Jump to Introduction & Chronology
Jump back to Previous: The Brothers K. Bk V. 4. & "Voices"
The Brothers Karamazov
p283 [In Ivan’s story “He,” presumably Christ, appears in Seville during the Inquisition. He is recognized by the people and performs some miracles which are observed by the Grand Inquisitor who arrests him and throws him into a prison. That night the Grand Inquisitor visits the Prisoner.] “ ‘Is it Thou? Thou?’ But receiving no answer, he adds at once, ‘Don’t answer, be silent. What canst Thou say, indeed? I know too well what Thou wouldst say. And Thou hast no right to add anything to what Thou hadst said of old. Why, then, art Thou come to hinder us? For Thou hast come to hinder us, and Thou knowest that. But dost Thou know what will be tomorrow? I know not who Thou art and care not to know whether it is Thou or only a semblance of Him. But tomorrow I shall condemn Thee and burn Thee at the stake as the worst of heretics...”
p284 “I don’t quite understand, Ivan. What does it mean?” Alyosha, who had been listening in silence, asked with a smile. “Is it a fantasy, or a mistake on the part of the old man -- some impossible mistaken identity?”
“Take it as the last,” said Ivan, laughing, “if you are so corrupted by modern realism that you can’t stand fantasy. If you like it to be a case of mistaken identity, let it be so. It is true,” he went on, laughing, “the old man is ninety, and he might well have been crazy over his set idea. He might have been struck by the appearance of the Prisoner. It might, in fact, be simply his ravings, the delusion of an old man of ninety, over-excited by the ‘act of faith’ of a hundred heretics [burned] the day before. But does it matter to us after all whether it was a mistake of identity or a wild fantasy? All that matters is that the old man should speak out, should speak openly of what he has thought in silence for ninety years.”
“And the Prisoner too is silent? Does He look at him and not say a word?”
“That’s inevitable,” Ivan laughed again. “The old man has told Him He hasn’t the right to add anything to what He has said of old. One may say it is the most fundamental feature of Roman Catholicism, in my opinion at least. ‘All has been given by Thee to the Pope,’ they say. ‘And all, therefore, is still in the pope’s hands, and there is no need for Thee to come now at all. Thou must not meddle for the time, at least.’ That’s how they speak and write too -- the Jesuits, at any rate. I have read it myself in the works of their theologians. ‘Hast Thou the right to reveal to us one of the mysteries of that world from which Thou has come? my old man asks Him, and answers the question for Him. ‘No, Thou has not; that Thou mayest not add to what has been said of old, and mayest not take from men the freedom which Thou didst exalt when Thou wast on earth. Whatsoever Thou revealest anew will encroach on men’s freedom of faith; for it will be manifest as a miracle, and the freedom of their faith was dearer to Thee than anything else in those days fifteen hundred years ago. Didst Thou not often say then: “I will make you free”? But now Thou has seen these “free” men,’ the old man adds suddenly, with a pensive smile. ‘Yes, we’ve paid dearly for it,’ he goes on, looking sternly at Him, ‘but at last we have completed that work in Thy name. For fifteen centuries we have been wrestling with Thy freedom, but now it is ended and over for good. Dost Thou not believe that it’s over for good? Thou lookest meekly at me and deignest not even to be angry with me. But let me tell Thee that now, today, people are more persuaded than ever that they have perfect freedom, yet they have brought their freedom to us and laid it humbly at our feet. But that has been our doing. Was this what Thou didst? Was this Thy freedom?’ ”
p285 “I don’t understand,” Alyosha broke in again. “Is he ironical, is he joking?”
“No. Not at all! He claims it is a merit for himself and his Church that at last they have vanquished freedom and have done so to make men happy. ‘For now’ (he is speaking of the Inquisition, of course) ‘for the first time it has become possible to think of the happiness of men. Man was created a rebel; and how can rebels be happy? Thou wast warned,’ he says to Him. ‘Thou has had no lack of warnings. Thou didst reject the only way by which men might be made happy. But, fortunately, departing Thou didst hand on the work to us. Thou hast promised, Thou has established by Thy word, Thou has given to us the right to bind and to unbind, and now, of course, Thou canst not think of taking it away. Why, then, hast Thou come to hinder us?”
“And what’s the meaning of ‘no lack of warnings’?” asked Alyosha.
