphiev, _pp._ 24, 29, 30,\n      117, 123, 124, 125, 127, 129, 132, 133, 134, 135, 391;\n      _notes_ 55, 191.\n  Nicholskoe, estate of Count S. L. Tolstoi, _p._ 228; _note_ 311.\n  Nietzche, Friedrich, _p._ 163\n  _Niva_, a magazine (No. 51) _p._ 296; _notes_ 346, 362, 392, 399.\n  Nobel, Alfred, _p._ 148; _note_ 220.\n  Nobel prize, _pp._ 148, 395; _notes_ 220, 227.\n  _Notes of a Madman_, by L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 109, 113, 392, 396;\n      _note_ 165.\n  _Nov_, a newspaper, _note_ 129.\n  Novaia Alexandria, _note_ 379.\n  Novikov, the brother of M. P. Novikov, _pp._ 31, 143, 163.\n  Novikov, M. P., _pp._ 31, 143, 144, 160; _notes_ 61, 205.\n  _Novoe Vremia_, a newspaper, _notes_ 74, 147, 182, 204, 253.\n\n\n  Obdorsk (government of Tobolsk), _notes_ 130, 300, 364.\n  \u201cObnovlenie,\u201d a publishing firm, _notes_ 125, 126, 134, 377.\n  Obolensky, E. V., princess, Tolstoi\u2019s niece, _p._ 262; _notes_ 257,\n      370.\n  Obolensky, M. L., Princess, Tolstoi\u2019s daughter, \u201cMasha,\u201d _pp._ 14,\n      35, 53, 85, 100, 140, 142, 185, 194, 228, 233, 237, 245,\n      256, 262, 277, 292, 389; _notes_ 12, 32, 54, 105, 131, 193,\n      198, 201.\n  Obolensky, N. L., Prince, Tolstoi\u2019s son-in-law, \u201cKolasha,\u201d \u201cKolia,\u201d\n      _pp._ 5, 142, 233, 262, 277, 292, 389, 405; _notes_ 12, 32,\n      60, 199, 201, 290.\n  Odessa, _pp._ 182, 397; _note_ 379.\n  _Ohne Staat_, a German newspaper, _note_ 56.\n  Olga, _see_ Tolstoi, O. C., Countess.\n  Olkhovik, P. V., _pp._ 85, 394; _note_ 134.\n  Olsuphiev, A. M., Countess, _p._ 132; _note_ 190.\n  Olsuphiev, A. V., Count, _p._ 149; _note_ 224.\n  Olsuphiev, M. A., Count, _pp._ 129, 391; _note_ 185.\n  Olsuphievs, the Counts, _pp._ 21, 24, 125, 391; _notes_ 48, 55.\n  \u201cOn Abyssinians,\u201d an article by Tolstoi, _see_ \u201cLetter to the\n      Italians, a.\u201d\n  _On a Cart_, a story by Chekhov, _p._ 186.\n  \u201cOn Art,\u201d _see_ _What is Art?_\n  \u201cOn the Condition of the People,\u201d _see_ \u201cFamine or No Famine.\u201d\n  _On Life_, Tolstoi\u2019s book, _notes_ 37, 178.\n  _On Life_, transcript by Hall, _p._ 125; _note_ 178.\n  \u201cOn Science,\u201d _see_ \u201cPreface to Carpenter\u2019s article \u2018Contemporary\n      Science.\u2019\u201d\n  \u201cOn War,\u201d an article by Tolstoi, _p._ 393; _note_ 146.\n  \u201cOn War,\u201d a French pamphlet, _p._ 7.\n  \u201cOn Whipping,\u201d _see_ _Shameful_.\n  \u201cOnly Possible Solution of the Land Problem, the,\u201d Tolstoi\u2019s\n      article, _note_ 96.\n  _Open Court, The_, a magazine, _note_ 206.\n  Orel, _note_ 295.\n  Orenburg, _note_ 63.\n  Ossipov, Peter, a peasant from Yasnaya Polyana, _p._ 165; _note_ 241.\n  Ovsiannikovo, T. L. Sukhotin\u2019s estate, _pp._ 6, 245; _notes_ 11,\n      13, 350.\n\n\n  P., _p._ 218.\n  Paris, _p._ 216; _note_ 87.\n  Pascal, Blaise, _pp._ 15, 273.\n  Pashkov Sect, _p._ 188; _note_ 226.\n  _Paths of Life_, by L. Tolstoi, _p._ 201; _note_ 289.\n  \u201cPatriotism or Peace?\u201d _see_ \u201cAbout Patriotism.\u201d\n  Paul, the apostle, _p._ 232; _note_ 249.\n  Pavlenkov, F. F., _note_ 398.\n  Peasant-Poet, from Kazan, _p._ 163.\n  Perer, _p._ 32.\n  Perfileev, V. S., _p._ 105; _note_ 163.\n  Persianninov, _pp._ 72, 182, 396.\n  Pet., _p._ 195.\n  _Peterburgskaia Viedomosti_, a newspaper, _pp._ 158, 160, 211,\n      395; _notes_ 222, 232.\n  Petrograd (St. Petersburg), _pp._ 124, 391; _notes_ 47, 90, 138,\n      145, 174, 176, 192, 300, 379.\n  Petrovich, _pp._ 182, 396.\n  Pharesov, A. I., _p._ 210.\n  Phedoseev, N. I., _p._ 193; _note_ 279.\n  Philosophov, N. A., _p._ 9; _note_ 30.\n  Pickard, Elizabeth, _p._ 240; _note_ 342.\n  Pirogovo, Count S. N. Tolstoi\u2019s estate, _pp._ 52, 60, 85, 163,\n      246, 262, 269, 391; _note_ 84.\n  Planidin, P. V., Dukhobor, _note_ 300.\n  Plato, _p._ 95.\n  \u201cPloughman, the,\u201d a poem by V. D. Liapunov, _p._ 199; _note_ 288.\n  Podsolnechnaia, _note_ 55.\n  \u201cPolitics,\u201d Aristotle\u2019s, _p._ 131; _note_ 187.\n  Poltava, _note_ 314.\n  Popov, E. I. (\u201cEvgenie Ivanovich\u201d), _pp._ 143, 199, 205, 217;\n      _notes_ 38, 207.\n  Posha, _see_ Biriukov, P. I.\n  \u201cPosrednik,\u201d a Moscow publishing firm, _notes_ 9, 19, 21, 75, 96,\n      102, 115, 119, 135, 149, 150, 167, 182, 259, 286, 357, 366.\n  \u201cPosrednik,\u201d a Slavonian publishing firm, _p._ 178; _note_ 259.\n  _Posthumous Literary Works of L. N. Tolstoi_, published by A. L.\n      Tolstoi, _notes_ 89, 112, 165, 244.\n  \u201cPosthumous Notes of the Monk, Fedor Kuzmich, the,\u201d by L. Tolstoi,\n      _p._ 396; _note_ 266.\n  _Power of Darkness, the_, Tolstoi\u2019s drama, _p._ 8; _note_ 10.\n  Pozdniakov, V. N. (\u201cThe Dukhobor\u201d), _p._ 256; _note_ 364.\n  Preface by L. Tolstoi to the English edition of _What is Art?_\n      _pp._ 211, 393.\n  Preface (by L. Tolstoi) to the work of T. M. Bondarev, _note_ 90.