Kozhemyako V.S. Teacher of the Russian language and literature, head of the department.
Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev said that for the existence and development of a real, great culture, “society must have a high cultural awareness, moreover, a cultural environment that owns not only national cultural values, but also values ​​that belong to all mankind. Such a cultural sphere - the concept sphere - is most clearly expressed in European, more precisely, in Western European culture. It retains all the cultures of the past and present: antiquity, Middle Eastern culture, Islamic, Buddhist.”
One cannot but agree with the assertion that European culture is a universal culture. And we, people who belong to the culture of Russia, must belong to the universal culture precisely through belonging to European music, painting, and literature. It is impossible to understand the world's cultural values ​​without feeling part of this culture.
As a philologist, I will focus on that part of the world cultural process, which is represented by literature. Literature arose almost simultaneously with the appearance of man. At the same time, the factor of written fixation of the work is not so significant. Among the folklore of different countries, we can find works that can rightfully be attributed to the masterpieces of world literature.
Mankind developed, and literature developed in parallel with it, reflecting society both as a society and as an association of self-sufficient creative individuals.
People endowed with the gift of the word got the opportunity to influence the hearts, minds and souls of people, because there is little that can compare with the word in terms of the power of influence. Let us recall the words spoken in the middle of the 20th century by Vadim Shefner. Words, alas, have become a kind of cliché, perhaps due to too frequent use. “You can kill with a word, you can save with a word ...” But if you think about these simple lines, we will see how deep and at the same time clear and understandable thought is contained in them. It is the word, literature that was, is and will be what allows a person to remain thinking, feeling, aware.
The undeservedly forgotten Russian writer of the century before last, Gleb Uspensky, has a wonderful story called “I straightened it out”. The hero of the story is very depressed, he, as they would say today, is in a stressful state, depressed, and believes that life is over, it has no meaning, only darkness lies ahead. And so he gets to the Louvre, sees the Venus de Milo and ... is reborn to life. “Straightened” - means that a person is bent, who has lost any basis, support in life. It straightened out a beautiful work of art. You can call it healing, but only spiritual healing. The person did not take drops or pills. He came into contact with a beautiful work of art, with an image of beauty, a sublime image, an image of great inner fulfillment. And the whole further life of a person was transformed by contact with this true beauty.
But suddenly, out of nowhere, such a transformation does not occur. A person must be prepared for the perception of art. This is not a multiplication table - you can't learn it in two days. Only the deep work of the soul, knowledge, leads to an understanding of art: they give impetus to feelings, a certain emotional mood. Otherwise, even the greatest work of art will not “straighten”.
Unfortunately, we have already lost more than one generation of people for whom everything that lies in the sphere of feelings remains alien. The semi-contemptuous phrase has firmly come into use: “Well, there are only emotions here!” Meanwhile, the world of emotions is a huge world! And the perception of life must necessarily go through emotions, and not just through laws and formulas.
My deepest conviction is that within the framework of the school such upbringing, and sometimes even the formation of an emotional culture, is the task of the literature course. Perhaps my words will sound pathetic, but "if not us, then who?"
You can talk a lot about modern personality-oriented pedagogical technologies, but this is a theory. There has always been a danger that while long and, undoubtedly, useful and interesting discussions about the specifics of the educational process and the study of new technologies are ongoing, the next graduate of the school will leave it without acquiring the very ability to feel, understand and appreciate the spiritual component of life. For a theoretical scientist, a year is a very short period of time, a small step on the path of research. For a school teacher, a year is a few more people who left school without the very “sparkle” that is so important for a person’s moral development. You can say that everything depends on the teacher - was he able to plant the seeds of morality, spirituality, a sense of beauty in the soul of a child? Undoubtedly, the personality of the teacher is important. But desire alone is not enough.
The school literature course, in my opinion, is too static for the modern world, and its compilers, if we recall the well-known lines, are "terribly far ... from the people." That level of outlook, that range of literary knowledge that is offered by the school curriculum, is unacceptably narrow for a modern young person who wants and can feel like a "citizen of the world."
Russian literature, especially that part of it that is traditionally called "classical Russian literature", cannot be perceived outside the context of world culture. After all, our national literature is surprisingly moralizing. Agree, the word “moralizing” has received in modern language, if not negative, then close to this stylistic coloring. But what does "moralizing" mean? S.I. Ozhegov in his dictionary gives the following interpretation: "Moral teaching - teaching, suggestion of moral values." Here they are - those words that are the main, key words for Russian literature, for its best examples. Suggestion, explanation, interpretation of moral values ​​through a literary work. The uniqueness of literature as a sphere of the world cultural process is that, like no other kind of art, it reflected the slightest changes in the life of human society, and by analyzing literature, we can trace the whole path of the formation of human morality, the whole difficult and still far from completed path. man to the realization of the truth.
If we talk about world literature as a whole, it is easy to single out several stages that have become significant for human history, the stages of the transformation of old and the emergence of new spiritual values. If we talk about literature in general, we can distinguish the following stages in the development of world literature: ancient literature, literature of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, literature of the period of classicism and sentimentalism, the era of romanticism and the advent of realism in literature. Of course, this division into stages is very conditional. But, if we look at the path that our national literature has passed, we will see a somewhat different picture. I will not dwell on this issue, since this is a topic for a separate serious discussion. Today we are talking about world literature as a reflection of moral values ​​in their formation and development. The focus of spiritual and moral values ​​are such basic values ​​as truth, goodness, beauty, sense of duty, conscience.
Aristotle, Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Ovid - do not their works (both philosophical and dramatic) raise questions about what is truth, what is true beauty and what is the role of a sense of duty? For example, "Florida" by Apuleius is a mirror of the social and literary mores of that era, its ideas, mood and joys. Or Plutarch, who in his "Comparative Characteristics" spoke about the psychology of his heroes, based on the fact that a person has an inherent desire for good and this quality should be strengthened in every possible way by studying the noble deeds of famous people. One can list for a long time the ancient authors who speak of moral values ​​that are close not only to the ancient Greeks or ancient Romans, but also to subsequent generations.
In the literature of the Middle Ages, undoubtedly, somewhat different moral values ​​become a priority: the emerging and strengthened Christianity declares the salvation of man as the highest goal. People sin before God. Salvation requires faith in God, spiritual efforts, a pious life, sincere repentance of sins. In this voluntary act of humility, the voluntary renunciation of one's own will, lies, from the point of view of Christianity, the true freedom of a person, and not self-will leading to sin. Proclaiming the dominance of the spiritual over the carnal, giving priority to the inner world of man, Christianity played a huge role in shaping the moral character of medieval man. The ideas of mercy, selfless virtue, the condemnation of money-grubbing and wealth - these and other Christian values, although they were not implemented in any of the estates of medieval society, nevertheless had a significant impact on the formation of the spiritual and moral sphere of medieval culture. The man of the Middle Ages believed in God, and this faith helped him navigate the world of moral values. The hero of the medieval epic is a true Christian, a faithful vassal, a noble person who is alien to the desire for profit. At the same time, the thesis about the equality of all in the face of the Almighty, about nobility that does not depend on origin, becomes characteristic of medieval literature.
As a result, literary mythology in the north of Europe crystallized in the cycle of Arthurian novels, and in the south - in Dante's Divine Comedy. With all the differences between these phenomena, we find in them the ideal of goodness characteristic of the mature Middle Ages: this is a value that requires both a knightly feat and monastic humility, the acceptance of the world as a creation of God and the rejection of the world as a self-sufficient reality. The negative of this ideal - evil - confirms the same. The world and man, closed in on themselves, on self-affirmation, come to death and evil; the world and man, who affirm themselves for the sake of a higher meaning, come to salvation.
The next turn of ethical self-consciousness took almost three hundred years: 14th-16th centuries. Both of its great components, the aesthetic (Renaissance) and the religious (Reformation) can be united by the third ethical principle, that is, the program of Humanism, although we are more familiar with the term "Renaissance" when we talk about art in general and literature in particular. Morality as such becomes the pinnacle of human aspirations, the goal of the human creator. The ideal of natural perfection clashed with the ideal of volitional self-affirmation, as a result of which it turned out that nature is indifferent to man and does not want to know anything about the “crown of creation”, easily dissolving it in its elements. The human self is indifferent to morality and easily turns into a destructive force. Luther, Machiavelli, Montaigne, Cervantes, Shakespeare - no matter how they try to ideologically or emotionally compensate for disappointment - in the realization of this sad outcome, Humanism reaches the extreme depths of tragedy.
The ideology of the Enlightenment is purely rationalistic, but it would be a serious mistake to say that in the Age of Enlightenment the moral aspects of literature fade into the background, on the contrary, they are declared in every possible way, acquiring a certain scientific form, undergoing a comprehensive study, analysis, and philosophical interpretation. It was in the Age of Enlightenment that the concept of national literature arose. Moral categories such as patriotism in its modern sense, faith in reason and moral self-improvement of a person begin to take shape. Of course, one can talk a lot about the difficult relationship of the writers of that time with the church and religion, but, again, this is a topic for a separate discussion.
The rationally oriented era of Enlightenment is being replaced by a period of romanticism, the specificity of which lies in the fact that not a rational mindset, but an emotional state is the result of the conjugation of consciousness and being and stimulates concern in compensating for the lost “existential” basis of human existence in the world. Rational attitudes cannot help in solving this problem, since the nature of concern is not for the ratio. In search of an answer, not finding it outside, the European consciousness turns to the depths of the soul, peers into religion, and researchers in the philosophy of religion and culture delve into the issues of the continuity of traditions, the content and meaning of religious ideas and orientation. This is evidenced by the literary manifestos of representatives of the romantic movement: V. Hugo, J. de Stael, F. Chateaubriand. It is impossible not to mention the mystical-religious mood in romantic creativity, in particular, C. Nodier, L. Uhland. The program works of the Romantics are also interesting: the orthodox Catholic Chateaubriand, the representative of the mystical and religious views of Novalis, as well as the numerous works of the Romantics on aesthetics. An important point for romantics is the category of inner beauty, the question of the relationship between youth and old age, the question of eternal life. For romanticism, youth is primarily a spiritual and moral category, and its attributes are not the freshness of the face and the speed of movements, but the creative activity of the individual, faith in higher moral values ​​and a strongly aroused universal interest. The absence of these characteristics, replacing them with opposite ones - this is old age, despite the physical condition of the body. Old age is not an age-related time of life, but a moment of loss of ideals, spiritual deadness, dominance of selfish goals and interests. Heine, Byron, Schiller, Goethe... The list is endless.
Romanticism with its reflective heroes was replaced by realism. First critical, then syncretic. And here it is impossible not to mention a somewhat incorrect understanding of realism in world literature. Traditional literary criticism saw in classical realistic literature only critical pathos, "tearing off all and sundry masks", exposing social order, fighting for the happiness of the people. Undoubtedly, there is a reason in such an approach, but nevertheless it seems to be secondary in relation to the most important side of world literature - the deepest moral, spiritual search. And here, for the first time, perhaps, in all centuries, Russian literature comes to the forefront of world literature, as a refuge of morality, spirituality, and faith. Stefan Zweig felt this very well: “Open any of the fifty thousand books produced annually in Europe. What are they talking about? About happiness. For Dickens, the goal of all aspirations will be a pretty cottage in the bosom of nature. Balzac has a castle with a peerage and millions. Which of the heroes of Dostoevsky aspired to this? Nobody. No one". The goal of the Russian hero is not in external success, not in a comfortable life, the Conscience becomes the basis of all human existence. Here is the hero of Jack London, a strong, courageous gold digger. He is in a tragic impasse: food has run out, strength has run out, frost and icy silence are winning. What can help? And the hero has a vision: “He saw the city of his dreams ... river steamboats anchored in three rows ... sawmills at full speed ... gambling houses, bankers' offices, stock exchanges, high stakes ... It's a shame all the same, he thought, to miss his happiness. From this thought, life stirred in him. And this brave man, imagining that he would never make a bet in roulette, would not hit the jackpot on the stock exchange, begins to fight for his life with a vengeance. By no means do I mean to say that Western European or American realist literature is unspiritual. But it was during this period that the division and different understanding of moral values ​​began, which we see today. Russian realism grew out of European realism, but stepped much further. If we paraphrase the well-known words “we all came out of Gogol's The Overcoat”, then we can say that all Russian realism “came out” of European realism. Therefore, it is simply impossible to talk about Russian classical literature without talking about Balzac, Dickens, Zola, Remarque, Dreiser. But we have to do it for now.
So that my words do not look like abstract reasoning, I will give a few figures. The study of ancient literature in the school course is given 5 lessons in the 6th grade, dedicated to the myths of Ancient Greece, and 2 lessons in the 9th grade, dedicated to the tragedy of Aeschylus "Prometheus Bound". Is this enough to comprehend, even in general terms, such an important period in the development of the world literary process for understanding a huge part of Russian literature? How will we then read Pushkin with his numerous references to antiquity? How can we understand Lomonosov, Derzhavin, Karamzin? How can we catch the reminiscences so important for understanding? The teacher is forced to "translate" the same Pushkin's texts, filling in the gaps. The following figures are also not invented by me, alas, but are taken from a real-life school literature curriculum for various classes. I will not bore you, and just list: the work of Moliere - 3 hours, Byron - 1 hour, Shakespeare - 4 hours, Dante - 1 hour, another hour for the work of individual authors. But what is one lesson? What can be told, for example, about Dante and his Divine Comedy in 40 minutes? This is not an acquaintance with world literature, this is profanity. And such great writers as Balzac, Hugo, Thomas Mann, Petrarch, Swift, Camus, Dreiser, Belle are not even mentioned. But how can we talk about the poetry of the "Silver Age" without talking about Baudelaire or Rimbaud? Or about the novel "Gentlemen Golovlevs", not to mention those who continued and developed the family chronicle genre - about Thomas Mann and George Galsworthy? And Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita without proper knowledge of the Bible, Goethe's great tragedy Faust, without at least a vague idea of ​​who Kant is, is a waste of time. You can talk on this topic endlessly, but I hope that the time of talk will be replaced by the time of concrete deeds. Namely, the inclusion in the program of the course of world literature.