“Why, that’s the chief part of what the old man must say.
“ ‘The wise and dread Spirit, the spirit of self-destruction and non-existence,’ the old man goes on, ‘the great spirit talked with Thee in the wilderness, and we are told in the books that he “tempted” Thee. Is that so? And could anything truer be said than what he revealed to Thee in three questions which Thou didst reject, and which in the books is called “the temptation”? And yet if there has ever been on earth a real miracle, it took place on that day, on the day of the three temptations. The statement of those three questions was itself a miracle. . . . Imagine simply for the sake of argument that those three questions of the dread spirit had perished utterly from the books, and that we had to restore them and to invent them anew. To do so we had gathered together all the wise men of the earth... and had set them the task of inventing three questions, such as would not only fit the occasion but express in three words, three human phrases, the whole future history of the world and of humanity. Dost Thou believe that all the wisdom of the earth united could have invented anything in depth and force equal to the three questions which were actually put to Thee then by the wise and mighty spirit in the wilderness? From those questions alone, from the miracle of their statement, we can see that we have here to do not with the fleeting human intelligence, but with the absolute and eternal. For in those three questions the whole subsequent history of mankind is, as it were, brought together into one whole, and foretold. In them are united all the unsolved historical contradictions of human nature. At the time it could not be so clear, since the future was unknown. But now that fifteen hundred years have passed, we see that everything in those questions was so justly divined and foretold, and has been so truly fulfilled, that nothing can be added to them or taken from them.
“‘Judge Thyself who was right -- Thou or he who questioned Thee then? Remember the first question. Its meaning was this: “Thou wouldst go into the world, and art going with empty hands, with some promise of freedom which men in their simplicity and their natural unruliness cannot even understand, which they fear and dread -- for nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom. [The ground of nihilism and existentialism.] But seest Thou these stones in this parched and barren wilderness? Turn them into bread, and mankind will run after Thee like a flock of sheep, grateful and obedient, though forever trembling, lest Thou withdraw Thy hand and deny them Thy bread.” But Thou wouldst not deprive man of freedom and didst reject the offer, thinking, what is that freedom worth, if obedience is bought with bread? Thou didst reply that man lives not by bread alone. But dost Thou know that for the sake of that earthly bread the spirit of the earth will rise up against Thee and will strive with Thee and overcome Thee? And all will follow him, crying: “Who can compare with this beast? He has given us fire from heaven!” Dost Thou know that the ages will pass, and humanity will proclaim by the lips of their sages that there is no crime, and therefore no sin; there is only hunger? “Feed men, and then ask of them virtue!” that’s what they’ll write on the banner, which they will raise against Thee, and with which they will destroy Thy temple. Where Thy temple stood will rise a new building; the terrible tower of Babel will be built again. And though, like the one of old, it will not be finished, yet Thou mightest have prevented that new tower and have cut short the sufferings of men for a thousand years; for they will come back to us after a thousand years of agony with their tower. They will seek us again, hidden underground in the catacombs, for we shall be again persecuted and tortured. They will find us and cry to us: “Feed us, for those who have promised us fire from heaven haven’t given it!” And then we shall finish building their tower, for he finishes the building who feeds them. And we alone shall feed them in Thy name, declaring falsely that it is in Thy name. Oh, never, never can they feed themselves without us! No science will give them bread so long as they remain free. In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us: “Make us your slaves, but feed us.” They will understand at last, that freedom and bread enough for all are inconceivable together. Never, never will they be able to have both together! They will be convinced, too, that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, worthless and rebellious.
This is also Mann’s theme in much of Doctor Faustus where good Germans are so eager to surrender their political freedom to one Reich or another. But is the bit about bread and feeding the masses a Malthusian influence or to be taken metaphorically?