\n  Preface (by L. Tolstoi) to Carpenter\u2019s article, \u201cContemporary\n      Science\u201d (\u201cOn Science,\u201d \u201cCarpenter\u201d), _pp._ 161, 165, 167,\n      171, 175, 206, 393; _note_ 135.\n  Prescriptions, _pp._ 83, 88, 171, 403.\n  Priest, the, _p._ 185.\n  _Problems of Philosophy and Psychology_, _notes_ 129, 169, 238,\n      265, 268, 278, 298.\n  _Progress, as an Evolution of Cruelty_, a book by M. A. Engelhardt,\n      _p._ 293; _note_ 398.\n  Prugavin, A. S., _note_ 222.\n  Public Library in Moscow, the, _p._ 136.\n  Public Library in Petersburg, the, _note_ 138.\n  Pugachev, _p._ 277.\n  Purleigh, a town in England, _note_ 194.\n\n\n  Quakers, _notes_ 221, 342, 353.\n\n\n  Rachinsky, S. A., _p._ 27; _note_ 57.\n  Rakhmanov, V. V., _note_ 140.\n  Raphael, _pp._ 103, 128.\n  Razin, Stenka, _p._ 277.\n  _Reading Circle, the_, by L. Tolstoi, _notes_ 167, 177, 366, 387.\n  _Religion des Geistes, die_, German magazine, _note_ 56.\n  Repine, I. E., _pp._ 93, 194; _notes_ 147, 282.\n  _Resurrection_, Tolstoi\u2019s novel (_Konevsky_), _pp._ 5, 6, 21,\n      51, 58, 85, 113, 182, 243, 245, 246, 252, 256, 258, 262,\n      269, 270, 277, 283, 286, 289, 292, 296, 390, 392, 397, 407;\n      _notes_ 1, 23, 96, 158, 190, 266, 346, 362, 371, 374, 376,\n      381, 392.\n  \u201cResurrection of Hell and its Destruction, the,\u201d a legend by\n      L. Tolstoi, _pp._ 182, 195, 397; _notes_ 266, 284.\n  Revolutionaries, the, _p._ 272.\n  Riazan, the Province of, _note_ 303.\n  Riga, _note_ 379.\n  Robinson, a teacher, _p._ 185.\n  Rostovtzev, M. N., _p._ 247; _note_ 354.\n  Rostovtzev, N. D., _note_ 354.\n  Rozanov, V. V., _p._ 173; _note_ 253.\n  Rusanov, G. A., _pp._ 95, 182; _notes_ 151, 180.\n  Rusanovs, _p._ 183.\n  _Russ_, a newspaper, _note_ 321.\n  _Russki Trud_, a magazine, _p._ 236; _note_ 336.\n  _Russkia Viedomosti_, a newspaper, _pp._ 222, 390, 395; _notes_ 218,\n      304.\n\n\n  S., _see_ Tolstoi, S. A., Countess.\n  Safonovo, a village, _p._ 133; _note_ 191.\n  Sakia-Muni, _p._ 81.\n  Salomon, K. A., _pp._ 53, 160; _note_ 87.\n  Samara, the Province of, _pp._ 58, 396; _notes_ 102, 222.\n  Samara, _p._ 148.\n  Sasha, _see_ Tolstoi, A. L., Countess.\n  Schmidt, Eugene, _pp._ 25, 85, 87, 394; _note_ 56.\n  Schmidt, M. A. (\u201cMaria Alexandrovna\u201d), _pp._ 6, 8, 162, 165, 172,\n      292; _notes_ 13, 177, 252.\n  Schopenhauer, Arthur, _pp._ 8, 400; _note_ 24.\n  Sectarians, _p._ 262; _note_ 218.\n  Seminary student, _p._ 53.\n  Sereda, Cyril, _p._ 394; _note_ 134.\n  Serezha, _see_ Tolstoi, S. L., Count.\n  Serezha, _see_ Tolstoi, S. N., Count.\n  Sergei, _see_ Tolstoi, S. N., Count.\n  Sergienko, P. A., _notes_ 53, 56, 130, 178, 206.\n  Sergiev, I. I. (Kronstad), _p._ 57; _note_ 99.\n  \u201cSergius,\u201d _see_ _Father Sergius_.\n  Servia, _note_ 46.\n  Shakespeare, William, _pp._ 55, 103, 128, 138, 152; _note_ 94.\n  _Shameful_, an article by Tolstoi (on whipping), _pp._ 8, 393;\n      _notes_ 27, 50.\n  Shamordino (Province of Kaluga, \u201cThe Monastery\u201d), _pp._ 70, 391;\n      _notes_ 121, 257.\n  Sharapov, S. F., _note_ 336.\n  Shelkovo, a village, _p._ 135; _note_ 191.\n  Shenshins, the landlords, _pp._ 69, 142; _note_ 118.\n  Shidlovsky, a peasant, _p._ 140; _note_ 202.\n  Shkarvan, A. A., _pp._ 5, 7, 10, 32, 53; _notes_ 8, 31, 91, 233.\n  Shokhor-Trotsky, K. S., _note_ 90.\n  Shorin, Mme., _p._ 132; _note_ 189.\n  _Should it really be so?_ an article by Tolstoi, _note_ 315.\n  Siaskov, M. V. (Maria Vasilievna), _p._ 8; _note_ 21.\n  Siberia, _p._ 390; _notes_ 90, 134, 218, 237, 270, 279, 364.\n  Sidorovo, a village, _p._ 226; _note_ 305.\n  _Sieverni Viestnik_, a magazine, _pp._ 161, 207; _notes_ 53, 135.\n  _Siegfried_, Wagner\u2019s opera, _pp._ 31, 388; _note_ 65.\n  Sinet, _p._ 270; _note_ 380.\n  Siutaev, V. K., _note_ 90.\n  Smolensk, the Province of, _note_ 211.\n  Sobolev, M. N., _p._ 144; _note_ 214.\n  _Social Gospel_, an American magazine, _note_ 296.\n  Socialists, _pp._ 16, 213, 214, 272, 275.\n  Soloviev, S. M., _p._ 188; _note_ 277.\n  Solovievs, Vladimir and Vsevolod Sergeevich, _note_ 277.\n  Sonya, _see_ Tolstoi, S. N., Countess.\n  Sophocles, _pp._ 81, 103.\n  Sopotsko, M. A., _pp._ 22, 394; _note_ 52.\n  _Sovremennik_, a magazine edited by Chernishevsky, _note_ 81.\n  Spielhagen, Friedrich, _p._ 16; _note_ 38.\n  Spier, A. A., _pp._ 31, 32, 35, 56, 115, 388, 400; _notes_ 66,\n      67, 169.\n  Spiritualists, _p._ 188.\n  St., _p._ 195.\n  St. John, _p._ 49.\n  St. John, A. K., _p._ 148; _note_ 221.\n  St. Thomas, L. Tolstoi\u2019s tutor, _p._ 69; _note_ 119.\n  Stakhovich, A. A., _note_ 212.\n  Stakhoviches, _p._ 144.\n  Stakhovich, M. A., _pp._ 145, 226, 253; _note_ 212.\n  Stakhovich, S. A., _note_ 212.\n  Stasov, V. V., _pp._ 87, 124, 194; _note_ 138.\n  Stcheglov, I. L., _note_ 185.\n  Stead, William, _note_ 342.\n  \u201cStep by Step\u201d people, _p._ 214.\n  Stockholm, _p._ 158; _notes_ 71, 220.