The first realistic novel in the history of Russian literature is considered to be a novel in verse by A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin". Vissarion Grigoryevich Belinsky considered it "an encyclopedia of Russian life." Pushkin always dreamed of creating some kind of work, the main characters of which would be his contemporaries. According to the canons of romanticism, which originated in Europe towards the end of the 18th century, the poetic girl became the female ideal. Such a girl appears in the novel "Eugene Onegin".

The most famous female image of Russian literature is Tatyana Larina, the poet's favorite heroine. She is a heroine of conscience, possessing high moral values. In literature, as well as in art, such a miracle is possible when an artist is seriously carried away by his own creation. So Alexander Sergeevich, while working on the novel "Eugene Onegin", was carried away by a wonderful girl who comes to life under his pen. Tatyana was for him a "sweet ideal", similar both in appearance and soul to the poet's muse. The character of Tatyana Larina is revealed to us both as a unique individuality and as a type of Russian girl living in a provincial noble family.

Proximity to another world and to people's Russia, which the nanny was the personification of, protected the purity of Tatyana's soul. Tatyana was very fond of nature: she preferred lonely walks to games with her peers. Winter was her favorite season:

Tatyana (Russian soul,
I don't know why.)
With her cold beauty
I loved Russian winter...

The life of nature is close and familiar to her since childhood. This is the world of her soul, the world is infinitely close. In this world, Tatyana is free from loneliness, from misunderstanding, here feelings resonate, the thirst for happiness becomes a natural legitimate desire. Throughout her life, Tatyana retains in herself this wholeness and naturalness of nature, which are brought up only in close communion with nature. Tatyana instinctively, with her heart, and not with her mind, felt in Onegin a person to match herself. No matter how restrained Onegin was during the first meeting, no matter how his personality was hidden under the mask of secular courtesy, Tatyana was able to guess his exclusivity. Naturalness, deep humanity, characteristic of Tatyana, suddenly, at the first collision with life, set in motion, made her bold and independent. Having fallen in love with Onegin, she is the first to take an important step: she writes him a letter. This is where the novel reaches its climax. Tatyana's confession, breathing such love and such sincerity, was not heard and understood by Onegin's chilled heart. Eugene was not able to answer the girl, because his feelings were mercilessly distorted by society. Onegin's rebuke alienated him from Tatyana.

"Eugene Onegin" is a philosophical novel, a novel about the meaning of life. In it, Pushkin raised the problems of being, thought about what good and evil are. And if Onegin's life is meaningless, he sows evil, death, indifference around him, then Tatyana is a whole, harmonious person, and she sees the meaning of her life in love, fulfilling her duty to her husband. Having come to terms with the harsh laws of life that deprived a person of happiness, Tatyana was forced to fight for her dignity, showing uncompromisingness and her inherent moral strength in this struggle, this was precisely what Tatyana's moral values ​​consisted of.

"War and Peace" is a work unique in its significance and semantic content not only in domestic, but also in world literature.

In our "Searching for the Good" feed, we usually look for content and meaning in classical works related to the theme of eternal values. However, War and Peace, huge both in terms of volume and semantic content, actually consists entirely of stories devoted to our topic. Both military and peaceful events in the novel, one way or another, are not just narrative and descriptive. In fact, all content eventually turns into moral conclusions. It is not difficult to find the novel "War and Peace", just as it is not difficult to find valuable material in it. Therefore, it is most likely not worth focusing on the word “search” in this case. We will try to structure the content of the book, present excerpts by topic in a relatively brief form, highlighting on the pages of the novel those plots that are more focused on the theme of our tape "Eternal Values". We will select and consider only those quotations that directly tell us about this.

The first quote that attracts our attention is the mention of "happiness" in Anna Pavlovna Scherer's social conversation. The author deliberately plays on contradictions:

“I often think,” Anna Pavlovna continued after a moment’s silence, moving towards the prince and smiling affectionately at him, as if showing by this that political and secular conversations are over and heartfelt conversations are now beginning, “I often think how sometimes the happiness of life is unfairly distributed. Why did fate give you such two glorious children (with the exception of Anatole, your younger one, I don’t love him, - she put in peremptorily, raising her eyebrows) - such lovely children? And you really value them least of all, and therefore you are not worthy of them.

The first contradiction is a sharp contrast between the false atmosphere of a secular salon saturated with falsehood, and words about values ​​​​and the happiness of life. The second is the high appreciation of the wonderful children of Prince Vasily, who (not only Anatoly, but also Helen) will still show themselves in the plot not from the best side. The third is a play on words in the last sentence, a particularly controversial and thought-provoking statement about the value and evaluation of a person in connection with his evaluation of others.

However, even in the emphatically false atmosphere of a secular salon, another contrast is vividly shown. A pregnant woman, as a symbol of new life, revives even the callous souls of those around her.

It was fun for everyone to look at this pretty mother-to-be, full of health and liveliness, who so easily endured her situation. It seemed to the old men and the bored, gloomy young people who looked at her that they themselves were becoming like her after having been and talked with her for some time. Anyone who spoke to her and saw at every word her bright smile and shining white teeth, which were constantly visible, thought that he was especially amiable today. And that's what everyone thought.

An interesting look at Pierre of a secular woman:

And, having got rid of a young man who does not know how to live, she returned to her occupations as a mistress of the house.…

The ability to live is an interesting wording. It makes you think about the meaning of life and the "ability to live" as well as about the different opinions of people on this topic.

Countess Rostova speaks of a trusting relationship with her daughters:

“Everything depends on upbringing,” said the guest. “Yes, you are right,” continued the countess. “Until now, thank God, I have been a friend of my children and enjoy their full confidence,” said the countess, repeating the error of many parents who believe that their children have no secrets from them. - I know that I will always be the first confidente [attorney] of my daughters ...

All parents (and especially mothers) want trusting relationships to be built in this way, but it often turns out quite differently, and the further plot of the story shows this when Natasha is preparing to run away from home with the rake Anatoly (although the countess will not be around at that moment, you need acknowledge). The conclusion, obviously, is that not in children's trust (or not only in it) is the key role, but there must be strong and independent value orientations in education. Although when there is love and passion on the other side, the value base for containment should be incredibly strong ... In general, the phrase makes you think.

In the novel, the characters of the story repeatedly look into the face of death. It's scary, it's unusual, sometimes majestic, sometimes incomprehensible. But this moment is always symbolic and emphasized by the author. The first such meeting is Pierre's meeting with his dying father.

When Pierre approached, the count looked directly at him, but looked with that look, the meaning and meaning of which cannot be understood by a person. Either this glance said absolutely nothing, only that, as long as there are eyes, one must look somewhere, or it said too much.

Another meeting is a meeting with the enemy. Anxiety before the fight:

Suddenly, on the opposite elevation of the road, troops in blue hoods and artillery appeared. These were the French. The Cossacks' troop moved off downhill at a trot. All the officers and people of Denisov's squadron, although they tried to talk about strangers and look around, did not stop thinking only about what was there, on the mountain, and incessantly all peered into the spots that appeared on the horizon, which they recognized as enemy troops. The weather cleared up again in the afternoon, the sun set brightly over the Danube and the dark mountains surrounding it. It was quiet, and from that mountain occasionally came the sounds of horns and cries of the enemy. There was no one between the squadron and the enemy, except for small sidings. An empty space, three hundred fathoms, separated them from him. The enemy stopped firing, and that strict, formidable, impregnable and elusive feature that separates the two enemy troops was felt all the more clearly. “One step beyond this line, reminiscent of the line separating the living from the dead, and the unknown of suffering and death. And what's there? who's there? there, behind this field, and a tree, and a roof lit by the sun? Nobody knows, and one wants to know; and it’s scary to cross this line, and I want to cross it; and you know that sooner or later you will have to cross it and find out what is there, on the other side of the line, just as it is inevitable to find out what is there, on the other side of death. And he himself is strong, healthy, cheerful and irritable, and surrounded by such healthy and irritably lively people. So if he does not think, then every person who is in sight of the enemy feels, and this feeling gives a special brilliance and joyful sharpness of impressions to everything that happens at these moments.

And as a contrast of the disturbing, terrible line between life and death, as a contrast of the upcoming bloodshed and the bright colors of life - a picture of nature through the eyes of a young hussar, who found himself on the battlefield for the first time:

Nikolai Rostov turned away and, as if looking for something, began to look at the distance, at the water of the Danube, at the sky, at the sun. How beautiful the sky looked, how blue, calm and deep! How bright and solemn the setting sun! How gently and glossy the water shone in the distant Danube! And even better were the distant mountains blue beyond the Danube, the monastery, the mysterious gorges, the pine forests flooded to the tops with fog ... it’s quiet, happy there ... thought Rostov. - There is so much happiness in me alone and in this sun, and here ... groans, suffering, fear and this vagueness, this haste ... Here again they shout something, and again everyone ran somewhere back, and I run with them, and here it is, here it is, death, above me, around me... A moment - and I will never see this sun, this water, this gorge again... At that moment the sun began to hide behind the clouds; ahead of Rostov other stretchers appeared. And the fear of death and the stretcher, and the love of the sun and life - all merged into one painfully disturbing impression. “Oh my God! He Who is there in this sky, save, forgive and protect me!” Rostov whispered to himself. The hussars ran up to the grooms, the voices became louder and calmer, the stretcher disappeared from sight. “What, bg’at, did you sniff the pog’okha? ...” the voice of Vaska Denisov shouted over his ear.

Such opposition and contrast is not only a description of the first impression of an inexperienced soldier, this opposition is in the title of the entire book, in the sense of the entire narrative, in the philosophical interpretation of Tolstoy's concept and attitude to war as the killing of man by man.

And again about the same:

Again, as on the Ensky bridge, there was no one between the squadron and the enemy, and between them, separating them, lay the same terrible line of uncertainty and fear, as it were, a line separating the living from the dead. All people felt this line, and the question of whether or not they would cross the line and how they would cross the line worried them.

No less vivid contrast is shown in the flight of Rostov from the French after falling from a horse. Contrast, where on the one hand - life, happiness, love of loved ones, and on the other - anxiety, danger, death.

Yes. Will they take me too? What kind of people are these? Rostov kept thinking, not believing his eyes. "Are they French?" He looked at the approaching French, and despite the fact that in a second he galloped only to overtake these Frenchmen and cut them down, their proximity now seemed to him so terrible that he could not believe his eyes. "Who are they? Why are they running? Really to me? Are they running towards me? And for what? Kill me? Me, whom everyone loves so much? - He remembered the love of his mother, family, friends for him, and the intention of the enemies to kill him seemed impossible. “Maybe kill!”

And the cowardice of the young warrior, shown at that moment, is just an artificial device of the author to emphasize this contrast. Indeed, after the loss of a horse, one warrior in front of a whole French detachment undoubtedly has some right to retreat, although in this case it turned out to be somewhat panicky.

Fear for life and will and willingness to fight. The choice of a soldier who is ready to risk his life for the sake of the king, the country, the honor of the army. Plus pride, honor and glory. value choice. Whether this is a substitution of true values ​​or not, is another question (and it also exists).

That moment of moral hesitation has come, which decides the fate of the battles: these upset crowds of soldiers will listen to the voice of their commander or, looking back at him, will run further.