“ ‘Thou didst promise them the bread of Heaven, but, I repeat again, can it compare with earthly bread in the eyes of the weak, ever sinful and ignoble race of man? And if for the sake of the bread of heaven thousands and tens of thousands shall follow Thee, what is to become of the millions and tens of thousands of millions of creatures who will not have the strength to forego the earthly bread for the sake of the heavenly? [Now this sounds like metaphorical “bread”] Or dost Thou care only for the tens of thousands of the great and strong, while the millions, numerous as the sands of the sea, who are weak but love Thee, must exist only for the sake of the great and the strong? No, we care for the weak too. They are sinful and rebellious, but in the end they too will become obedient. They will marvel at us and look on us as gods, because we are ready to endure the freedom which they have found so dreadful and to rule over them -- so awful it will seem to them to be free. But we shall tell them that we are Thy servants and rule them in Thy name. We shall deceive them again, for we will not let Thee come to us again. That deception will be our suffering, for we shall be forced to lie.
p288 “ ‘This is the significance of the first question in the wilderness, and this is what Thou hast rejected for the sake of that freedom which Thou has exalted above everything. Yet in this question lies hidden the great secret of this world. Choosing “bread,” Thou wouldst have satisfied the universal and everlasting craving of humanity -- to find someone to worship. [While you could think of today’s religious fundamentalists here, I still think loyal Germans and Russians and the Nazis and Communists of his future are more relevant.] So long as man remains free he strives for nothing so incessantly and so painfully as to find someone to worship. But man seeks to worship what is established beyond dispute, so that all men would agree at once to worship it. For these pitiful creatures are concerned not only to find something that all would believe in and worship; what is essential is that all may be together in it. [The Protestant tradition would argue against this.] This craving for community of worship is the chief misery of every man individually and of all humanity from the beginning of time. For the sake of common worship they’ve slain each other with the sword. They have set up gods and challenged one another: “Put away your gods and come and worship ours, or we will kill you and your gods!” And so it will be to the end of the world, even when gods disappear from the world; they will fall down before idols just the same. [I still think it’s more likely that man seeks conflict rather than an extensive community.] Thou didst know, Thou couldst not but have known, this fundamental secret of human nature. But Thou didst reject the one infallible banner which was offered Thee to make all men bow down to Thee alone -- the banner of earthly bread. And Thou hast rejected it for the sake of freedom and the bread of Heaven.
p289 “ ‘Behold what Thou didst further. And again in the name of freedom! I tell Thee that man is tormented by no greater fear than to find someone quickly to whom he can hand over that gift of freedom with which he is born. But only one who can appease his conscience can take over his freedom. In bread there was offered Thee an invincible banner; give bread, and man will worship Thee, for nothing is more certain than bread. But if someone else gains possession of his conscience -- oh! then he will cast away Thy bread and follow after him who has ensnared his conscience. In that Thou wast right. For the secret of man’s being is not only to live but to have something to live for. Without a stable conception of the object of life, man would not consent to go on living, and would rather destroy himself than remain on earth, though he had bread in abundance. [Now this is the ground Nietzsche was working at the same time with his study of the Greeks both Apollonian and Dionysian. And this speaks more to the nihilists and existentialists than to the loyal subject of Prussia or Russia, though it speaks to them as well.] That is true. But what happened? Instead of taking men’s freedom from them, Thou didst make it greater than ever! Didst Thou forget that man prefers peace, and even death, to freedom of choice in the knowledge of good and evil? [I would like to argue with this, but there’s not much evidence to support the contrary position.] Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience, but nothing is a greater cause of suffering. And behold, instead of giving a firm foundation for setting the conscience of man at rest forever, Thou didst choose all that is exceptional, vague and puzzling. Thou didst choose that what was utterly beyond the strength of men, acting as though Thou didst not love them at all -- Thou who didst come to give Thy life for them! Instead of taking possession of men’s freedom, Thou didst increase it, and burdened the spiritual kingdom of mankind with its sufferings forever. Thou didst desire man’s free love, that he should follow Thee freely, enticed and taken captive by Thee. In place of the rigid ancient law, man must hereafter with free heart decide for himself what is good and what is evil, having only Thy image before him as his guide. But didst Thou not know he would at last reject even Thy image and Thy truth, if he is weighed down with the fearful burden of free choice? They will cry aloud at last that the truth is not in Thee, for they could not have been left in greater confusion and suffering than Thou hast caused, laying upon them so many cares and unanswerable problems.
p290 “ ‘So that, in truth, Thou didst Thyself lay the foundation for the destruction of Thy kingdom, and no one is more to blame for it. Yet what was offered Thee?