\n  _Stockholms Dagbladet_, a Swedish newspaper (_Tagblatt Stokholm_),\n      _p._ 150.\n  \u201cStones, the,\u201d a legend by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 387.\n  Storozhenko, N. I., _p._ 180; _note_ 262.\n  Storozhenko, O. I., _p._ 388.\n  Strakhov, N. F. (\u201cNatasha Strakhov\u201d), _p._ 52; _note_ 82.\n  Strakhov, N. N., _pp._ 20, 37, 228, 388; _notes_ 47, 76, 316.\n  Strakhov, Ph. A., _pp._ 37, 185; _notes_ 75, 77, 82.\n  Students, from Kharkov, _p._ 5.\n  Student Movement of 1899, the, _p._ 270; _note_ 379.\n  Sudakovo, Shenshins\u2019 estate, _note_ 118.\n  Sudzha (the Province of Kursk), _note_ 38.\n  Sukhotin, M. S., L. Tolstoi\u2019s son-in-law, _p._ 390; _note_ 62.\n  Sukhotin, T. L., L. Tolstoi\u2019s daughter (\u201cTania\u201d), _pp._ 31, 60,\n      129, 133, 136, 167, 173, 194, 237, 262; _notes_ 11, 13, 62,\n      71, 144, 185.\n  Suller, _see_ Sullerzhitsky.\n  Sullerzhitsky, L. A. (\u201cSuller\u201d), _pp._ 199, 253, 258; _notes_ 287,\n      357, 367.\n  Sumsk, the district of (Province of Kharkov), _notes_ 134, 240.\n  Sverbeev, D. D., _p._ 32; _note_ 69.\n  _Svobodnaia Mysl_, a magazine edited by P. I. Biriukov, _note_ 220.\n  Swede, the, _see_ Langlet.\n  Sweden, _p._ 35; _notes_ 71, 326.\n  Swedes, the, _note_ 378.\n  \u201cSwedish Letter, the,\u201d _see_ \u201cLetter to the Swedish Papers, a.\u201d\n  Swift, Jonathan, _p._ 95.\n  Switzerland, _p._ 237; _note_ 46.\n  Sytin, I. D., _note_ 5.\n\n\n  _Tagblatt Stokholm_, _see_ _Stockholms Dagbladet_.\n  Tania, _see_ Sukhotin, T. L.\n  Tanyeev, Sergei Ivanovich, _pp._ 53, 66; _notes_ 88, 117.\n  Tarovat, _p._ 199.\n  \u201cTeaching of the Twelve Apostles, the,\u201d _p._ 71; _note_ 128.\n  \u201cThousand and One Nights, the,\u201d _p._ 288.\n  \u201cThree Problems,\u201d a story by L. Tolstoi, _note_ 331.\n  Tiflis, _p._ 5; _notes_ 9, 155.\n  Tischenko, F. F., _p._ 96; _note_ 156.\n  Tobolsk, Province of, _notes_ 130, 364.\n  Tod, the Hindu, _p._ 71.\n  Tolstoi, A. A., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s aunt, _p._ 124; _notes_ 94,\n      176.\n  Tolstoi, A. L., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s daughter (\u201cSasha\u201d),\n      _p._ 194; _notes_ 71, 283.\n  Tolstoi, A. L., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s son (\u201cAndrusha\u201d), _p._ 143;\n      _note_ 208.\n  \u201cTolstoi Annual, 1913,\u201d _notes_ 90, 258.\n  Tolstoi, D. F., Countess, born Vesterlund, wife of Count L. L.\n      Tolstoi, _pp._ 70, 146; _notes_ 71, 123, 216, 326.\n  Tolstoi, I. L., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s son (\u201cIlya,\u201d \u201cIliusha\u201d),\n      _pp._ 14, 70, 143, 150, 277, 391; _notes_ 30, 33, 85, 123,\n      208, 303, 322.\n  Tolstoi, L. L., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s son (\u201cLeo\u201d), _pp._ 70, 146;\n      _notes_ 71, 98, 123, 216, 326, 332.\n  Tolstoi, M. K., Countess, born Rachinsky, first wife of Count S. L.\n      Tolstoi, _p._ 70; _notes_ 57, 123.\n  Tolstoi, M. L., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s son, _notes_ 71, 214.\n  Tolstoi, M. L., _see_ Obolensky, M. L.\n  Tolstoi, M. N., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s sister (\u201cMashenka,\u201d \u201cMaria\n      Nicholaievna\u201d), _pp._ 176, 246, 253, 291; _notes_ 121, 257,\n      352, 358, 370.\n  Tolstoi, M. S., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s niece (\u201cthe girls\u201d) _p._ 53;\n      _note_ 86.\n  Tolstoi Museum in Petrograd, _note_ 223.\n  Tolstoi, N. N., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s brother (\u201cNicholai\u201d), _p._ 173;\n      _note_ 253.\n  Tolstoi, O. C., Countess, born Dieterichs, first wife of Count A. L.\n      Tolstoi (\u201cOlga\u201d), _pp._ 158, 277, 289; _notes_ 231, 338, 389, 394.\n  Tolstoi, S. A., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s wife (\u201cS,\u201d \u201cSonya,\u201d\n      \u201cWife\u201d), _pp._ 5, 8, 10, 35, 68, 70, 86, 124, 125, 136, 150,\n      163, 172, 226, 231, 243, 245, 246, 256, 283, 286, 374, 404;\n      _notes_ 3, 66, 71, 96, 121, 129, 199, 242, 258, 303, 359,\n      365, 374.\n  Tolstoi, S. L., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s son (\u201cSerezha\u201d), _pp._ 70,\n      86, 223, 226, 258, 292; _notes_ 57, 96, 123, 135, 136, 257,\n      311, 367.\n  Tolstoi, S. N., Count, L. Tolstoi\u2019s brother (\u201cSergei,\u201d \u201cSerezha,\u201d\n      \u201cBrother S\u201d), _pp._ 52, 60, 85, 246, 276, 286, 391; _notes_ 65,\n      84, 85, 86, 110, 133, 351, 360.\n  Tolstoi, S. N., Countess, born Philosophov, wife of Count I. L.\n      Tolstoi (\u201cSonya,\u201d \u201cDaughter-in-Law\u201d), _pp._ 70, 232, 277;\n      _notes_ 30, 123, 322, 385.\n  Tolstoi, T. L., Countess, _see_ Sukhotin, T. L.\n  Tolstoi, Vera S., Countess, L. Tolstoi\u2019s niece (\u201cThe Girls\u201d),\n      _pp._ 53, 253; _note_ 86.\n  Tolstoi, V. P., Count, the husband of L. Tolstoi\u2019s sister,\n      _note_ 257.