Not always will and character become a key factor in this choice, sometimes fear is overcome by work and diligence, which obscure the problem of choice as such:

As a result of this terrible rumble, noise, need for attention and activity, Tushin did not experience the slightest unpleasant feeling of fear, and the thought that they might kill him or hurt him painfully did not occur to him. On the contrary, he became more and more cheerful. It seemed to him that a very long time ago, almost yesterday, there was that moment when he saw the enemy and fired the first shot, and that the patch of field on which he stood was a familiar, kindred place to him for a long time. Despite the fact that he remembered everything, thought everything, did everything that the best officer in his position could do, he was in a state similar to feverish delirium or the state of a drunk person. Because of the deafening sounds of their guns from all sides, because of the whistle and blows of enemy shells, because of the appearance of servants sweating, flushed, hurrying near the guns, because of the blood of people and horses, because of the enemy’s smoke on that side (after which each time a cannonball flew in and hit the ground, a person, a tool or a horse), because of the sight of these objects, his own fantastic world was established in his head, which constituted his pleasure at that moment.

Of interest is the relationship between self-doubt and guilt in Pierre during attraction to Helen.

Pierre was one of those people who are strong only when they feel completely pure. And from the day that he was possessed by that feeling of desire that he experienced over Anna Pavlovna's snuffbox, an unconscious sense of the guilt of this desire paralyzed his resolve.

Earthly love through love for God in Princess Marya, one of the main characters of the novel:

There was an agonizing doubt in Princess Mary's soul. Is it possible for her to enjoy the joy of love, earthly love for a man? In thoughts of marriage, Princess Mary dreamed of both family happiness and children, but her main, strongest and most hidden dream was earthly love. The feeling was the stronger, the more she tried to hide it from others and even from herself. My God, she said, how can I suppress these thoughts of the devil in my heart? How can I renounce evil thoughts forever so that I can calmly do Your will? And as soon as she made this question, God already answered her in her own heart: “Desire nothing for yourself; do not seek, do not worry, do not envy. The future of the people and your fate must be unknown to you; but live so as to be ready for anything. If it pleases God to test you in the duties of marriage, be ready to do His will.” With this soothing thought (but still with the hope of fulfilling her forbidden, earthly dream), Princess Mary, sighing, crossed herself and went downstairs, not thinking about her dress, or her hair, or about how she would enter and what she would say. . What could all this mean in comparison with the predestination of God, without whose will not a single hair will fall from a human head.

In the picture of the high, endless sky above Andrei Bolkonsky, who fell on the field of Austerlitz, the opposition again arises between eternity and mortal human life:

"What is this? I'm falling? my legs give way, ”he thought, and fell on his back. He opened his eyes, hoping to see how the fight between the French and the artillerymen ended, and wishing to know whether the red-haired artilleryman had been killed or not, whether the guns had been taken or saved. But he didn't take anything. Above him there was nothing now but the sky—a high sky, not clear, but still immeasurably high, with gray clouds quietly creeping across it. “How quiet, calm and solemn, not at all the way I ran,” thought Prince Andrei, “not the way we ran, shouted and fought; not at all like the Frenchman and the artilleryman dragging each other's bannik with embittered and frightened faces - not at all like the clouds crawling across this high, endless sky. How could I not have seen this lofty sky before? And how happy I am that I finally got to know him. Yes! everything is empty, everything is a lie, except for this endless sky. Nothing, nothing but him. But even that is not even there, there is nothing but silence, calmness. And thank God!…"

The picture clearly shows another strong opposition of the greatness and harmony of the world, nature, eternity and momentary human affairs, even of such a historical scale as the Napoleonic wars.

The opposition of the bloody picture of the battlefield and kindred feelings in the soul of a person again sounds in the thoughts of Rostov after Austerlitz.

He remembered his mother's last letter. “What would she feel,” he thought, “if she could see me here now, on this field and with guns aimed at me.”

The greatness and insignificance of Napoleon as a hero, in contrast to the true greatness of the world and life, was shown through the eyes of Andrei Bolkonsky, who previously idolized the French military leader. In this comparison, there is both the symbolism of the opposition of values, and the way of thinking of a person on the verge of life and death with his detachment from false, false ideals.

... he now, directly fixing his eyes on Napoleon, was silent ... All the interests that occupied Napoleon seemed so insignificant to him at that moment, his hero himself seemed so petty to him, with this petty vanity and joy of victory, in comparison with that lofty, fair and the good sky that he saw and understood, that he could not answer him. Yes, and everything seemed so useless and insignificant in comparison with that strict and majestic structure of thought, which caused in him a weakening of forces from the flow of blood, suffering and the imminent expectation of death. Looking into Napoleon's eyes, Prince Andrei thought about the insignificance of greatness, the insignificance of life, which no one could understand the meaning of, and the even greater insignificance of death, the meaning of which no one could understand and explain from the living.

Prince Andrei's thoughts on faith. Of course, it is easier for believers to live and die than for unbelievers. This is recognized by non-believers. It's just that it's not always easy to believe them ...

“It would be nice,” thought Prince Andrei, looking at this icon, which his sister hung on him with such feeling and reverence, “it would be nice if everything were as clear and simple as it seems to Princess Marya. How good it would be to know where to look for help in this life and what to expect after it, there, beyond the grave! How happy and calm I would be if I could say now: Lord, have mercy on me!... But to whom shall I say this! Either the power - indefinite, incomprehensible, which I not only cannot address, but which I cannot express in words - great everything or nothing, - he said to himself, - or is it that God who is sewn up here, in this palm, Princess Mary? Nothing, nothing is true, except for the insignificance of everything that is clear to me, and the greatness of something incomprehensible, but the most important!

And the words of the doctor thrown at Prince Andrei, once again confirming to us the opinion that people who rejoice live better and longer:

“C’est un sujet nerveux et bilieux,” said Larrey, “il n’en rechappera pas.” (This is a nervous and bilious person, he will not recover).

Although Prince Andrei nevertheless recovered this time.

Time and eternity, feelings of guilt and truth are clearly reflected in Pierre's doubts after the duel with Dolokhov.

Who is right, who is wrong? Nobody. But live and live: tomorrow you will die, how could I have died an hour ago. And is it worth it to suffer when one second remains to live compared to eternity?

Eternal questions about the meaning of life, death and the purpose of a person arise one after another in Pierre:

What's wrong? What well? What should you love, what should you hate? Why live, and what am I? What is life, what is death? What power governs everything?” he asked himself. And there was no answer to any of these questions, except for one, not a logical answer, not at all to these questions. This answer was: “If you die, everything will end. You will die and you will know everything, or you will stop asking.” But it was also scary to die.

Contrasting vain values ​​in the form of money on the one hand and the greatness of life and death on the other.

The Torzhkovskaya tradeswoman offered her goods in a shrill voice, and especially goat shoes. “I have hundreds of rubles, which I have nowhere to put, and she stands in a torn fur coat and looks timidly at me,” thought Pierre. And why do we need this money? Precisely for one hair, this money can add to her happiness, peace of mind? Can anything in the world make her and me less subject to evil and death? Death, which will end everything and which must come today or tomorrow, is all the same in a moment, in comparison with eternity.

Pierre begins to think about good:

And most importantly, - continued Pierre, - this is what I know and know for sure, that the pleasure of doing this good is the only true happiness of life.

I feel that not only can I not disappear, just as nothing in the world disappears, but that I will always be and have always been. I feel that besides me, spirits live above me and that there is truth in this world. “Yes, this is Herder’s teaching,” said Prince Andrei, “but not that, my soul, will convince me, but life and death, that’s what convinces me.” It is convincing that you see a creature dear to you, who is connected with you, before whom you were guilty and hoped to justify yourself (Prince Andrei trembled in his voice and turned away) and suddenly this creature suffers, suffers and ceases to be ... Why? It cannot be that there is no answer! And I believe that he exists ... That's what convinces, that's what convinced me, - said Prince Andrei. “Well, yes, well, yes,” said Pierre, “isn’t that what I say too!” - No. I only say that it is not arguments that convince you of the need for a future life, but when you walk in life hand in hand with a person, and suddenly this person disappears into nowhere, and you yourself stop in front of this abyss and look into it. And I looked...

- Well, so what! do you know what is there and what is someone? There is a future life. Someone is God. Prince Andrew did not answer. The carriage and horses had long since been brought to the other side and had already been laid down, and the sun had already disappeared to half, and the evening frost covered the puddles near the ferry with stars, and Pierre and Andrei, to the surprise of the lackeys, coachmen and carriers, were still standing on the ferry and talking. - If there is a God and there is a future life, then there is truth, there is virtue; and the highest happiness of man is to strive to achieve them. We must live, we must love, we must believe, - said Pierre, - that we do not live today only on this piece of land, but we have lived and will live forever there in everything (he pointed to the sky). Prince Andrei stood leaning on the railing of the ferry and, listening to Pierre, without taking his eyes off, looked at the red reflection of the sun over the blue flood. Pierre is silent. It was completely quiet. The ferry had landed long ago, and only the waves of the current with a faint sound hit the bottom of the ferry. It seemed to Prince Andrei that this rinsing of the waves was saying to Pierre's words: "True, believe this." Prince Andrei sighed, and with a radiant, childish, tender look looked into Pierre's flushed, enthusiastic, but still timid in front of his superior friend. “Yes, if that were the case!” - he said. “However, let’s go sit down,” Prince Andrei added, and leaving the ferry, he looked at the sky, which Pierre pointed out to him, and for the first time, after Austerlitz, he saw that high, eternal sky, which he saw lying on the Austerlitz field, and something that had long fallen asleep, something better that was in him, suddenly awoke joyfully and youthfully in his soul. This feeling disappeared as soon as Prince Andrei entered the habitual conditions of life again, but he knew that this feeling, which he did not know how to develop, lived in him. A meeting with Pierre was for Prince Andrei an epoch from which, although in appearance it was the same, but in the inner world, his new life began.

Good people leave a good impression on others. Good about Pierre:

When Pierre left and all the members of the family got together, they began to judge him, as it always happens after the departure of a new person, and, as rarely happens, everyone said one good thing about him.

And life goes on regardless of individual events and personalities, even if they are very important and very significant:

Meanwhile, life, the real life of people with their essential interests of health, illness, work, recreation, with their own interests of thought, science, poetry, music, love, friendship, hatred, passions, went on, as always, independently and without political closeness or enmity with Napoleon Bonaparte, and beyond all possible transformations.

Happiness and sorrow, life, pain and joy are opposed to each other in the perception of Prince Andrei when he enters the Rostov estate:

Prince Andrei suddenly felt pain from something. The day was so good, the sun so bright, everything around was so cheerful; but this thin and pretty girl did not know and did not want to know about his existence, and was contented and happy with some sort of her separate, stupid, but cheerful and happy life. “Why is she so happy? what is she thinking! Not about the military charter, not about the arrangement of the Ryazan dues. What is she thinking? And why is she happy? Prince Andrei involuntarily asked himself with curiosity.

A new life and a new look at life in colors breaks into the soul of Prince Andrei along with a meeting with Natasha, with moonlight and freshness that burst into the room through an open window, when he accidentally heard the conversation of the girls, along with the impression of the blossoming leaves of the old one, it seemed already dead, oak, with which a person for some reason decided to compare himself.

“No, life is not over at the age of 31, suddenly, Prince Andrei decided completely, without change. Not only do I know everything that is in me, it is necessary that everyone knows this: both Pierre and this girl who wanted to fly into the sky, it is necessary that everyone knows me, so that my life goes not for me alone so that they do not live so independently of my life, so that it is reflected on everyone and that they all live with me together!

The idea of ​​the purpose of a person and the role in society, which is associated, incl. and happiness.

Natasha was as happy as ever in her life. She was at that highest stage of happiness when a person becomes completely trusting and does not believe in the possibility of evil, misfortune and grief.

Life and happiness. How short, and sometimes instant, this moment of feeling happiness, full of joy and harmony.

Something similar is then shown in the sensations of Prince Andrei, a sense of life and the greatness of being, happiness, even if happiness is short.

He looked at the singing Natasha, and something new and happy happened in his soul. He was happy and at the same time sad. He had absolutely nothing to cry about, but he was ready to cry. About what? About old love? About the little princess? About your disappointments?... About your hopes for the future?... Yes and no. The main thing he wanted to weep about was the terrible opposition he suddenly realized vividly between something infinitely great and indefinable that was in him, and something narrow and corporeal that he himself was and even she was. This opposition tormented and delighted him during her singing.

And again, a rather serious philosophical thought about life, quite relevant for any person:

“What am I struggling with, what am I fussing about in this narrow, closed frame, when life, all life with all its joys is open to me?” he said to himself.

“I need to use my freedom while I feel so much strength and youth in myself,” he said to himself. Pierre was right when he said that one must believe in the possibility of happiness in order to be happy, and I now believe in him. Let's leave the dead to bury the dead, but as long as you're alive, you have to live and be happy," he thought.