“ ‘There are three powers, three powers alone, able to conquer and to hold captive forever the conscience of these impotent rebels for their happiness -- those forces are miracle, mystery and authority. [What would be the Brave New World equivalents?] Thou hast rejected all three and hast set the example for doing so. When the wise dread spirit set Thee on the pinnacle of the temple and said to Thee, “if Thou wouldst know whether Thou art the son of God then cast Thyself down, for it is written: The angels shall hold him up lest he fall and bruise himself, and Thou shalt know then whether Thou art the Son of God and shall prove then how great is Thy faith in Thy Father.” But Thou didst refuse and wouldst not cast Thyself down. Oh! of course, Thou didst proudly and well like God. But the weak, unruly race of men, are they gods? Oh Thou didst know then that in taking one step, in making one movement to cast Thyself down, Thou wouldst be tempting God and have lost all Thy faith in Him, and wouldst have been dashed to pieces against that earth which Thou didst come to save. [This is, again, Pavel’s thinking about abandoning faith equivalent of abandoning it in fact. And this will come back to bite Ivan in the ass when it comes to his responsibility for his father’s death.] And the wise spirit that tempted Thee would have rejoiced. But I ask again, are there many like Thee? And couldst Thou believe for one moment that men, too, could face such a temptation? Is the nature of men such, that they can reject miracles and at the great moments of their life, the moments of their deepest, most agonizing spiritual difficulties, cling only to the free verdict of the heart? Oh, Thou didst know that Thy deed would be recorded in books, would be handed down to remote times and the utmost ends of the earth, and Thou didst hope that man, following Thee, would cling to God and not ask for a miracle. But Thou didst not know that when man rejects miracles he rejects God too; for man seeks not so much God as the miraculous, he will create new miracles of his own for himself, and will worship deeds of sorcery and witchcraft, though he might be a hundred times over a rebel, heretic and infidel. Thou didst not come down from the cross when they shouted to Thee, mocking and reviling Thee: “Come down from the cross and we will believe that Thou art He.” Thou didst not come down, for again Thou wouldst not enslave man by a miracle, and didst crave faith given freely, not based on miracles.
p291 “ ‘Thou didst crave for free love and not the base raptures of the slave before the might that has overawed him forever. But Thou didst think too highly of men therein, for they are slaves, of course, though rebellious by nature. Look around and judge; fifteen centuries have passed, look upon them. Whom hast Thou raised up to Thyself? I swear, man is weaker and baser by nature than Thou hast believed him! Can he, can he do what Thou didst? By showing him so much respect, Thou didst, as it were, cease to feel for him -- Thou who has loved him more than Thyself! Respecting him less, Thou wouldst have asked less of him. That would have been more like love, for his burden would have been lighter. He is weak and vile. He is weak and vile though he is everywhere now rebelling against our power, and proud of his rebellion! It is the pride of a child and a schoolboy. They are little children rioting and barring out the teacher at school. But their childish delight will end; it will cost them dearly. They will cast down temples and drench the earth with blood. But they will see at last the foolish children , that, though they are rebels, they are impotent rebels, unable to keep up their own rebellion. Bathed in their foolish tears, they will recognize at last that He who created them rebels must have meant to mock at them. They will say this in despair, and their utterance will be a blasphemy which will make them more unhappy still, for man’s nature cannot bear blasphemy, and in the end always avenges it on itself. And so unrest, confusion and unhappiness -- that is the present lot of man after Thou didst bear so much for his freedom!
“ ‘Thy great prophet tells in vision and in image, that he saw all those who took part in the first resurrection and that there were of each tribe twelve thousand. But if there were so many of them, they must have been not men but gods. They had borne Thy cross, they had endured scores of years in the barren, hungry wilderness, living upon locusts and roots -- and Thou mayest indeed point with pride at those children of freedom, of free love, of free and splendid sacrifice for Thy name. But remember that they were only some thousands; and what of the rest? And how are the other weak ones to blame, because they could not endure what the strong have endured? How is the weak soul to blame that it is unable to receive such terrible gifts? Canst Thou have simply come to the elect and for the elect? If so, it is a mystery and we cannot understand it. [Interesting point.] And if it is a mystery, we too have a right to preach a mystery, and to teach men that it’s not the free judgement of their hearts, not love that matters, but a mystery which they must follow blindly, even against their conscience. So we have done. We have corrected Thy work and have founded it upon miracle, mystery and authority. [This is so subversive and clever.] And men rejoiced that they were again led like sheep, and that the terrible gift that had brought them such suffering, was, at last, lifted from their hearts. Were we right teaching them this? Speak! Did we not love mankind, so acknowledging their feebleness, lovingly lightening their burden, and permitting their weak nature even sin with our sanction? Why hast Thou come now to hinder us? And why dost Thou look silently and searchingly at me with Thy mild eyes? Be angry. I don’t want Thy love, for I love Thee not. And what use is it for me to hide anything from Thee? Don’t I know to Whom I am speaking? All that I can say is known to Thee already. And is it for me to conceal from Thee our mystery? Perhaps it is Thy will to hear it from my lips. Listen, then. We are not working with Thee, but with him -- that is our mystery. It’s long -- eight centuries -- since we have been on his side and not on Thine. [That would have been around the time the Papal States came into existence. This feels like karma for my never paying any attention to the Papal States. It’s worth mentioning that the Papal States ceased to exist only 10 years before the publication of The Brothers Karamazov.]