\n  Tolstoyanism, _p._ 178.\n  Tomsk, _note_ 379.\n  Transvaal, _p._ 395.\n  Tregubov, I. M. (\u201cIvan Mikhailovich\u201d), _pp._ 93, 133, 135, 139,\n      143, 145, 146, 181, 185, 195, 198, 253, 389, 393; _notes_ 148,\n      160, 173, 195, 196, 219.\n  _Trilby_, _p._ 25.\n  Trophime, a peasant, _p._ 59.\n  Trubetzkoi, S. N., Prince, _p._ 181; _note_ 265.\n  Tsurikovs, the landlords, _pp._ 226, 232; _note_ 308.\n  Tula, _pp._ 53, 69, 89, 174, 195, 198; _notes_ 63, 98, 236, 325.\n  Tula District Court, _notes_ 49, 237.\n  Tula, the Province of, _pp._ 390, 391; _notes_ 61, 84, 236, 261, 303.\n  Tver, _pp._ 19, 198; _note_ 41.\n  \u201cTwo Wars,\u201d the article by L. Tolstoi, _p._ 393.\n  Typist, the, _p._ 148.\n\n\n  Ukhtomsky, E. E., Prince, _p._ 236; _note_ 334.\n  Umansk, the district of (Province of Kiev), _note_ 270.\n  United States of America, _notes_ 36, 37, 46.\n  Ursin, M., _see_ Zdziekhovsky, M. E.\n  Usev, P. S., _note_ 394.\n\n\n  Vanderveer (\u201cThe Hollander\u201d), _pp._ 70, 89, 146, 163;\n      _notes_ 124, 125.\n  Van-Duyl, _note_ 18.\n  Varia, _see_ Nagornov, V. V.\n  _Vegetarian Review_, the magazine, _note_ 13.\n  Venezuela, _note_ 36.\n  Verigin, P. V., a Dukhobor, _pp._ 75, 394; _notes_ 9, 130, 300, 364.\n  Verkholensk, _p._ 193; _note_ 134.\n  Verus, _note_ 384.\n  Viatka, the village of, _p._ 94.\n  Viazemsky, Prince, _p._ 185.\n  _Viestnik Evropa_, _p._ 236.\n  Vietrova, M. F., _pp._ 136, 389; _note_ 192.\n  Virgil, _p._ 128.\n  Vivek\u00e2nanda, Svami, _note_ 127.\n  Vladimir, the ikon of, _p._ 165.\n  Vladivostok, _notes_ 17, 134.\n  Volkonsky, G. M., Prince, _p._ 395.\n  Voronezh, the disciplinary battalion of, _note_ 38.\n  Voronezh, the prison of, _note_ 38.\n  _Vrede_, a Dutch magazine, _note_ 124.\n\n\n  Wagner, Richard, _pp._ 31, 388; _note_ 65.\n  Walz, _p._ 6; _note_ 10.\n  _War Against War_, Stead\u2019s magazine, _note_ 342.\n  Westerlund, Ernest, _p._ 233; _note_ 326.\n  Westrup, _p._ 286; _note_ 388.\n  _What is Art?_ L. Tolstoi\u2019s book on art, _pp._ 88, 90, 96, 117,\n      120, 125, 127, 129, 136, 137, 139, 140, 144, 145, 150, 160,\n      161, 162, 163, 174, 175, 178, 180, 181, 182, 185, 195, 199,\n      206, 393, 398, 400; _notes_ 65, 93, 142, 181, 238, 247, 254,\n      255, 265, 267, 268, 269, 278.\n  _What is my Faith?_ Tolstoi\u2019s book, _p._ 31.\n  _What Then Shall We Do?_ L. Tolstoi\u2019s book, _note_ 90.\n  \u201cWhere is Thy Brother?\u201d the article by V. G. Chertkov, _p._ 226;\n      _note_ 312.\n  \u201cWhere is the Way Out?\u201d the article by Tolstoi, _note_ 315.\n  \u201cWho is Right?\u201d Tolstoi\u2019s story, _pp._ 5, 392; _note_ 5.\n  \u201cWhom to Serve?\u201d the book by A. I. Arkhangelsky, _p._ 113;\n      _note_ 167.\n  Willard, _p._ 240; _note_ 343.\n  Witte, S. I., _p._ 91; _note_ 145.\n  Women, Tolstoi\u2019s attitude toward them, _note_ 177.\n  Workingman from Tula, a, _p._ 53.\n  Workingman, the, _p._ 57.\n  \u201cWorks of the St. Petersburgh Philosophic Society,\u201d _note_ 187.\n  _Works of Count L. N. Tolstoi_, published by Countess S. A. Tolstoi,\n      _note_ 398.\n\n\n  Yakutsk, _note_ 270.\n  Yakutsk, the region of, _pp._ 256, 390; _note_ 134.\n  Yaremichov, _p._ 59.\n  Yaroshenko, N. A., _p._ 124; _note_ 175.\n  Yasenki, a post-office branch, _pp._ 35, 142, 160, 161, 167, 172.\n  Yasnaya Polyana, _pp._ 3, 4, 5, 7, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 52,\n      56, 58, 59, 60, 68, 70, 74, 78, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90,\n      93, 136, 139, 140, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 148, 149, 150,\n      158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 167, 168, 171, 173,\n      174, 175, 177, 232, 236, 237, 240, 243, 245, 253, 256, 258,\n      262, 265, 269, 270, 275, 276, 277, 283, 286, 289, 388, 390,\n      394, 406.\n  Yeniseisk, the government of, _note_ 90.\n\n\n  Zakaz, the forest near Yasnaya Polyana, _p._ 58, _note_ 101.\n  Zakharin, G. A., _p._ 176; _note_ 256.\n  Zanini, _pp._ 90, 96; _notes_ 144, 155.\n  Zdziekhovsky, M. E., _p._ 22; _note_ 53.\n  Zhebelev, S. A., _note_ 187.\n  Zyabrev, C. N., a peasant from Yasnaya Polyana (\u201cBieli\u201d), _p._ 6;\n      _note_ 16.\n\n\n\n\nSPEAKING ABOUT RUSSIA--\n\n\nbrings one inevitably to Borzoi Books. Here are listed some which\nare bound to interest you. They may be seen at any bookstore.\n\n  THE RUSSIAN SCHOOL OF PAINTING: From the Russian of Alexandre\n    Benois with an introduction by Christian Brinton, and\n    thirty-two full page plates. The only survey in English. An\n    unusually beautiful book.                               $5.00\n\n  MODERN RUSSIAN HISTORY: From the Russian of Alexander Kornilov.\n    The only work in English that comes right down to the present\n    day, and the most complete history of modern Russian in\n    any language but Russian. Two volumes with maps, boxed,\n    per set.                                                $5.00\n\n  THE SHIELD: Edited by Gorky, Sologub, and Andreyev. Issued\n    in Russia by the Society for the Study of Jewish Life (to\n    which only pure blooded Russians are allowed membership),\n    this book is a remarkable plea for the abrogation of the\n    Jewish disabilities. Russia\u2019s best writers, scientists and\n    publicists have contributed to it. Foreword by William English\n    Walling.                                                $1.25\n\n  GREAT RUSSIA: By Charles Sarolea, author of \u201cThe Anglo-German\n    Problem,\u201d etc. A brilliant and sympathetic survey of the\n    country and its people. With maps.                      $1.25\n\n  IDEALS AND REALITIES IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE: By P. Kropotkin.\n    Generally considered the best history of Russian literature\n    available in English. Third edition.                    $2.00\n\n  RUSSIA\u2019S GIFT TO THE WORLD: By J. W. Mackail, Professor of Poetry\n    at the University of Oxford. A concise and informing survey\n    of just what Russia has contributed to the art, science and\n    culture of the world.                                    50c.\n\n  IN THE RUSSIAN RANKS: By John Morse (Englishman.) Ten months\n    fighting in Poland. \u201cThe most notable piece of war literature\n    the war has yet produced.\u201d--_The London Times_.         $1.50\n\n  RUSSIA\u2019S MESSAGE: By William English Walling. A new, revised\n    and cheaper edition of the only book in English that tells\n    the truth about the Russian peasant and explains the\n    recent Revolution. With over twenty hitherto unpublished\n    illustrations.                                          $1.50\n\nAll prices are net.\n\n\nALFRED A. KNOPF, PUBLISHER, NEW YORK\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[Transcriber\u2019s Notes:\n\nThe marker \u201c[1][A]\u201d (I continue[1][A]) was changed from \u201c1\u201d to\nclearly show that it points to two references, a footnote and an\nend note.\n\nErrors in punctuation have been corrected. Inconsistency in the use\nof period in initials representing omitted names, e.g., \u201cN.\u201d and\n\u201cN\u201d, has been retained.\n\nNo changes to the numbers and words in the text, including those\nwith variant spellings and inconsistent hyphenation, capitalization,\nand formatting, have been made except the following:\n\n  Page xi, \u201cYasnaya\u201d changed from \u201cYasanaya\u201d (home in Yasnaya).\n  Page xvi, \u201cTatiana\u201d changed from \u201cTitiana\u201d (eldest daughter\n    Tatiana).\n  Page xviii, \u201cto\u201d inserted before \u201chear or understand them\u201d.\n  Contents, page no. \u201c210\u201d corrected from \u201c213\u201d.\n  Page 21, \u201cTo-day\u201d changed from \u201cToday\u201d (To-day, _Feb. 13, Moscow_).\n  Page 23, \u201cfulfil\u201d changed from \u201cfufil\u201d (he must fulfil them).\n  Page 31, \u201cjotted\u201d changed from \u201cjolted\u201d (In all I have jotted).\n  Page 56, italics added in \u201cIt seems to me, _June 6, Ysn. Pol._\u201d\n  Page 70, inserted paragraph break before \u201c_August 1, Ysn. Pol. If\n    I live._\u201d\n  Page 173, inserted \u201c24\u201d in \u201cNov. 24, Y. P.\u201d\n  Page 193, \u201cVerkholensk\u201d changed from \u201cVerhkolensk\u201d (a letter from\n    Verkholensk).\n  Page 204, \u201csometimes\u201d changed from \u201csometime\u201d (coincide, and can\n    sometimes not).\n  Page 221, duplicated \u201cthe\u201d deleted (slaves and the women).\n  Page 228, marker for Note 315 transferred from \u201cVaria.\u201d (Masha,\n    Varia.) to \u201c_The Appeal_.\u201d (on _The Appeal_.[315]).\n  Page 237, marker for Note 339 transferred from \u201cBulgaria.\u201d\n   (Boulanger to Bulgaria.) to \u201cquarrelled.\u201d (all quarrelled.[339]).\n  Page 238, \u201cphysical\u201d changed from \u201cphysicial\u201d (in physical\n    suffering).\n  Page 252, \u201coneself\u201d changed from \u201conself\u201d (one means--to perfect\n    oneself).\n  Page 272, \u201cvestigial\u201d changed from \u201cvestigal\u201d (... is vestigial).\n  Note 24, \u201cV.\u201d changed from \u201cO.\u201d (Ph. V. Chernigovitz); \u201cgreatest\u201d\n    changed from \u201cgrestest\u201d (the greatest geniuses).\n  Note 29, \u201chospital\u201d changed from \u201chosptial\u201d (military hospital in\n    Moscow).\n  Note 34, \u201cVladimir\u201d changed from \u201cVladimar\u201d (Vladimir Grigorevich\n    Chertkov).\n  Note 42, \u201cVarvara\u201d changed from \u201cVavara\u201d (Tolstoi\u2019s niece,\n    Varvara Valerianovna).\n  Note 45, \u201cMakovick\u00fd\u201d changed from \u201cMakovck\u00fd\u201d (Du\u0161an Makovick\u00fd).\n  Note 54, \u201cM. L.\u201d changed from \u201cN. L.\u201d (by M. L. Tolstoi).\n  Note 64, \u201cI. L.\u201d changed from \u201cE. L.\u201d (I. L. Goremykin and N. V.).\n  Note 66, \u201cWirklichkeit\u201d changed from \u201cWirchlikeit\u201d (_Denken und\n    Wirklichkeit_).