Attitude towards justice through the eyes of Princess Marya.

And what is justice? The princess never thought about this proud word: "justice." All the complex laws of mankind were concentrated for her in one simple and clear law - in the law of love and self-sacrifice, taught to us by Him Who suffered with love for humanity, when He himself is God. What did she care about the justice or injustice of other people? She had to suffer and love herself, and she did it.

... one religion can explain to us what a person cannot understand without its help: why, why are good, exalted beings who know how to find happiness in life, who not only do not harm anyone, but are necessary for the happiness of others - are called to God, but remain live evil, useless, harmful, or those who are a burden to themselves and others.

I am writing all this to you, my friend, only to convince you of the gospel truth, which has become a life rule for me: not a single hair will fall from my head without His will. And His will is guided only by one boundless love for us, and therefore everything that happens to us is all for our good.

The doubts of the princess, who wanted to go wandering with a pilgrim:

... without human love, without desires from saints to saints, and in the end, to where there is neither sorrow nor sighing, but eternal joy and bliss. “I will come to one place, I will pray; if I don’t have time to get used to it, to love it, I’ll move on. And I will walk until my legs give way, and I will lie down and die somewhere, and I will finally come to that eternal, quiet harbor, where there is neither sorrow nor sighing! ... ”thought Princess Marya. But then, seeing her father and especially little Koko, she weakened in her intention, wept quietly and felt that she was a sinner: she loved her father and nephew more than God.

The fourth part of the second volume of the novel begins with Tolstoy's philosophical discussion of work and idleness:

Biblical tradition says that the absence of labor - idleness was the condition of the bliss of the first man before his fall. The love of idleness has remained the same in fallen man, but the curse still weighs on man, and not only because we must earn our bread by the sweat of our brow, but because, due to our moral qualities, we cannot be idle and calm. A secret voice says that we must be guilty of being idle. If a person could find a state in which, being idle, he would feel useful and fulfilling his duty, he would find one side of primeval bliss.

The feelings experienced on the way to relatives and the contrast between the business he is busy with in separation and his native home are subtly noted by Tolstoy in one of Nikolai Rostov's returns home.

Half the way, as it always happens, from Kremenchug to Kyiv, all Rostov's thoughts were still back - in the squadron; but having crossed over halfway, he had already begun to forget the trio of Savras, his sergeant-major Dozhoyveika, and he began to restlessly ask himself what and how he would find in Otradnoye. The closer he drove, the stronger, much stronger (as if the moral feeling was subject to the same law of the speed of falling bodies in the squares of distances), he thought about his house; at the last station before Otradnoye, he gave the coachman three rubles for vodka, and, like a boy, panting, he ran onto the porch of the house.

Another visit to Moscow is even more emotionally described - with Denisov, described earlier, at the beginning of the second volume, and a touching meeting with relatives.

Another topic for reflection is raised during the Rostovs' hunting. Is it worth asking a higher power for some momentary interests of a momentary matter? Is that really the most important thing? Even when the matter seems most important at this particular moment. An illustration of this is well shown at the time of Rostov's hunt.

Several times he turned to God with a prayer that the wolf would come out on him; he prayed with that passionate and conscientious feeling with which people pray in moments of great excitement, depending on an insignificant cause. “Well, what does it cost you,” he said to God, “to do this for me! I know that You are great, and that it is a sin to ask You about it; but for the sake of God, make a hardened one crawl out on me, and so that Karay, in front of the eyes of the “uncle”, who is looking out from there, slams into his throat with a death grip.

Many believe that the products of good human labor contain positive energy, memory of hands and efforts, good intentions. We see a little about this during the picture of the treat at Uncle Rostov's.

All this was household, collection and jam Anisya Fyodorovna. All this smelled and resonated and had the taste of Anisya Fyodorovna. Everything responded with juiciness, purity, whiteness and a pleasant smile.

The bright colors of the joint childhood memories of the Rostovs touch in the conversation of the brothers and sisters who met and matured:

Smiling with pleasure, they sorted through memories, not sad old, but poetic youthful memories, those impressions from the most distant past, where the dream merges with reality, and laughed quietly, rejoicing at something.

The illness of Natasha Rostova and her treatment, Tolstoy's reasoning about the benefits and futility of the treatment of mental ailments:

Doctors went to Natasha both individually and in consultations, spoke a lot in French, German and Latin, condemned one another, prescribed the most diverse medicines for all diseases known to them; but not one of them came up with the simple thought that they could not be aware of the illness that Natasha suffered, just as no illness that a living person is obsessed with could be known: for every living person has his own characteristics and always has special and its own new, complex, unknown disease to medicine, not a disease of the lungs, liver, skin, heart, nerves, etc., recorded in medicine, but a disease consisting of one of the innumerable compounds in the suffering of these organs. This simple thought could not come to doctors (just as the thought cannot come to a sorcerer that he cannot conjure) because their life's work was to heal, because they received money for that, and because they spent the best years of their lives on this business. But the main thing is that this thought could not come to the doctors because they saw that they were undoubtedly useful, and were really useful for all the Rostovs at home. They were useful not because they forced the patient to swallow mostly harmful substances (this harm was not very noticeable, because harmful substances were given in small quantities), but they were useful, necessary, inevitable (the reason is why there always are and will be imaginary healers, soothsayers, homeopaths and allopaths) because they satisfied the moral needs of the sick and people who love the sick. They satisfied that eternal human need of hope for relief, the need for sympathy and activity that a person experiences during suffering. They satisfied that eternal, human need, noticeable in a child in the most primitive form, to rub the place that is bruised. The child will kill himself and immediately run into the hands of the mother, the nanny in order to be kissed and rubbed on the sore spot, and it becomes easier for him when the sore spot is rubbed or kissed. The child does not believe that the strongest and wisest of him do not have the means to help his pain. And the hope for relief and the expression of sympathy while the mother rubs his bump consoles him. Doctors were useful for Natasha in that they kissed and rubbed the bobo, assuring that it would pass now if the driver went to the Arbat pharmacy and took seven hryvnias of powders and pills in a pretty box for a ruble, and if these powders were sure to be in two hours, nothing more and no less, the patient will take in boiled water.

What would Sonya, the count and the countess do, how would they look at the weak, melting Natasha, doing nothing, if there weren’t these pills by the hour, drinking warm, chicken cutlets and all the details of life prescribed by the doctor, observing which was a lesson and comfort for others? The stricter and more complex these rules were, the more comforting it was for those around. How would the count endure the illness of his beloved daughter, if he did not know that Natasha's illness cost him thousands of rubles and that he would not spare thousands more to do her good: if he did not know that if she did not recover, he would not he will spare thousands more and take her abroad and hold consultations there; if he had not been able to tell the details about how Metivier and Feller did not understand, but Freeze understood, and Wise defined the disease even better? What would the countess do if she could not sometimes quarrel with the sick Natasha because she did not fully comply with the doctor's prescriptions?

“You’ll never get well,” she said, forgetting her grief in annoyance, “if you don’t obey the doctor and take your medicine at the wrong time!” After all, you can’t joke about this when you can get pneumonia, ”said the countess, and in the pronunciation of this one word, incomprehensible to more than her, she already found great consolation. What would Sonya do if she didn’t have the joyful consciousness that she didn’t undress for three nights at first in order to be ready to fulfill exactly all the doctor’s instructions, and that she now doesn’t sleep at night so as not to miss the clock in which it is necessary to give harmless pills from a golden box? Even Natasha herself, who, although she said that no medicines could cure her and that all this was nonsense - and she was glad to see that so many donations were made for her that she had to take medicines at certain hours, and even she was happy was that she, neglecting the fulfillment of the prescribed, could show that she did not believe in treatment and did not value her life.

The doctor went every day, felt the pulse, looked at the tongue and, not paying attention to her dead face, joked with her. But on the other hand, when he went out into another room, the countess hurriedly followed him, and he, assuming a serious look and shaking his head thoughtfully, said that, although there was danger, he hoped for the effect of this last medicine, and that we had to wait and see. ; that the disease is more moral, but ...

Natasha's "moral illness" was also healed by faith:

Natasha and Belova took their usual place in front of the icon of the Mother of God, embedded in the back of the left choir, and Natasha’s new sense of humility in front of the great, incomprehensible, seized her when she, at this unusual hour in the morning, looking at the black face of the Mother of God, lit by candles burning in front of him, and the light of the morning falling from the window, she listened to the sounds of the service, which she tried to follow, understanding them.

Tears, incomprehensible to her, stood in Natasha's chest, and a joyful and agonizing feeling agitated her. “Teach me what to do, how to correct myself forever, forever, how to deal with my life…” she thought.

Suffering of Princess Marya before the death of her father:

But she had never been so sorry, she had never been so afraid of losing him. She recalled her whole life with him, and in every word and deed of him she found an expression of his love for her.

A very capacious formulation of a look at the situation through the eyes of close people is also connected with Princess Marya. In an emergency, at the risk of being captured by the French, the princess looks at it through the eyes of her brother and father.

She involuntarily thought with their thoughts and felt with their feelings.

On the Borodino field, the manifestation of ordinary human feelings before the bloody battle surprises Pierre:

And of all these, twenty thousand are doomed to death, and they are surprised at my hat!

Powerful quote that the most powerful are the simplest thoughts.

There was nothing more for him to do. But the simplest, clearest and therefore terrible thoughts did not leave him alone.

Philosophical quote about knowledge:

- Oh, my soul, lately it has become hard for me to live. I see that I began to understand too much. And it’s not good for a person to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ... Well, not for long! he added.

The long, painful stay of Prince Andrei between life and death after the Battle of Borodino makes us think about death as something that awaits everyone, as something that during our life we ​​try not to think at all:

But isn't it all the same now, he thought. “What will happen there and what happened here?” Why did I feel so sorry for losing my life? There was something in this life that I did not understand and do not understand.

A scary description of the military term "cannon fodder":

... a bloody human body that seemed to fill the entire low tent, just as a few weeks ago on this hot August day this same body filled a dirty pond along the Smolensk road. Yes, it was the same body, the same chair a canon [meat for cannons], the sight of which even then, as if predicting the present, aroused horror in him.

Again the thoughts of man between life and death. Again - against the backdrop of a contrast with good childhood memories:

After suffering, Prince Andrei felt bliss that he had not experienced for a long time. All the best, happiest moments in his life, especially the most distant childhood, when they undressed him and put him to bed, when the nurse sang over him, lulling him to sleep, when, burying his head in the pillows, he felt happy with one consciousness of life - he imagined imagination, not even as the past, but as reality.

Prince Andrei could no longer restrain himself and wept tender, loving tears over people, over himself and over their and his own delusions. “Compassion, love for brothers, for those who love, love for those who hate us, love for enemies - yes, that love that God preached on earth, which Princess Mary taught me and which I did not understand; that's why I felt sorry for life, that's what was left for me, if I were alive. But now it's too late. I know it!"

And in human terms, the hardest of all - Napoleon, the culprit of the misfortunes of others.

And not for this hour and day alone, the mind and conscience of this man were darkened, who, heavier than all the other participants in this work, bore the whole burden of what was being done; but never, until the end of his life, he could understand neither goodness, nor beauty, nor truth, nor the significance of his actions, which were too opposed to goodness and truth, too far from everything human, so that he could understand their significance. He could not renounce his actions, praised by half the world, and therefore had to renounce truth and goodness and everything human.

On behalf of the spiritualized rain (by the way, a certain symbol of purification, renewal in nature), an appeal sounds to the warring, which is then reflected in the thoughts of the people themselves:

It was like he was saying, “Enough, enough, people. Stop... Come to your senses. What are you doing?" Exhausted, without food and without rest, the people of both sides began to equally doubt whether they should still exterminate each other, and hesitation was noticeable on all faces, and in every soul the question was equally raised: “Why, for whom should I kill and be killed? Kill whoever you want, do whatever you want, and I don't want any more!"

Pierre begins to internally understand that the distribution of money to everyone who asks is not at all an unconditional good deed.

"We must give them!" thought Pierre, taking hold of his pocket. "No, don't," a voice told him.

Philosophical thoughts of Pierre:

“War is the most difficult subjection of human freedom to the laws of God,” said the voice. — Simplicity is obedience to God; you won't get away from it. And they are simple. They don't say, but they do. The spoken word is silver, and the unspoken is golden. A person cannot own anything while he is afraid of death. And whoever is not afraid of her, everything belongs to him. If there were no suffering, a person would not know the boundaries of himself, would not know himself. The most difficult thing (Pierre continued to think or hear in a dream) is to be able to combine in his soul the meaning of everything. Connect everything? Pierre said to himself. No, don't connect. You can’t connect thoughts, but to connect all these thoughts - that’s what you need! Yes, you need to match, you need to match! Pierre repeated to himself with inner delight, feeling that with these, and only with these words, what he wants to express is expressed, and the whole question that torments him is resolved.