“ ‘Just eight centuries ago, we took from him, the wise and mighty spirit in the wilderness, what Thou didst reject with scorn, the last gift he offered Thee, showing Thee all the kingdoms of the earth. We took from him Rome and the sword of Caesar, [ha, I was right!] and proclaimed ourselves sole rulers of the earth, though we have not yet been able to complete our work. [And this relates back to that discussion about religion and justice, also put in Ivan’s mouth.] But whose fault is that? Oh, the work is only beginning, but it has begun. It has long to await completion and the earth has yet much to suffer, but we shall triumph and shall be Caesars, and then we shall plan the universal happiness of man. But Thou mightest have taken even then the sword of Caesar. Why didst Thou reject that last gift? Had Thou accepted that last offer of the mighty spirit, Thou wouldst have accomplished all that man seeks on earth -- that is, someone to worship, someone to keep his conscience, and some means of uniting all in one unanimous and harmonious ant heap, because the craving for universal unity is the third and last anguish of men. Mankind as a whole has always striven to organize a universal state. [Again, I don’t see any evidence of this.] There have been many great nations with great histories, but the more highly they were developed the more unhappy they were, for they felt more acutely than other people the craving for worldwide union. The great conquerors, Timours and Genghis-Khans, whirled like hurricanes over the face of the earth striving to subdue its people, and they too were but the unconscious expression of the same craving for universal unity. Hadst Thou taken the world and Caesar’s purple, Thou wouldst have founded the universal state and have given universal peace. For who can rule men if not he who holds their conscience and their bread in his hands.
On the one hand, I can see how a Russian, so exposed to empirical conquest from both east and west might think like this; but Russia has so often been the stumbling block and proved the futility of these dreams of expansion. The logic of conquest grows weaker and weaker as the field of conquest expands. And while people did enjoy the benefits of the Roman Peace, I’m not aware of any people that sought out conquest by Rome. There was a king who bequeathed his lands to Rome, but usually even Rome’s allies fought for their independence past the point where resistance was reasonable.
p293 “ ‘We have taken the sword of Caesar, and in taking it, of course, have rejected Thee and followed him. Oh, ages are yet to come of the confusion of free thought, of their science and cannibalism. For having begun to build their tower of Babel without us, they will end, of course with cannibalism. But then the beast will crawl to us and lick our feet and spatter them with tears of blood. And we shall sit upon the beast and raise the cup, and on it will be written: “Mystery.” But then, and only then, the reign of peace and happiness will come for men. Thou art proud of Thine elect, but Thou hast only the elect, while we give rest to all. [Again, very similar to Brave New World] And besides, how many of those elect, those mighty ones who could become elect, have grown weary waiting for Thee, and have transferred and will transfer the powers of their spirit and the warmth of their heart to the other camp, and end by raising their free banner against Thee? Thou didst Thyself lift up that banner. But with us all will be happy and will no more rebel nor destroy one another as under Thy freedom. Oh, we shall persuade them that they will only become free when they renounce their freedom to us and submit to us. [Now we have 1984, as well] And shall we be right or shall we be lying? They will be convinced that we are right, for they will remember the horrors of slavery and confusion to which Thy freedom brought them. Freedom, free thought and science, will lead them into such straits and will bring them face to face with such marvels and insoluble mysteries, that some of them, the fierce and rebellious, will destroy themselves. Others, rebellious but weak, will destroy one another, The rest, weak and unhappy, will crawl fawning to our feet and whine to us: “Yes, you were right, you alone possess His mystery, and we come back to you. Save us from ourselves!”