\n  Note 78, \u201cUniversity\u201d changed from \u201cUniverstiy\u201d (at the Moscow\n    University).\n  Note 85, \u201cI. L.\u201d changed from \u201cT. L.\u201d (by Count I. L. Tolstoi).\n  Note 94, \u201cCountess\u201d changed from \u201cCount\u201d (to Countess A. A. Tolstoi).\n  Note 96, \u201cCountess\u201d changed from \u201cCount\u201d (to Countess S. A. Tolstoi).\n  Note 138, \u201cV. V.\u201d changed from \u201cV. A.\u201d (Memory of V. V. Stasov).\n  Note 160, \u201cI. M.\u201d changed from \u201cI. N.\u201d (P. I. Biriukov, I. M.\n    Tregubov).\n  Note 163, \u201cVasili\u201d changed from \u201cVasali\u201d (Vasili Stepanovich\n    Perfileev).\n  Note 167, \u201cBulgaria\u201d changed from \u201cBulgardia\u201d [in Bourgas\n    (Bulgaria)].\n  Note 173, \u201cI. M.\u201d changed from \u201cI. N.\u201d (I. M. Tregubov to\n    Goldingen).\n  Note 177, \u201cirreplaceable\u201d changed from \u201cirreplacable\u201d (great and\n    irreplaceable).\n  Note 184, \u201cviolinist\u201d changed from \u201cvolinist\u201d (the violinist and\n    the pianist).\n  Note 207, \u201c38\u201d changed from \u201c43\u201d (see Note 38).\n  Note 219, \u201cP. A.\u201d changed from \u201cB. A.\u201d (P. A. Boulanger was sent);\n    \u201cI. M.\u201d changed from \u201cI. N.\u201d (I. M. Tregubov were exiled).\n  Numbering of Note 234 corrected from \u201c324\u201d.\n  Note 243, \u201cN. N.\u201d changed from \u201cM. N.\u201d (N. N. Miklukha-Maklai).\n  Notes 246 and 253, \u201cKnizhki\u201d changed from \u201cKnighki\u201d [_Knizhki\n    Nedieli_ in 1897; _Knizhki Nedieli_ (1897, Nos. 9\u201311)].\n  Note 248, \u201c2\u201d changed from \u201c1\u201d (Chapter XIV, Verse 2).\n  Note 257, \u201cNagornov\u201d changed from \u201cNagarnov\u201d (Mme. V. V. Nagornov).\n  Note 262, \u201cNicholai\u201d changed from \u201cNichalai\u201d (Nicholai Ilich\n    Storozhenko).\n  Note 279, \u201cEvgrafovich\u201d changed from \u201cEvgrafovivh\u201d (Nicholas\n    Evgrafovich Phedoseev).\n  Note 294, \u201ccontemporary\u201d changed from \u201ccontemporaary\u201d (of\n    contemporary science).\n  Note 316, \u201cStrakhov\u201d changed from \u201cStakhov\u201d (deceased, N. N.\n    Strakhov).\n  Note 338, \u201cConstantinovna\u201d changed from \u201cConstantinova\u201d (and Olga\n    Constantinovna).\n  Note 386, \u201c384\u201d changed from \u201c385\u201d (See Note 384).\n  Page 387, \u201cJune\u201d changed from \u201cJuly\u201d (August, 1896; June, 1897).\n  Page 388, \u201cStrakhov\u201d changed from \u201cStrahkov\u201d (philosopher, N. N.\n    Strakhov).\n  Page 390, \u201cM. S.\u201d changed from \u201cN. S.\u201d (married to M. S. Sukhotin).\n  Page 391, \u201cand\u201d changed from \u201canr\u201d (August and November, 1898).\n  Page 394, \u201cManson\u201d changed from \u201cMason\u201d (2. John Manson).\n  Page 395, \u201c15\u201d corrected from \u201c16\u201d (15. To the _Russkia Viedomosti_).\n  Page 396, \u201cPersianninov\u201d changed from \u201cPersianinov\u201d (old man,\n    Persianninov).\n  Page 397, \u201cKorni\u201d changed from \u201cKorin\u201d (1897, \u201cKorni Vasiliev\u201d).\n  Footnote a18, \u201c136\u201d changed from \u201c404\u201d (March 9, 1897, page 136).\n  Footnote a19, \u201cApril 4, page 137, and April 9, 1897, page 139\u201d\n    changed from \u201cApril 4 and 9, 1897, page 137\u201d.\n  In the Index,\n    topic \u201cBiography of L. N. Tolstoi\u201d, \u201cP. I.\u201d changed from \u201cI. P.\u201d\n    topic \u201cBourgas\u201d, \u201cBulgaria\u201d changed from \u201cBulgardia\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Carthago Delenda Est\u2019\u201d, \u201c221\u201d changed from \u201c222\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Catechism\u2019\u201d, \u201cthe\u201d changed from \u201cThe\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Declaration of Faith\u2019\u201d, last \u201cthe\u201d changed from \u201cThe\u201d.\n    topic \u201cDesert of Optina\u201d, \u201cOptina\u201d changed from \u201cOptin\u201d.\n    topic \u201cDukhobors\u201d, \u201c353\u201d changed from \u201c352\u201d.\n    topic \u201cEpictetus\u201d, assignment of \u201c261\u201d as page number changed\n      from note number.\n    topic \u201cEvgenie Ivanovich\u201d, \u201cEvgenie\u201d changed from \u201cEvgeni\u201d.\n    topic \u201cFamine-Stricken, The\u201d, \u201c270\u201d changed from \u201c271\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Free Press, the\u2019\u201d, \u201c297, 298\u201d changed from \u201c1297, 1298\u201d.\n    topic \u201cGay, N. N., the artist\u2019s son\u201d, assignment of \u201c269, 271, 283\u201d\n      as page numbers changed from note numbers.\n    topic \u201cGeneva\u201d, deleted note reference \u201c18\u201d.\n    topic \u201cGoethe\u201d, \u201c94\u201d changed from \u201c97\u201d.\n    topic \u201cGorbunov (Posadov), I. I.