When the youngest son of the Rostovs ended up in the army, the feelings of the mother-countess changed in relation to the time when only the eldest son was at risk of death:

... then it seemed to the mother that she loved him more, much more than all her children.

The sacrifice of the Rostovs of almost all the property left in Moscow in order to free the carts for the transport of the wounded, which took place on the initiative of Natasha, and as a result was approved by everyone, leaves no one indifferent. Especially considering that the family will be completely ruined in the very near future:

People gathered near Natasha and until then they could not believe the strange order that she transmitted, until the count himself, in the name of his wife, confirmed the orders to give all the carts under the wounded, and carry the chests to the pantries.

The illusions of a manager, administrator, leader who thinks that the people he manages, the process he manages are completely under his control, are well described in relation to the activities of the Moscow mayor, Count Rostopchin:

In a calm, not turbulent time, it seems to every administrator that it is only through his efforts that the entire population under his control is moving, and in this consciousness of his necessity, each administrator feels the main reward for his labors and efforts. It is clear that as long as the historical sea is calm, it should seem to the ruler-administrator, with his fragile boat resting against the ship of the people with his pole and moving himself, that the ship against which he rests is moving with his efforts. But as soon as a storm rises, the sea is agitated and the ship itself moves, then delusion is impossible. The ship moves on its own huge, independent course, the pole does not reach the moving ship, and the ruler suddenly passes from the position of a ruler, a source of strength, into an insignificant, useless and weak person.

In justification of the perfect crime Rostopchin:

I should have done this.

The concept of duty is used in an attempt to justify the brutal massacre arranged by a random person.

An interesting comparison for the French army:

Like that monkey who, having put his hand into the narrow throat of a jug and seized a handful of nuts, does not open his fist so as not to lose what he has seized, and this destroys himself, the French, when leaving Moscow, obviously had to die due to the fact that they were dragging with loot, but it was as impossible for him to give up this loot as it is impossible for a monkey to unclench a handful of nuts.

Pierre's thoughts on wealth and power in comparison with the true values ​​of life.

For the first time, Pierre experienced this strange and charming feeling in the Sloboda Palace, when he suddenly felt that wealth, and power, and life, everything that people arrange and cherish with such diligence - if all this is worth something, then only by the pleasure with which all this can be thrown.

Simple, ordinary human communication quickly dispelled the murderous mood in Pierre, which he tried to create in himself.

He was tormented by the consciousness of his weakness. A few glasses of drunk wine, a conversation with this good-natured man destroyed the concentrated, gloomy mood in which Pierre lived these last days and which was necessary for the fulfillment of his intention. The pistol, and the dagger, and the coat were ready, Napoleon was moving in tomorrow. Pierre in the same way considered it useful and worthy to kill the villain; but he felt that now he would not do it. Why?

The thoughts of Prince Andrei, just before his death, beginning to comprehend God and faith.

“Yes, a new happiness has opened up to me, inalienable from a person,” he thought, lying in a half-dark, quiet hut and looking ahead with feverishly open, stopped eyes. Happiness that is outside the material forces, outside the material external influences on a person, the happiness of one soul, the happiness of love! Any person can understand it, but only God alone can recognize and prescribe its motif.

And love:

“Yes, love,” he thought again with perfect clarity), but not the love that loves for something, for something or for some reason, but the love that I experienced for the first time when, dying, I saw my enemy and still fell in love with him. I experienced that feeling of love, which is the very essence of the soul and for which no object is needed. I still have that blissful feeling. Love your neighbors, love your enemies. To love everything is to love God in all manifestations. You can love a dear person with human love; but only the enemy can be loved with divine love. And from this I experienced such joy when I felt that I love that person. What about him? Is he alive... Loving with human love, one can move from love to hatred; but divine love cannot change. Nothing, not death, nothing can destroy it. She is the essence of the soul. And how many people I hated in my life. And of all people, I did not love or hate anyone else like her. And he vividly imagined Natasha, not in the way he had imagined her before, with only her charm, joyful for himself; but for the first time imagined her soul. And he understood her feeling, her suffering, shame, repentance. He now for the first time understood the cruelty of his refusal, saw the cruelty of his break with her. “If only it were possible for me to see her one more time. Once, looking into those eyes, say ... "

God in all its manifestations is the idea of ​​the inherent divine energy in everything earthly, in people, nature, events. Love is the essence of the soul. These ideas are valuable in and of themselves, regardless of the context, binding to the fate of the dying Prince Andrei, are close to the philosophy of Tolstoy himself and clearly underlie the moral core of the entire novel.

The eyes of a person - as the main thing in beauty and strength, are emphasized in the appearance of Natasha at the bedside of a dying person.

Natasha's thin and pale face with swollen lips was more than ugly, it was terrible. But Prince Andrei did not see this face, he saw shining eyes that were beautiful.

Pierre in burning Moscow experiences a new surge of feeling for life before captivity:

Inflamed with heat and running around, Pierre at that moment, even stronger than before, experienced that feeling of youth, revival and determination that seized him while he ran to save the child.

An illustration of the fact that the power of love transforms even such difficult people as Princess Marya:

... from the moment she saw this sweet, beloved face, some new force of life took possession of her and forced her, against her will, to speak and act.

All her inner work, dissatisfied with herself, her suffering, striving for goodness, humility, love, self-sacrifice - all this now shone in those radiant eyes, in a thin smile, in every line of her tender face. Rostov saw all this as clearly as if he had known her all her life. He felt that the creature that was before him was completely different, better than all those he had met up to now, and better, most importantly, than himself.

Oh again about prayer at Rostov, but in a different way:

Yes, prayer will move a mountain, but you have to believe and not pray the way Natasha and I prayed as children that the snow would turn into sugar, and ran out into the yard to try to see if sugar was made from snow. No, but I'm not praying for trifles now "...

Sonya's tragic love for Nikolai and self-sacrifice:

But before that, in all acts of self-sacrifice, she was joyfully aware that, by sacrificing herself, she thereby raises her price in the eyes of herself and others and becomes more worthy of Nicolas, whom she loved most in life; but now her sacrifice had to consist in giving up what for her was the whole reward of sacrifice, the whole meaning of life.

Pierre's thoughts before the execution - about life, death, the order of things:

Who, finally, executed, killed, took away his life - Pierre with all his memories, aspirations, hopes, thoughts? Who did it? And Pierre felt that it was nobody. It was an order, a warehouse of circumstances. Some kind of order was killing him - Pierre, depriving him of his life, of everything, destroying him.

Several drums suddenly struck from both sides, and Pierre felt that with this sound, a part of his soul seemed to be torn off. He lost the ability to think and reason. He could only see and hear. And he had only one desire - the desire that something terrible be done as soon as possible, which had to be done.

From the moment Pierre saw this terrible murder committed by people who did not want to do this, it was as if in his soul that spring was suddenly pulled out, on which everything was supported and seemed to be alive, and everything fell into a heap of senseless rubbish. In him, although he did not realize himself, faith was destroyed in the improvement of the world, and in the human, and in his soul, and in God.

The words of Platon Karavaev, which became something new for Pierre in his worldview:

- Do not grieve, my friend: endure an hour, but live a century! That's it, my dear. And we live here, thank God, there is no offense. There are also good and bad people,” he said. …

The meeting of Princess Marya and Natasha, who before that did not like each other and did not actually communicate, but instantly became extremely spiritually close people, is a vivid illustration of how common grief unites people.

But before the princess had time to look at the face of this Natasha, she realized that this was her sincere comrade in grief, and therefore her friend. She rushed to meet her and, embracing her, wept on her shoulder. As soon as Natasha, who was sitting at the head of Prince Andrei, found out about the arrival of Princess Marya, she quietly left his room with those quick, as it seemed to Princess Marya, as if with cheerful steps, and ran to her. On her excited face, when she ran into the room, there was only one expression - an expression of love, boundless love for him, for her, for everything that was close to a loved one, an expression of pity, suffering for others and a passionate desire to give herself all for in order to help them. It was evident that at that moment not a single thought about herself, about her relationship to him, was in Natasha's soul.

Date of a dying father with a young son:

The little son of Prince Andrei was seven years old. He could hardly read, he knew nothing. He experienced a lot after that day, acquiring knowledge, observation, experience; but if he had then mastered all these later acquired abilities, he could not have better, deeper understood the full significance of the scene that he saw between his father, Princess Mary and Natasha than he understood it now.

Feelings of the dying. Deep philosophical thoughts, mixed with the delirium of a seriously ill, suffering person:

Everything, to love everyone, to always sacrifice oneself for love, meant not to love anyone, meant not to live this earthly life. And the more he was imbued with this beginning of love, the more he renounced life and the more completely he destroyed that terrible barrier that, without love, stands between life and death. When, this first time, he remembered that he had to die, he said to himself: well, so much the better.

"Love? What is love? he thought. “Love interferes with death. Love is life. Everything, everything that I understand, I understand only because I love. Everything is, everything exists only because I love. Everything is connected by her. Love is God, and to die means for me, a particle of love, to return to the common and eternal source. These thoughts seemed to him comforting. But these were only thoughts. Something was missing from them...

“Yes, it was death. I died - I woke up. Yes, death is an awakening! - suddenly brightened in his soul, and the veil that had hidden the unknown until now was lifted before his spiritual gaze. He felt, as it were, the release of the previously bound strength in him and that strange lightness that had not left him since then.

And the silent question of those who remained to live:

“Where did he go? Where is he now?..”

Pierre in captivity, despite physical hardships, finds peace of mind:

And it was precisely at this very time that he received that calmness and self-satisfaction, for which he had vainly sought before. For a long time in his life he sought from various sides this peace, harmony with himself, that which so struck him in the soldiers in the Battle of Borodino - he sought this in philanthropy, in Freemasonry, in the dispersal of secular life, in wine, in heroic deeds. self-sacrifice, in romantic love for Natasha; he sought it by way of thought, and all these searches and attempts all deceived him.

About needs, freedom of choice and attitude towards it:

The absence of suffering, the satisfaction of needs and, as a result, the freedom to choose occupations, that is, a way of life, now seemed to Pierre the undoubted and highest happiness of a person. Here, now only, for the first time, Pierre fully appreciated the pleasure of eating when he was hungry, drinking when he was thirsty, sleeping when he was sleepy, warmth when it was cold, talking with a person, when he wanted to speak and listen to a human voice. Satisfaction of needs - good food, cleanliness, freedom - now, when he was deprived of all this, seemed to Pierre perfect happiness, and the choice of occupation, that is, life, now that this choice was so limited, seemed to him such an easy thing that he forgot the fact that an excess of the comforts of life destroys all the happiness of satisfying needs, and a great freedom in choosing occupations, the freedom that education, wealth, position in the world gave him in his life, that this freedom makes the choice of occupations inextricably difficult and destroys the very need and opportunity to practice.

An interesting philosophical thought about the possibility of limiting human freedom sounds in Pierre's hysterical laughter in captivity:

- Ha, ha, ha! Pierre laughed. And he said aloud to himself: "The soldier didn't let me in." Caught me, locked me up. I am being held captive. Who me? Me! Me, my immortal soul! Ha, ha, ha! .. Ha, ha, ha! .. - he laughed with tears in his eyes.

Complemented by the greatness of nature, its infinity and eternity:

And even farther than these forests and fields could be seen a bright, oscillating, inviting endless distance. Pierre looked into the sky, into the depths of the departing, playing stars. “And all this is mine, and all this is in me, and all this is me! thought Pierre. “And they caught all this and put it in a booth, fenced off with boards!” He smiled and went to bed with his comrades.

Denisov, over the body of the deceased Petya, recalls the touching words of the boy, who not so long ago shared raisins with the soldiers:

“I'm used to anything sweet. Excellent raisins, take them all,” he remembered.

And again Pierre, again about human needs, about suffering and excess, about the attitude towards this:

In captivity, in a booth, Pierre learned not with his mind, but with his whole being, with his life, that man was created for happiness, that happiness is in himself, in satisfying natural human needs, and that all misfortune comes not from lack, but from excess; but now, in these last three weeks of the campaign, he learned another new, comforting truth - he learned that there is nothing terrible in the world. He learned that just as there is no position in which a person would be happy and completely free, so there is no position in which he would be unhappy and not free. He learned that there is a border of suffering and a border of freedom, and that this border is very close...

Now only Pierre understood the whole force of human vitality and the saving power of shifting attention invested in a person, similar to that saving valve in steam engines that releases excess steam as soon as its density exceeds a certain norm.

The subconscious work of the brain, controlled by the human soul:

It seemed to him that he was thinking of nothing; but far and deep somewhere his soul was thinking something important and comforting.