I would love to know what a member of ISIS or Boko Haram would make of this. Would they recognize themselves here?
p294 “ ‘Receiving bread from us, they will see clearly that we take the bread made by their hands from them, to give it to them, without any miracle. They will see that we do not change the stones to bread, but in truth they will be more thankful for taking it from our hands than for the bread itself! For they will remember only too well the old days, without our help, while since they have come back to us, the very stones have turned to bread in their hands. [?] Too, too well they know the value of complete submission! And until men know that, they will be unhappy. Who is most to blame for their not knowing it? Speak! Who scattered the flock and sent it astray on unknown paths?
It occurs to me that Christopher Tietjens, in Parade’s End, might have thought something similar to this about the fall of the Tory world order. How much of this is the gentry thinking “they will regret depriving us of our special status?”
“ ‘But the flock will come together again and will submit once more, and then it will be once and for all. Then we shall give them the quiet humble happiness of weak creatures such as they are by nature. Oh, we shall persuade them at last not to be proud, for Thou didst lift them up and thereby taught them to be proud. We shall show them that they are weak, that they are only pitiful children, but that childlike happiness is the sweetest of all. [So Brave New World] They will become timid and will look to us and huddle close to us in fear, as chicks to the hen. They will marvel at us and will be awestricken before us, and will be proud of our being so powerful and clever, that we have been able to subdue such a turbulent flock of thousands of millions. [Take that, you freed serfs.] They will tremble impotently before our wrath, their minds will grow fearful, they will be quick to shed tears like women and children, but they will be just as ready at a sign from us to pass to laughter and rejoicing, to happy mirth and childish song. [Now I’m reminded of a minstrel show with happy, simple Coloured people.] Yes, we shall set them to work, but in their leisure hours we shall make their life like a child’s game, with children’s songs and innocent dance. Oh, we shall allow them even sin, [“Orgy-porgy, Ford and fun...”] they are weak and helpless, and they will love us like children because we allow them to sin. We will tell them that every sin will be atoned, if it is done with our permission. We shall tell them that we allow them to sin because we love them, and the punishment for these sins we take upon ourselves. And we shall take it upon ourselves, and they will adore us as their saviour because we have taken on their sins before God. And they will have no secrets from us. We shall allow or forbid them to live with their wives and mistresses, to have or not to have children -- according to whether they have been obedient or disobedient -- and they will submit to us gladly and cheerfully. The most painful secrets of their conscience, all, all they will bring to us, and we shall have an answer for all. And they will be glad to believe our answer, for it will save them from the great fear and terrible agony they endure at present in making a free decision for themselves. And all will be happy, all the millions of creatures except the hundred thousand who rule over them. For only we, we who guard the mystery, shall be unhappy. There will be thousands of millions of happy ones and a hundred thousand sufferers who have taken upon themselves the curse of the knowledge of good and evil. Peacefully they will die, peacefully in Thy name, and beyond the grave they will find nothing but death. But we shall keep the secret, and for their happiness we shall allure them with the reward of heaven and eternity. Though if there were anything in the other world, it certainly would not be for such as they.
p295 “ ‘It is prophesied that Thou wilt come again in victory. Thou wilt come with Thy chosen, the proud and strong. But we will say that they have only saved themselves, but we have saved all. We are told that the harlot who sits upon the beast, and holds in her hands the mystery, shall be put to shame, [Durer again?] that the weak will rise up again, and will rend her royal purple and will strip naked her loathsome body. But then I will stand up and point out to Thee the thousand millions of happy creatures who have known no sin. And we who have taken their sins upon us for their happiness will stand up before Thee and say: “Judge us if Thou canst and darest.” Know that I fear Thee not. Know that I too have been in the wilderness, I too have lived on roots and locusts, I too prized the freedom with which Thou has blessed men, and I too was striving to stand among Thy elect, among the strong and powerful, thirsting “to make up the number.” But I awakened and would not serve madness. I turned back and joined the ranks of those who have corrected Thy work. I left the proud and went back to the humble, for the happiness of the humble.
p296 “ ‘What I say to Thee will come to pass, and our dominion will be built up. I repeat, tomorrow Thou shalt see that obedient flock who at a sign from me will hasten to heap up the hot cinders about the pile on which I shall burn Thee for coming to hinder us. For if anyone has ever deserved our fires, it is Thou. Tomorrow I shall burn Thee. . . . I have spoken.’ “
Ivan stopped. He had been carried away as he talked and spoke with excitement. Now he suddenly smiled.