\u201d, deleted note reference \u201c37\u201d.\n    topic \u201cGorbunovs\u201d, \u201c244\u201d changed from \u201c255\u201d.\n    topic \u201cGrinevka\u201d, \u201c226\u201d changed from \u201c225\u201d; assignment of \u201c391\u201d\n      as page number changed from note number.\n    topic \u201cGubonin\u201d changed from \u201cGubonon\u201d.\n    topic \u201cIvan Mikhailovich\u201d, \u201cTregubov\u201d changed from \u201cTregunov\u201d.\n    topic \u201cKasatkin\u201d, \u201c214, 263\u201d changed from \u201c214\u2013243\u201d.\n    topic \u201cKazan\u201d, \u201c146\u201d changed from \u201c46\u201d.\n    topic \u201cKaznacheevka\u201d changed from \u201cKaznacheecka\u201d.\n    topic \u201cKh., N. l.\u201d changed from \u201cKh., Nl.\u201d\n    topic \u201cKlein, I-Kh.\u201d, \u201cI-Kh.\u201d changed from \u201cI. Kh.\u201d\n    topic \u201cKolechka, Kolichka\u201d, \u201cN. N.\u201d changed from \u201cN. M.\u201d\n    topic \u201cKuzminsky, T. A.\u201d, \u201cTanya\u201d changed from \u201cTania\u201d.\n    topic \u201cLeipzig\u201d, \u201c384\u201d changed from \u201c284\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Letter to the Swedish Newspapers, a\u2019\u201d, \u201cNobel\u201d changed\n      from \u201cNoble\u201d.\n    topic \u201cLetters of Count Tolstoi to His Wife\u201d, \u201cof\u201d changed\n      from \u201cto\u201d; \u201c365\u201d changed from \u201c265\u201d.\n    topic \u201cLonginov, V. V.\u201d, \u201c209\u201d changed from \u201c204\u201d.\n    topic \u201cMakovitsky\u201d changed from \u201cMakovitzky\u201d.\n    topic \u201cMallory\u201d changed from \u201cMalory\u201d.\n    topic \u201cMaria Nicholaievna\u201d, \u201cNicholaievna\u201d changed from\n      \u201cNicholaevna\u201d.\n    topic \u201cMasha\u201d, \u201cM. L.\u201d changed from \u201cM. N.\u201d\n    topic \u201cMoscow\u201d, \u201c390\u201d changed from \u201c398\u201d.\n    topic \u201cN, NN, A, B, V, G, Z\u201d, \u201c186\u201d changed from \u201c187\u201d.\n    topic \u201cNazarenes, the\u201d, \u201c46\u201d changed from \u201c33\u201d.\n    topic \u201cNicholaev, Grigori\u201d, \u201c166\u201d changed from \u201c155\u201d.\n    topic \u201cNicholai\u201d changed from \u201cNicholas\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_Niva_\u201d, \u201c362\u201d changed from \u201c352\u201d.\n    topic \u201cObolensky, M. L.\u201d, \u201cMasha\u201d changed from \u201cMesha\u201d; \u201c35\u201d\n      changed from \u201c23\u201d.\n    topic \u201cObolensky, N. L.\u201d, \u201cPrince\u201d changed from \u201cprince\u201d.\n    topic \u201cOlsuphiev, M. A.\u201d, deleted note reference \u201c391\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018On Abyssinians\u2019\u201d, inserted \u201c, a\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018On the Condition of the People\u2019\u201d, \u201cNo\u201d changed from \u201cno\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018On Whipping\u2019\u201d, \u201c_Shameful_\u201d changed from \u201c\u2018Shame\u2019\u201d.\n    topic \u201cOvsiannikovo\u201d, \u201c13\u201d changed from \u201c130\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPashkov Sect\u201d, \u201c188\u201d changed from \u201c189\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_Paths of Life_\u201d, \u201c201\u201d changed from \u201c2\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPerfileev\u201d changed from \u201cPerfiluv\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPetrovich\u201d, page reference \u201c396\u201d changed from note reference\n      \u201c397\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPharesov\u201d changed from \u201cPharisov\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPopov, E. I.\u201d, \u201cEvgenie\u201d changed from \u201cEvgeni\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPosha\u201d, \u201cBiriukov\u201d changed from \u201cBiriukop\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Posrednik,\u2019 a Moscow publishing firm\u201d, deleted note\n      reference \u201c1\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_Power of Darkness, the_\u201d, \u201c8\u201d changed from \u201c18\u201d.\n    topic \u201cPreface by L. Tolstoi to the English edition of _What is\n      Art?_\u201d, assignment of \u201c393\u201d as page number changed from note\n      number.\n    topic \u201c_Resurrection_\u201d, note reference \u201c392\u201d changed from \u201c342\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_Russkia Viedomosti_\u201d, deleted note references \u201c390, 395\u201d.\n    topic \u201cS.\u201d, \u201cCountess\u201d changed from \u201ccountess\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSafonovo\u201d changed from \u201cSafonova\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSectarians\u201d, \u201c262\u201d changed from \u201c252\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSergius\u201d, \u201c_Father Sergius_.\u201d changed from \u201c\u2018Father\n      Sergius.