Pierre's philosophy shortly before his release:

“Life is everything. Life is God. Everything moves and moves, and this movement is God. And as long as there is life, there is the enjoyment of the self-consciousness of the deity. Love life, love God. It is most difficult and most blessed to love this life in one's suffering, in the innocence of suffering.

Greatness cannot be opposed to a measure of good or bad. With regard to Napoleon, the narrative speaks of this, but of course it makes you think about any power and any violence.

When it is no longer possible to stretch further such elastic threads of historical reasoning, when the action is already clearly contrary to what all mankind calls good and even justice, historians have a saving concept of greatness. Greatness seems to exclude the possibility of a measure of good and bad. For the great, there is no evil. There is no horror that can be blamed on one who is great.

- "C'est grand!" [This is majestic!] - say historians, and then there is no longer either good or bad, but there is "grand" and "not grand". Grand - good, not grand - bad. Grand is a property, according to their concepts, of some special animals, which they call heroes. And Napoleon, going home in a warm coat from not only his comrades who are dying, but (in his opinion) the people he brought here, feels que c'est grand, and his soul is at peace.

“Du sublime (he sees something sublime in himself) au ridicule il n’y a qu’un pas,” he says. And the whole world repeats for fifty years: “Sublime! Grand! Napoleon le grand! Du sublime au ridicule il n'y a qu'un pas." [majestic... There is only one step from majestic to ridiculous...]

And it would never occur to anyone that the recognition of greatness, immeasurable by the measure of good and bad, is only the recognition of one's insignificance and immeasurable smallness. For us, with the measure of good and bad given to us by Christ, there is nothing immeasurable. And there is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.

Princess Mary and Natasha after the death of Prince Andrei. Touching something great and intimate - in feelings, but not in words.

It seemed to them that what they experienced and felt could not be expressed in words. It seemed to them that any mention in words of the details of his life violated the greatness and sanctity of the sacrament accomplished in their eyes.

Natasha remembers the words spoken to Prince Andrei, pronounces them differently, changing not only the form, but also the meaning, although it has long been gone. The essence concerns the relationship between the suffering patient and the caregiver. Can this go on for a long time or is this not the question at all? Let it go on for a long time, it is not at all important, but something else.

“Terrible for you, but not for me. You know that without you there is nothing in my life, and suffering with you is the best happiness for me.

“The wedge is knocked out with a wedge,” says a wise proverb. The death of her brother and the need to support her mother brought Natasha back to life, after the death of Prince Andrei, she had already completely lost the meaning of life.

Suddenly, like an electric current, ran through Natasha's entire being. Something terribly hurt her heart. She felt a terrible pain; it seemed to her that something was breaking off in her and that she was dying. But following the pain, she felt an instant release from the prohibition of life that lay on her.

Natasha's love, stubborn, patient, not as an explanation, not as a consolation, but as a call to life, every second seemed to embrace the countess from all sides.

Natasha's wound also healed. She thought her life was over. But suddenly love for her mother showed her that the essence of her life - love - was still alive in her. Love has awakened, and life has awakened. The last days of Prince Andrei connected Natasha with Princess Mary. A new misfortune brought them even closer. Princess Marya postponed her departure and for the last three weeks, as if she were a sick child, she looked after Natasha.

And Natasha, embracing, began to kiss the hands and face of Princess Marya. Princess Mary was ashamed and rejoiced at this expression of Natasha's feelings.

The release of Pierre, the removal of tension in the body and soul, and the disease - as relaxation, the reaction of the body and, nevertheless, recovery:

Pierre, as is most often the case, felt the brunt of the physical hardships and stresses experienced in captivity only when these stresses and hardships were over. After his release from captivity, he arrived in Orel, and on the third day of his arrival, while he was going to Kyiv, he fell ill and lay ill in Orel for three months; he became, as the doctors said, bilious fever. Despite the fact that the doctors treated him, bled him and gave him medicines to drink, he nevertheless recovered.

The philosophy and concept of life has become much simpler. Interesting thoughts about freedom, incl. as freedom from purpose and the opposition of freedom and faith:

The very thing that he had tormented before, what he was constantly looking for, the purpose of life, now did not exist for him. It was no coincidence that this desired goal of life now did not exist for him only at the present moment, but he felt that it did not exist and could not exist. And this lack of purpose gave him that full, joyful consciousness of freedom, which at that time constituted his happiness. He could not have a goal, because he now had faith, not faith in any rules, or words, or thoughts, but faith in a living, always felt god. Previously, he had sought it for the purposes he had set for himself. This search for a goal was only a search for God; and suddenly, in his captivity, he recognized, not by words, not by reasoning, but by direct feeling, what his nanny had told him for a long time: that God is here, here, everywhere.

And the closer he looked, the more he was calm and happy. The terrible question that previously destroyed all his mental structures was: why? no longer existed for him. Now to this question - why? a simple answer was always ready in his soul: then, that there is a god, that god, without whose will a hair will not fall from a person’s head.

Change in relationships with people. Tolerance, tolerance, in more modern terms:

... with all the people he met now, there was a new feature in Pierre that deserved him the favor of all people: this recognition of the possibility of each person to think, feel and look at things in his own way; recognition of the impossibility of words to dissuade a person. This legitimate feature of every person, which previously excited and irritated Pierre, now formed the basis of the participation and interest that he took in people.

The author's opinion on the role in the family and the behavior of an intelligent woman. Not the one who speaks incessantly, argues, proves my rightness and significance, but the one who, with her mind, feeling and tact, correctly directs a man to accomplishment, becoming one with him.

Now, when he told all this to Natasha, he experienced that rare pleasure that women give when listening to a man - not smart women who, listening, try or remember what they are told in order to enrich their minds and, on occasion, retell what or adapt what is being told to your own and communicate as soon as possible your clever speeches worked out in your small mental economy; but the pleasure that real women give, gifted with the ability to choose and absorb into themselves all the best that is only in the manifestations of a man.

Attitude towards people not according to people's assessment:

Pierre's madness consisted in the fact that he did not, as before, wait for personal reasons, which he called the virtues of people, in order to love them, and love overflowed his heart, and he, loving people for no reason, found undoubted reasons for which it was worth loving their.

Tolstoy's reasoning is collected at the end of the book, where history, politics and diplomacy, military strategy, morality and, of course, philosophy are intertwined to a greater extent than in the course of the story.

Here, in particular, is a quote about the limitations of the human mind.

If we assume that human life can be controlled by reason, then the possibility of life will be destroyed.

The higher the human mind rises in discovering these goals, the more obvious for it is the inaccessibility of the final goal.

The relationship between husband and wife, using the example of the relationship between Nikolai and Countess (after marriage) Marya, is shown as one of the options for possible harmony in family relationships:

... Nikolai thought; but this relentless, eternal spiritual tension, which has as its goal only the moral good of children, delighted him. If Nicholas could be aware of his feelings, he would have found that the main basis of his firm, tender and proud love for his wife was always based on this feeling of surprise before her sincerity, before that sublime, moral world, almost inaccessible to Nicholas, in which always lived his wife.

The second example of the harmony of marital relations is Pierre and Natasha, an example of a deep sense of mutual understanding, often expressed in quite simple words. The author compares with sleep:

As in a dream everything is wrong, meaningless and contradictory, except for the feeling that guides the dream, so in this communication, which is contrary to all the laws of the mind, it is not speeches that are consistent and clear, but only the feeling that guides them.

Wealth - poverty, fame - uncertainty, power - subordination, strength - weakness, health - illness, education - ignorance, work - leisure, satiety - hunger, virtue - vice are only greater or lesser degrees of freedom.

The gradualness of the idea of ​​greater or lesser freedom and necessity in this regard depends on a greater or lesser interval of time from the commission of an act to a judgment about it.

In order to imagine it free, one must imagine it in the present, on the verge of the past and the future, that is, outside of time, which is impossible...

In conclusion, it is only worth saying that "War and Peace", of course, is a work that has no analogues in world literature. A work that vividly describes all human feelings and critical events of a person's life - both spiritual life and life in society: birth and death, love and betrayal, faith and disbelief, hope and despair, kindred feelings, craving for truth, vanity and loneliness , fear and fearlessness, feat and meanness, falsehood and sincerity, thoughts and feelings, war and peace. Yes, “War and Peace” is a book that can and should be read many times in order to think about eternal values ​​more often, learn to live and feel for real, to be a person.

The apology of Christian life, the features of the manifestation of Christianity in the soul and in the life of the heroes of N.S. Leskov reveals through the theme of morality. Let's consider a number of topics related to the life of individual characters, their vision of the meaning of life, their understanding of faith and attitude to the world and people around them.

One of the brightest manifestations of the writer's morality is humility - one of the most important Christian virtues. Possessing such a virtue, many characters in the stories not only defeated evil, but completely eradicated it. Humility is that by means of which a person draws as close to God as possible. The apostle Peter states: “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble” (1 Pet. 5:5). And it is this grace that eradicates wickedness.

“The world brings up pride in a person. In this state of mind, a person builds his whole life only for himself, except for his own self, he does not see anyone next to him. Pride is a disease of the soul. The soul lives by deceit, the soul lives in the world that it invents, constructs for itself. And this world is dead, there is no God in it, there is no neighbor in it, there is no life. A proud person does not notice that there is emptiness around him and that he himself is internally empty. He tries to be the best, to be in the center of all events and his opinion becomes the only one. But this loneliness in which a proud man lives kills him. A person is blinded and stunned by himself, his imaginary talents, achievements, merits, and he is not able to see and hear the person who is nearby. A proud person is always alone, he is always dissatisfied with something and condemns everyone, and when something does not work out for him, he falls into despondency, despair, because he cannot reconcile himself, cannot endure, cannot admit his sin, your mistake. Pride is that wall behind which a person does not see either God or neighbor, this is the beginning of the death of the soul, because pride kills all living things in the soul and destroys all ties.

Humility as the fullness of life, humility as a great gift of God, is given to those who work, who seek God next to them, who do not trust themselves and do not put themselves in the center in the first place. “Learn from me, for I am meek and lowly in heart,” the Lord humbled himself to death, death on the cross. The source of humility is Christ Himself, who came into this world, came to a person to save him from eternal death, from that pride that paralyzed the will, which closed the eyes of a person, which made him unable to rejoice and see beauty next to him "(Archpriest Andrey Lemeshonok confessor of St. Elisabeth Monastery and Sisterhood).

How great is the manifestation of the humility of the buffoon Pamphalon in the story of the same name. It is through humility that all the beauty of the soul of this person is revealed. “For My strength is made perfect in weakness,” says the Lord (2 Cor. 12:9). Humility is a weakness pleasing to God, it is a state of the human spirit, from which demons tremble, for the Lord Himself lives in the soul of the humble. Who does Pamphalon think he is? Clay, from which the Lord creates His image and His likeness. “I believe that I won’t be able to make anything good out of myself, and if the One who created me Himself makes something better out of me over time, well, that’s His business ...”.

“Well, you are a lost man.

It may very well be…”

“What teachings can I give, you wretched buffoon. Rest on my bed. After all, I am the son of sin, and as I was conceived in sin, so I grew up with sinners ... ".

“And now I know that how can a weak person make a vow to the Almighty, who has provided what he should be, and crumples him like a potter crumples clay on a wheel?”

In this series of quotations from the story, Pamphalon's obedience to his Creator and firm hope in Him are visible.

In the story “The Sealed Angel”, the image of the angry anchorite elder Pamva played a decisive role in the conversion of the Old Believer Luke to the Orthodox faith. This saint, invested with his humility, Pamva, showed the true path to salvation for this zealot of antiquity. The light of his humble soul illuminated the heart of this man, illuminated his thoughts. “I didn’t say a single word to Father Pamva, and what could I say to him: be rude to him - he will bless him, nail him - he will bow to the ground, this man is invincible with such humility! What will he be afraid of when he even asks to go to hell ...

He will drive the demons out of hell with his humility or turn them to God! This humility and Satan can not stand it! He will chop all his hands on him, strip off all his claws, and he himself will comprehend his impotence before the Creator, who created such love, and will be ashamed of Him.

"God! - I dare to argue, - if there are only two such people in the Church, then we are lost, for this one is all, animated by love.

If you look at the last words in Luke's discussion of the elder, you can clearly see that love is inseparable from humility, and humility is inseparable from love.

No less clearly the virtue of humility is revealed in the work "The Enchanted Wanderer", for example, in a dialogue with the main character of the story, Father Ishmael.

• - “And soon you will take the senior tonsure?
• - I won't accept him. So… I don’t consider myself worthy.”

The search for the meaning of this person's life is the search for God. Having found his calling, he gave his whole soul to him, for which the Lord, in turn, endowed this wanderer, eternally seeking His Only One, with the gift of prophecy. This gift could not be given by God to a soul that did not acquire humility.