[Alyosha] “But . . . that’s absurd!” he cried. “Your poem is in praise of Jesus, not in blame of him -- as you meant it to be. And who will believe you about freedom? Is that the way to understand it? That’s not the idea of it in the Orthodox Church . . . That’s Rome, and not even the whole of Rome, it’s false -- those are the worst Catholics, the Inquisitors, the Jesuits! . . . And there could not be such a fantastic creature as your Inquisitor. What are these sins of mankind they take on themselves? Who are these keepers of the mystery who have taken some curse upon themselves for the happiness of mankind? When have they been seen? We know the Jesuits. They are spoken ill of, but surely they are not what you describe? They are not that at all, not at all. . . . They are simply the Romish army for the earthly sovereignty of the world in the future, with the Pontiff of Rome for Emperor . . . That’s their ideal, but there’s no sort of mystery about it. . . . It’s simple lust for power, for filthy earthly gain, for domination -- something like a universal serfdom with them as masters -- that’s all they stand for. They don’t even believe in God perhaps. Your suffering Grand Inquisitor is a mere fantasy.”
p297 “Wait, wait,” laughed Ivan. “How upset you are! A fantasy you say, let it be so! Of course it’s a fantasy. But let me say: do you really think that the Roman Catholic movement of the last centuries is actually nothing but the lust for power, for filthy earthly gain? Is that Father Paissy’s teaching?”
“No, no, on the contrary, Father Paissy did once say something rather the same as you . . . But of course it’s not the same, not at all the same,” Alyosha quickly corrected himself.
“A precious admission, in spite of your ‘not at all the same.’ I ask you why your Jesuits and Inquisitors have united simply for vile material gain? Why can there not be among them one martyr oppressed by great sorrow and loving humanity? You see, only suppose that there was one such man among all those who desire nothing but filthy material gain -- if there’s only one like my old Inquisitor, who had himself eaten roots in the desert and made frenzied efforts to subdue his flesh to make himself free and perfect. But all his life he loved humanity, and suddenly his eyes were opened, and he saw that it is no great moral blessedness to attain perfection and freedom, if at the same time one gains the conviction that millions of God’s creatures have been created as a mockery, that they will never be capable of using their freedom, that these poor rebels can never turn to giants to complete the tower, that it was not for such geese that the great idealist dreamt his dream of harmony. Seeing all that he turned back and joined -- the clever people. Surely that could have happened?” [This sounds like a description of Alyosha.]
“Joined whom, what clever people?” cried Alyosha, completely carried away. “They have no such great cleverness and no mysteries and secrets. . . . Perhaps nothing but atheism, that’s all their secret. Your Inquisitor does not believe in God, that’s his secret!”
p298 “What if he doesn’t believe in God! At last you have guessed it. It’s perfectly true that that’s the whole secret. [Brave New World!] But isn’t that suffering, at least for a man like that, who has wasted his whole life in the desert and yet could not shake off his incurable love of humanity? In his old age he reached the clear conviction that nothing but the advice of the great dread spirit could build up any tolerable sort of life for the feeble, unruly ‘incomplete, empirical creatures created in jest.’ And so, convinced of this, he sees that he must follow the counsel of the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction, and accept lying and deception, and lead men consciously to death and destruction. He sees that he must deceive them all the way so that they may not notice where they are being led, that the poor blind creatures may at least on the way think themselves happy. And note, the deception is in the name of Him in whose ideal the old man had so fervently believed all his life. Is not that tragic? And if only one such stood at the head of the whole army ‘filled with the lust for power only for the sake of filthy gain’ -- would not one such be enough to make a tragedy? More than that, one such standing at the head is enough to create the actual leading idea of the Roman Church with all its armies and Jesuits, its highest idea. I tell you frankly that I firmly believe that there has always been such a man among those who stood at the head of the movement. Who knows, there may have been some such even among the Roman Popes. Who knows, perhaps he spirit of that accursed old man who loves mankind so obstinately in his own way, is to be found even now in a whole multitude of such old men, existing not by chance but by agreement. Perhaps these old men formed a secret league long ago for the guarding of the mystery, to guard it from the weak and the unhappy, so as to make them happy. No doubt it is so and so it must be indeed. I believe that even among the Masons there’s something of the same mystery and that that’s why the Catholics detest the Masons. [I saw that coming.] They feel that the Masons are breaking up the unity of the idea, while it is so essential that there should be one flock and one shepherd. . . . But from the way I defended my idea you might think that I am angry at your criticism. Enough of it.”