\u2019\u201d\n    topic \u201cShamordino\u201d changed from \u201cShamordin\u201d.\n    topic \u201cShokhor-Trotsky\u201d changed from \u201cShokhor-Trosky\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSophocles\u201d, assignment of \u201c103\u201d as page number changed\n      from note number.\n    topic \u201cStrakhov, N. F.\u201d, \u201cStrakhov\u201d in \u201cNatasha Strakhov\u201d changed\n      from \u201cStrakhova\u201d.\n    topic \u201cStrakhov, Ph. A.\u201d, \u201cPh.\u201d changed from \u201cTh.\u201d\n    topic \u201cSudakovo\u201d changed from \u201cSudakova\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSuller\u201d, \u201cSullerzhitsky\u201d changed from \u201cSuller Zhitsky\u201d.\n    topic \u201cSwedish Letter, the\u201d, inserted \u201c, a\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_Tagblatt Stokholm_\u201d, \u201cStockholms\u201d changed from \u201cStokholms\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTobolsk\u201d changed from \u201cTolbolsk\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, A. L., Count\u201d, \u201cA. L.\u201d changed from \u201cA. I.\u201d\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, D. F.\u201d, \u201cL. L.\u201d changed from \u201cL. I.\u201d; \u201c146\u201d changed\n      from \u201c144\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, I. L.\u201d, \u201cIlya\u201d changed from \u201cIdya\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, M. N., Countess\u201d, \u201cNicholaievna\u201d changed from\n      \u201cNicholaevna\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, O. C.\u201d, \u201cDieterichs\u201d changed from \u201cDitterichs\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, S. A.\u201d, deleted note reference \u201c404\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTolstoi, S. N., Count\u201d, \u201cTolstoi\u2019s\u201d changed from\n      \u201cToilstoi\u2019s\u201d; \u201cSerezha\u201d changed from \u201cSerzha\u201d; \u201cBrother S\u201d\n      changed from \u201cBrothers\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTransvaal\u201d, \u201c_p._\u201d changed from \u201c_note_\u201d.\n    topic \u201cTregubov, I. M.\u201d, page number \u201c143\u201d changed from \u201c183\u201d.\n    topic \u201cUrsin, M.\u201d, \u201cZdziekhovsky\u201d changed from \u201cZdiekhovsky\u201d.\n    topic \u201cVaria\u201d, \u201cNagornov, V. V.\u201d changed from \u201cNagornova\u201d.\n    topic \u201cVerus\u201d, \u201c384\u201d changed from \u201c284\u201d.\n    topic \u201c_What Then Shall We Do?_\u201d, \u201cWe\u201d changed from \u201cW\u201d.\n    topic \u201c\u2018Works of the St. Petersburgh Philosophic Society\u2019\u201d,\n      \u201c187\u201d changed from \u201c189\u201d.\n    topic \u201cZdziekhovsky\u201d changed from \u201cZdiekhovski\u201d.\n    entry \u201cZyabrev, A. T., a peasant from Yasnaya Polyana, _note_ 16\u201d,\n      an inexact duplicate of entry for topic \u201cZyabrev, C. N.\u201d, deleted.\n    positions of out-of-order entries corrected.\n    italicization of \u201c_p._\u201d, \u201c_pp._\u201d, \u201c_note_\u201d, \u201c_notes_\u201d, and \u201c_see_\u201d\n      made consistent.\n    incorrect uses of \u201c_p._\u201d, \u201c_pp._\u201d, \u201c_note_\u201d, and \u201c_notes_\u201d repaired.\n    positions of out-of-order page and note number references\n      corrected.\n\nUse of additional vertical space to separate journal entries has\nbeen made consistent.\n\nSome portions of the text that appear to be typographical errors\nare printed as such in the original book. A list of these possible\nmisprints follows:\n\n  Page x, \u201cformerly\u201d for \u201cformally\u201d (formerly anathematised).\n  Page 37, \u201cTh.\u201d for \u201cPh.\u201d (Strakhov Th. A.).\n  Page 53, \u201cSalamon\u201d for \u201cSalomon\u201d and \u201cTanyee\u201d for \u201cTanyeev\u201d\n    (Salamon,[87] Tanyee.[88]...).\n  Page 92, \u201c(in relation to God\u201d and \u201c(1 in the sense\u201d share a\n    single closing parenthesis, \u201cof a number)\u201d.\n  Page 131, \u201c\u00e1\u201d for \u201c\u00e0\u201d (\u00e1 l\u2019agriculture).\n  Page 185, no period in the paragraph ending with \u201c12) ----[271]\u201d.\n  Page 193, \u201ceditor _The Adult_\u201d for \u201ceditor of _The Adult_\u201d.\n  Page 198, \u201cl.\u201d for \u201cL.\u201d or \u201cI.\u201d (Tula: N. l. Kh.).\n  Page 228, \u201cBobrika\u201d for \u201cBobriki\u201d (went to Bobrika).\n  Note 80, \u201cAlexandrovich\u201d for \u201cIvanonich\u201d (Alexander Alexandrovich\n    Herzen).\n  Note 90, \u201cNicholaievich\u201d for \u201cMichailovich\u201d (Timofei Nicholaievich\n    Bondarev).\n  Note 261, \u201cGorobov\u201d for \u201cGorokov\u201d or \u201cGorokhov\u201d (neighbouring\n    landlord, Gorobov).]","title":"The Journal of Leo Tolstoi (First Volume\u20141895-1899)","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":101053}