In the hagiographic story “The Lion of Elder Gerasim”, the author shows a man who, with his life, with his humility, conquered the whole creation of God under his nose, found a common divine language with animals. This is the language that was lost by our first parents Adam and Eve in Paradise. As it is said in the Holy Scriptures, a person must bring the whole world, the whole creation to God. This is one of the main purposes of man on earth. With your life, make the salvation not only of your own, but also of your neighbors and all animals. And Gerasim reached this blissful state, just as such saints as Sergius of Radonezh and Seraphim of Sarov reached it, who fed the bear from the hands of a dove. “No, I’m the most ordinary person, and I even confess to you that I’m still very stupid: I live with animals, but I didn’t know how to live with people at all - they all took offense at me, and I left the city for the desert,” - thus says this servant of God, not seeing his own holiness.

In the positive heroes of Leskov's works, to one degree or another, there is such a virtue as humility. And it cannot be absent, because this virtue is an integral part of a good soul, a soul seeking help not in itself, but in God, relying not on its own strength, which a person has so little to do good, but on the power of God, which a person can do this good.

This Christian virtue, its fruits and saving power are revealed somewhat differently by N.S. Leskov in the story "The Villain of Ascalon", through the image of the main character. “Tenia meekly submitted to necessity and bore her share, not revealing her suffering in front of her husband.” Her humility did not allow her husband Falaley to despair even more of his fate. If Tenia complained about her hard life without him, then she made her sick and suffering husband even more painful, and it is not known to what desperate state the enemy of the human race could then bring him. Towards the end of his involuntary confinement in the Ascalonian dungeon, the husband of Tenia Falaley also received this precious gift from God. And, undoubtedly, he came to this thanks to the life position of his wife. “I was greedy for the acquisition of wealth - this is what is not needed and in which the misfortune of life is hidden. I suffer for it." This is what the words of the psalmist David are about: “God will not despise a contrite and humble heart” (Ps. 50:19).

This gift of humility was also endowed with the hero of the story "Mountain" goldsmith master Zenon. Here is how the author says about him: "Zeno was modest and always moved away from honor." By the words “was modest”, the author means Zeno’s humility, because from modesty alone, as a small part of this virtue, the noble master could not move away from honor and live separately from everyone, so that no one would see him. And he lived in a beautiful place, which was as beautiful as his soul.

In The Tale of the God-pleasing Woodcutter, the writer shows what power of prayer the Lord gives to a humble worker, what boldness before God this unknown person has. Even a bishop, by his consecration, endowed with gifts of grace from God, does not have such a strong prayer that a simple person has. But was it really a pity for the Lord to give rain to the thirsty earth and the good people living on it? No, this is not why the all-good Lord did not send rain on the earth. God, first of all, cares about the salvation of the human soul, and not about the conditions of human life in which these rain-hungry people found themselves. God sent such a humble man to these people, so that when they saw him, they would understand what kind of heart and what kind of soul are pleasing to Him: a contrite and humble heart. For these people, “it is surprising that a peasant, barely moving under a bundle of firewood, would be the best of all for offering up prayers to God for a public disaster.” If the souls of these people were pure, as the soul of a wood splitter is pure, as a soul pleasing to God should be pure and bright, then it would not be so surprising for them to see this man. “I am not worthy, father, that in your presence the words of prayer ascend from my lips. It is more fitting for you, father, to pray in the general calamity, you pray, but I don’t dare.” This wood splitter, in his deepest humility, accepted everything that the God who knows the heart gives him. He was poor in spirit, having nothing on the earth, that which tied him to the earth. “Yes, I don’t have any home either, and I never have. And when I get tired and I need to rest or spend the night, I will crawl under the church and curl up under the floor and sleep.”

The wood splitter does not see his holiness in the same way that all the saints did not see it in their humility and considered themselves the worst people. “Believe me, sir, that I would gladly tell you everything, but the fact is that I really have nothing to tell you at all. I am the most ordinary sinner and spend my life in the daily bustle and troubles of life. The fruit of this humility is an effective prayer pleasing to God, and the long-awaited rain from heaven is a miracle. “The old man no longer argued, and as best he could, he began to pray, and immediately overgrown from the sky, and blessed rain began to fall.” About the "Tale of the charitable wood splitter" we can say that it is entirely devoted to the virtue of humility.

The next most important virtue that appears in the stories of Leskov, perhaps, can be called chastity. Let's touch this topic and try to figure it out. A chaste person is a person with a clear "wise" mind and a pure heart that loves the truth and the truth. Chastity is a Christian virtue and at the same time a human condition, we dare even say, a heavenly condition. Why is chastity a heavenly state not only of the soul, but of the whole person as a whole: his soul, spirit and body? Before the fall, Adam and Eve in Paradise were chaste in the fullness of this word. Their spirit, soul and body were one. There was no such state when one yearns for one thing, and the other yearns for another opposite, which is a deplorable consequence of the fall into sin. N.S. Leskov knowingly shows and emphasizes this virtue in his characters. He focuses the reader's attention on the integrity, purity of their thoughts, actions, movements of the soul, spirit, aspiring to God, and purity of the body. After all, chastity - the preservation of one's purity, brings the fruits of goodness and light. This is also spiritual prudence, above all. “First of all, chastity means not only that side of a person’s life that relates to the body. It refers to the whole human being. Hence the very word "chastity". The Holy Fathers speak of this wholeness as the correct dispensation of the soul and the corresponding state of the body, which are commanded by Christ.

“Chastity is a great deed and the basis, only thanks to which a person can gradually, through prayer, partake of God, and in him the process that we call the process of deification can be carried out - that is, when created human nature is transformed, grafted onto divine nature.”

“Chastity is a tricky word. Chastity is deeply connected with humility. Chastity is the state of one who has achieved such spiritual integrity, such inner wisdom, which does not allow him to deviate from God, deviate from purity, deviate from his human greatness, that is, from serving the image of God in himself.

In his story about the early Christians, The Villain of Ascalon, the author writes about how the chastity of one wife saved the lives of many people and not only their lives, but also their souls. This is Tenia - the wife of one baptized pagan Falaley, a merchant shipbuilder and a skilled navigator. Because she firmly guarded the purity of her body from the pagans - the guards of the prison - the Lord preserved the purity of her soul. Thanks to this spiritual purity and kind heart of Tenia, the robber Anastas, who was considered the most evil and cruel, gave her all his treasure. With this earthly treasure, and especially with the treasure of her heart, Tenia saved the life of her husband, children and the lives of many more people. Some considered Tenia's keeping her integrity as a manifestation of stubbornness and selfishness towards others. She did not give up her body for reproach, but she persevered, keeping it clean. But she was offered a “way out” of her “criminal stubbornness”:

“-… A fungus that beats off memory will take aside shame.

Yes, give me, give me soon this juice that diverts memory so that I can forget what I hear from you, ”said Puplii, the grandmother of her children, Tenia. Those people who condemned Tenia did not understand what prevented her from becoming a concubine and thereby saving her husband from prison. Puplia Baba thought that she was just ashamed to undress, and therefore suggested a fungus that removes shame and memory. The spiritual blindness of these people did not see the virtue of Tenia.

The husband of Tenia, the shipbuilder Falaley, was also distinguished by his chastity and love for his wife. This love for him was even higher than freedom. “Tenia had nothing to feed the imprisoned husband, and Virin and Witt, and Puplia-baba ... Tenia didn’t have to tell Falalley how their situation worsened: he himself understood everything and quietly said to his wife: “I feel quite firm enough to die of hunger, but you be free over yourself: I no longer dare to say anything about yourself and about the unfortunate Virin and Witte. Try the latter: send them themselves to beg ... Angry shipbuilders shouted: “Let all the ailments that have been living here since the days of Herod attack you” ... Falaley answered: “Let all this be, but the integrity of Tenia is most precious to me.”

In Leskov's story "Beautiful Aza", on the contrary, a young girl saved the honor of one bride and the life of her father at the cost of her own purity and bodily purity. Aza gave all her fortune to a stranger in order to save his daughter Io. The latter decided to become the mistress of a cruel lender so that he would not put her father in prison and stuff a deck around his neck. The girl's father decided that it was better to take his own life than to give his daughter to a voluptuary desecration. Asa told him:

“- I understand this too; but tell me, how much do you owe the creditor?

• “Oh, very much,” said the stranger, and named a very considerable sum. This was equal to the entire state of the Egyptian.
• - Come to me tomorrow - I will give you this amount.

Being a beggar, the girl Aza became a coastal harlot.

“In relation to the soul, first of all, chastity means nothing more than purity. It turns out that a married man who lives a normal life with his wife can be chaste. And a person who not only is not married, but also does not commit any carnal sins, can also be unchaste. But, nevertheless, according to its internal state, it - as the holy fathers say - is kindled. That is, it is full of all sorts of evil inclinations, lusts, and lives with these passionate thoughts, feelings, and so on. From these words it is clear that chastity is not bodily purity, but above all, spiritual purity. Christ our Lord said: “The lamp for the body is the eye. So if your eye is clear, then your whole body will be bright; If your eye is evil, then your whole body will be dark.” (Matthew 6:22-23). And again: "Jesus says to them: Truly, I say to you, publicans and harlots are going into the kingdom of God before you." (Matthew 21:31).

So the pure girl Asa, who did not know God with her mind, knew Him with her heart. She became a harlot involuntarily, sacrificing herself, giving away all her savings. Her fragile body could not withstand any physical work, she could not earn a piece of bread for herself. The desperate girl gave her body to be mocked. But only the body, as our temporary clothes on earth. Her soul remained as pure as a drop of clear water, for love for her neighbor was the strongest of all.

Keeping your body clean is great, but not the most important thing, this is not what the Lord expects from us. He is waiting for us to have a heart that loves Him. And without love for neighbors, there is no love for God, as Saint John the Theologian, the beloved disciple of Christ, wrote about this: God, whom he does not see? And we have this commandment from Him, that he who loves God love his brother also” (1 John 4:20). Young Aza loved Christ with all her soul when she learned about Him and His teachings.

Involuntarily, and perhaps not accidentally, the writer compares the beautiful Aza with the chaste Tenia. “Aza (like Tenia - author) could not avoid serious disasters for reasons that lay in her upbringing: she was not at all prepared to raise funds for herself by her labors. She had youth, beauty and a bright, even penetrating mind and an elevated soul, but she was not trained in any craft. Her lovely, virginal body was weak in order to perform rough work - coastal day laborers drove her away; she could not carry baskets of fruits or bricks to the buildings, and when she wanted to wash clothes in the river, the ashes from the burnt Nile reed corroded her tender hands, and the flowing water made her dizzy ...

Aza had a kind and selfless soul… Let her suffer, but Io and her old people are saved.”

And Tenia suffered, earning her daily bread for her beloved husband and children. Someone may object, how can you compare Azu and Tenia, because their actions are completely opposite?! One gave her body to be desecrated by alien sailors - the other kept her body, its purity, in every possible way. Is there a contradiction here? Why does Leskov cite him so frankly? Is it to confuse the prudent reader? No! It was not in vain that the wise writer put these two stories close and it was not in vain that he drew so many parallels through the images of these women. The writer did this on purpose so that we could not only see the huge difference between these two “fragile vessels”, but also think about it. Why do I say to look deeper into yourself? This is only at first glance, a superficial and shallow view, here lies a contradiction. Leskov is a writer of the highest depth, and he thinks like a true Christian. After all, if you take the life of Aza and the life of the same Tenia, then you can understand that initially their life paths are absolutely incomparable. Aza was an unmarried rich girl, while Tenya, on the contrary, was a married woman with two children. Therein lies the big difference. Aza had nothing to lose, or rather, she did not have a husband and children, and even parents, whom she should look after and serve them. The girl was an orphan. From this it turns out that she was not responsible for the lives of her relatives like Tenia. Aza was left to herself, responsible only for herself. And she responded by sacrificing herself. She did everything she could to save the lives of the unfortunate stranger and his daughter. She sacrificed herself, fulfilling the main commandment of God, laid down her life for her neighbor. And the loss of bodily purity did not change the soul in any way, did not pollute it. It was as if she had become a harlot and not by her own will.

Now let's look at the life of the chaste Tenia. Tenia, in turn, as Aza fulfilled the main commandment of God, she kept the purity of marriage and remained faithful to her husband, given to her by God. She did not go to any persuasion to lose her purity in the arms of the voluptuous Milia, did what she had to do, listened, first of all, to her heart, like Aza. It was very hard to endure the attacks and insults from all those who reproached her, she was persecuted like Christ Himself for the truth. Tenia suffered persecution, as did Aza, and for that she was rewarded by God. It is impossible not to see the difference in the outer life of these two women and the unity in the inner life. Their pure souls are devoted to God, and far from everything external speaks of the internal. The Lord calls us to the salvation of the soul, not to the salvation of our body. The author shows their souls in all their fullness and beauty. This is how they are remembered by readers: the firm, strong, chaste Tenia and the fragile, beautiful and also chaste Aza. “Deep knowledge of spiritual culture allowed N.S. Leskov to use the Christian concept of man to create the image of an earthly righteous woman, thereby embodying his ideal of man.