p299 “Maybe you are a Mason yourself!” said Alyosha suddenly. “You don’t believe in God,” he added, speaking this time very sorrowfully. He felt that his brother was looking at him ironically. “How does your poem end?” he asked, suddenly looking down. “Or was that the end?”
“ 'I meant to end it like this. When the Inquisitor stopped speaking he waited some time for his Prisoner to answer him. His silence weighed down upon him. He saw that the Prisoner had listened carefully all the time, looking gently at his face. But evidently He did not want to reply. The old man longed for Him to say something, however bitter and terrible. But He suddenly approached the old man in silence and softly kissed him on the forehead. That was His answer. The old man shuddered. His lips moved. He went to the door, opened it and said to Him: 'Go, and come no more. . . . Come not at all, never, never!' And he let Him out into the dark alleys of the town. The Prisoner went away.”
I can't help thinking here how inconvenient the return of Christ would be for the majority of Christians. If there's anything most Christians should agree with it's this statement about Christ never returning.
“The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man holds to his idea.”
“And you with him, you too?” cried Alyosha sadly.
Ivan laughed.
“Why, it's all nonsense, Alyosha. It's only a senseless poem of a senseless student, who could never write two lines of verse. Why do you take it so seriously? Surely you don't think I am going straight off to the Jesuits, to join the men who are correcting His work? Good Lord, it's no business of mine. I told you, all I want is to live on to thirty, and then . . . dash the cup to the ground!”
Isn't that the age Jesus died? Yes -- well, 33, but close enough!
“But the little sticky leaves, and the precious tombs and the blue sky, and the woman you love! How will you live, how will you love them?” Alyosha asked sorrowfully. “With such a hell in your heart and your head, how can you? No, that's just what you are going away for, to join them . . . if not, you will kill yourself, you can't endure it!”
“There is a strength to endure everything,” Ivan said with a cold smile.
p300 “What strength?”
“The strength of the Karamazovs -- the strength of the Karamazov baseness.”
“To sink into debauchery? To stifle your soul with corruption?”
“Possibly even that . . . only perhaps till I am thirty I will escape it, and then.”
“How will you escape it? By what will you escape it? That's impossible with your ideas.”
“In the Karamazov way.”
“ 'Everything is lawful,' you mean? Everything is lawful, is that it?”
Ivan scowled, and all at once turned strangely pale. “Ah, you're repeating yesterday's phrase, which so offended Miusov -- and which Dmitri pounced upon so naively and paraphrased!" He smiled queerly. “Yes, if you like, 'everything is lawful' since the word has been said. I won't deny it. And Dmitri's version isn't bad.”
Alyosha looked at him in silence.
“I thought that in going away from here I would at least have you,” Ivan said suddenly with unexpected feeling. “But now I see that there is no place for me even in your heart, my dear hermit. The formula, 'all is lawful,' I won't renounce. Will you renounce me for that?”
Alyosha “plagiarizes” Ivan's story and kisses him on the forehead.
“Listen, Alyosha,” Ivan began with determination. “If I am really able to care for the sticky little leaves I will only love them, remembering you. It's enough for me that you are somewhere here, and I won't lose my desire for life yet. [I suspect this is also largely about Dostoyevsky's dead child.] Is that enough for you? Take it as a declaration of love if you like. And now you go to the right and I to the left. And it's enough, do you hear, enough... When at thirty, I want to 'dash the cup to the ground,' wherever I may be I'll come to have one more talk with you, even though I have to come from America...”
So there's that.
Jump to Next: TBK. Bk V. 6-7. & "Ham of God"
No comments:
Post a Comment