In the story of "Buffoon Pamphalon" we meet a chaste woman named Magna. The plot of this line is as follows. Magna's husband was put in prison, but they wanted to castrate the children. She was brought under guard and in secrecy to Damascus, and “the next day ... it was announced that the seller of Magna kept her for a fee of five gold coins for every day. Anyone who pays gold coins can get it ... Depraved people rushed to the seller's house, and Magna barely escaped with tears all day. Magna's friends did not help her in her desperate situation and did not even try to help her. And what is most striking is that these women were "pious" as people considered them, and one of these "pious" friends was Sylvia the Virgin. This is clearly emphasized by the author. The writer shows where chastity is true and where it is false. Magna was helped by the most important of all the harlots - hetaera Azella - and this is no coincidence. For Leskov, internal purity is clearly important, not external. After all, this is true virtue.

And the buffoon Pamphalon asked for help from Magna's girlfriends, one of whom, we recall, was a maiden: “She had already made a request to the high citizens I named, but that they all left her requests in vain ... My words only led these women to fiery anger, and I was cast out for daring to come to their homes with such a request. Two of them, Taora and Fotina, ordered me to be driven away with only one reminder that I would be worth good blows, but Sylvia the maiden, she ordered me to be beaten in front of her face, and her servants beat me with a copper rod until I came out of her with a bloody body and a parched throat. But when Pamphalon did not receive help from Magna’s friends and the virgin, he turned to the harlots for Magna’s help: “I was met by the hetaera’s confidante, the blond Ada (let’s pay attention to her name, as if from the word “hell”!) ... O unfortunate ! It is good that you escaped from them under our roof. Stay here and wait for me a little; I will now take this chilled drink to the guests and return in an instant to wash your wounds ... And hetaera Azella (you can also pay attention to the name Azella: “azazel” is one of the demonic names) began to quietly sob, and rob from her hands golden wrists, necklaces and a huge pearl from Egypt and said: “Take it all, take it and run, take the children of poor Magna from the eunuch as soon as possible before he mutilates them!”. Let us pay attention - both Magna and the beautiful Aza are the first to come to the aid of a harlot. Why N.S. Does Leskov exalt harlots in his works like that? The answer is simple. Leskov does not elevate harlots, he does not elevate fornication, but shows us the “hidden man in the heart” in an image that has fallen at first glance. For what? Yes, then, in order to once again show the superiority of the internal over the external, the main over the secondary, sincerity over hypocrisy, chastity over debauchery, truth over lies.

Exploring the apology of Christian life in the works of N.S. Leskov, one cannot pass by the novel "On the Knives". This is a brilliant work by Leskov about the struggle between good and evil, which appears here in the form of a nihilistic doctrine, widespread in the second half of the 19th century. The writer portrayed one of the heroines of the novel, Alexandra Ivanovna Sintyanina, as a righteous woman, distinguished by her virtuous life, her chastity, purity of soul and loyalty to her unloved husband. Note - fidelity to an unloved husband! Is this not true chastity, the source of which was sacrifice and faith in God. Andrey Podozerov, Katerina Astafyevna and Filiter Ivanovich Forov are also an example of Christian purity, chastity and morality. But here in the embodiment of this theme there is a new twist. Forov Filiter Ivanovich is a nihilist. The chastity of his soul is not based on faith in God. But, despite this, this man is chaste in his conscience. He was looking for truth and the truth, which he saw, although only towards the end of his life.

It is impossible not to say about Zeno's act in Leskov's story "Mountain". This young man gouged out his own eye so as not to be tempted by the beauty of Nephoris's feminine nature. For she wanted overnight to take possession not only of his soul, but also of his body, succumbing to passion. Zeno, however, deprived himself of his eye according to the word of Christ: “If your right eye offends you, tear it out and throw it away from you, for it is better for you that one of your members perish, and not your whole body be cast into hell.” (Matthew 5:29). He was a true Christian, and nothing prevented him from fulfilling the commandment of Christ literally. The Lord does not call us here to understand literally the meaning of his words, but He speaks in this way so that we can see the whole danger of the sin of temptation as such. Also, God does not forbid a person to understand His commandment literally, as long as it is fulfilled with reason, in the case when it is really necessary. The goldsmith Zeno was so devoted to Christ that he did not spare himself just to be with Him, and perhaps also because to show Nefora all the shame of the sin of fornication, which her soul so desired. For thanks to this act, so decisive and terrible in its essence, Zeno Nefora eventually turned to God. Thus, we see that the Lord does not leave the people devoted to Him, but also glorifies them, as He glorified the faith of His hidden Christian Zenon. And he not only does not leave and glorifies, but also converts His lost souls through these people.

The next virtue can conditionally be designated "For one's friends." The name speaks for itself. This is a theme about the sacrifice of heroes, more precisely, about their sacrificial love for their neighbor. It is the fulfillment of another of Christ's commandments, which says: "There is no greater love than if someone lays down his life for his friends." (John 15:13). Sacrifice, as an integral quality of a kind and disinterested soul, is inherent in many heroes of Leskov's works. An example of this sacrificial love is often the center or fulcrum of the works of Nikolai Semyonovich. Arguing, analyzing, the author draws conclusions and leads the reader to an understanding of the depth and beauty of this truly Christian quality.

In the story "The Enchanted Wanderer", our hero, who has been mentioned more than once in other topics, is also characterized by sacrifice and the highest nobility. He sacrifices years of his freedom for the redemption of the soul of his beloved Grushenka. Ivan Flyagin goes to the soldiers instead of someone else's son. “I took pity on the old people and said:“ I would go for you like that, without pay, but I don’t have any papers. And they say: “This is nothing: that is our business; and you just call yourself, like our son, Peter Serdyukov.

Well, I answer, I don't care. I will pray to my angel Ivan the Forerunner, and I can be called in every possible way, as you please. And they took me to another city, and handed me over there instead of my son as a recruit. I have now put the money that I took from them, twenty-five rubles, into a poor monastery - a contribution for Grushin's soul.

Isn't this sacrificing oneself for the sake of saving the departed soul of a beloved girl and for the sake of the only son of the elderly - parents, a manifestation of a truly Christian spirit?

In Tales of God's People, the writer often shows us hearts full of love for our neighbor, love that does not know itself, ready to sacrifice everything.

In the story "Buffoon Pamphalon" the main character sacrifices himself to save the children of Magna, whom they wanted to castrate. “Having put on clean clothes, I wanted to go to the former monk Ammun, who was engaged in all sorts of things, and enslave myself to him for a lifetime, just to immediately take the money and give it to ransom the children of Magna from the eunuch,” says Pamphalon. To give one's life for one's friends does not mean only giving one's life. The Savior speaks not only of death for his neighbor. Sacrificing yourself for your neighbor is not only the willingness to give your life, but also the determination to give for him the most precious thing that you have. Not to regret for the sake of saving one's neighbor one's condition, one's position, one's freedom, also means - "to lay down one's life for one's friends." Sacrifice for the sake of saving one's neighbor not only from death, but also from misfortune - this is the true love that Christ spoke about, and there is no more that love.

The story of N.S. Leskov “Beautiful Aza” is perhaps the most striking example of sacrifice. A kind orphan girl, having become wealthy, gave up everything she had for the sake of saving a stranger from suicide, and his daughter Io from reproach. Did Asa know these people? The most striking thing is that she saw a stranger in her garden for the first time when he tried to commit suicide so that his daughter would not become the lender's mistress. Aza did not think long and sold all her fortune in order to repay this stranger's debt. Is this not a feat?! Is this not true selflessness? How lofty and how beautiful is the soul of this girl! The author himself calls Azu beautiful. She laid down her life for her neighbor. She did not think about her own good, but about the good of others. Her heart was ready to receive Christ. Her heart was pleased to choose God Himself as an abode. Truly, “Therefore I say to you, her many sins are forgiven, because she loved much” (Luke 7:47). "But love covers many sins, and whitens purple spots, like a wave on a lamb ...".

A worthy example of high morality and sacrificial love is Alexandra Ivanovna Sintyanina and Andrey Podozerov from the novel "On the Knives". Alexandra Ivanovna married an unloved man and was faithful to him until the end of his days. This man turned out to be no longer the young General Sintyanin, who was notorious among the people at that time. the following is said about him in the novel: “This general, one might say, had two wives, only the first of them, obviously, in mistresses, and the second as a lawful wife. For several years after his arrival in the city of Sintyanin, he lived with Elvira Karlovna, whom he made with him as a clerk and raised her little daughter Flora. Flora was not the daughter of a general by blood, but by position she was, since the general supported her and her mother Elvira Karlovna. When Flora, brought up by him in daughters, grew up, Sintyanin, to everyone's surprise and indignation, married her. Soon Elvira Karlovna, who always cried, as they said, was gone. A month later, Flora also quietly died a mysterious death. In the hands of the general was his daughter from Flora, the deaf-mute Vera. Such a strange and frightening coincidence of the two deaths of the general's wives - mother and daughter could not but arouse fear and suspicion of the personality of General Xingtianin. The people called him Bluebeard. His house was always closed to everyone.”

The events described are terrible and sad. And the meek, pious girl Alexandra Ivanovna married this man without hesitation. An irreparable mistake, as people thought then? Was it really a mistake? Or maybe Sasha married the general because of his connections and good salary? No! High sacrificial love for neighbors is revealed in her confessional letter: “Rotating in a circle of anxious and impartial people, Vislinev (then still Sasha’s fiancé - author) got into a story that was then called political, although I am convinced that it should not have been called that, because it was nothing more than childish stupidity both in design and in methods of implementation.

Iosaf Vislinev was taken and a most audacious plan was found in his papers, for which the author, in fairness, could have been put, if not in a madhouse, then in a straitjacket, but, worst of all, this plan had a long list of people who had imprudence trust my frivolous fiancé.

He did not die alone, but betrayed with him other young people like him, in whom the best hopes of unfortunate fathers, mothers, sisters and brides like me perished.

My whole life appeared before me, as it were, in one cup, which I had to either carefully carry and drink in the right place, or spill it along the weedy path. (I have always believed and believe in God simply as the church commands, and I bless Providence for this faith). But an inner voice (I cannot think otherwise), from the lips of my father, told me the path I had to follow in order to somehow alleviate the fate of the one whom I still felt sorry for.

My father blessed me to suffer for the sake of delivering the unfortunate, given by my fiancé. “If you pity him, pity them; if you are a woman and a Christian, go save them, and I ... will not hold you back: I myself, with my old hands, bless you, and hide it, and then God will bless you.

He painted me a picture of the disasters and despair of the families of those whom Vislenev destroyed, and this picture, in all its horror, was imprinted with fiery features in my soul; my heart was filled with a constricting pity, such as I had never felt for anyone before this moment, pity before which I myself and my own life were not worth any attention in my eyes, and the thirst for work, the thirst for the salvation of these people began to boil in my soul with such the strength that for a whole day I could not have any other thoughts, except for one: to save people for their own sake, for the sake of those to whom they are dear, and for the sake of him, whose conscience will someday be awakened to a difficult answer. In my soul I felt God; I had to go to save them, strangers to me by conviction and completely unknown to me; This seemed to me to be my calling. I have already said that General Sintyanin, my current husband, on whom everything depended, or at least a lot for these unfortunate people, was looking for my hand ... The general did not know my soul, and I understood that I inspired him against my will only one passion. It was terrible, but I decided to use it to accomplish my feat.

Any person who reads this confession will appreciate the high beauty of the soul of this girl, her priceless feat of love for her neighbors, those neighbors who are unworthy of such a feat. She put her whole life, her girlish beauty, her happiness on the altar of love in order to make others happy. She saved the lives of people who, out of their naive credulity and frivolity, were carried away by the new revolutionary doctrine. Her sensitive soul could not even bear the thought that these people would be unhappy. She, like the beautiful Aza, fulfilled the great commandment of Christ.

It is worth dwelling on the story of Andrei Podozerov. Andrei Ivanovich Podozyorov married Larisa Platonovna Visleneva out of deepest pity for her and Christian compassion. Larisa herself with tears begged him to take her as his wife. She was in a desperate situation, in a fallen state, as she had previously had an extramarital affair. In his philanthropy, Andrei took her as his wife, but after a while he saw how it began to weigh on his wife, who still passionately loved her seducer. Andrei breaks up with Larisa, lets her go, does not forcibly keep her near him. After all, there is also a saying “You can’t be forced to be nice.” By covering her sin, he gave the “freedom” that this reckless woman longed for. His feat is that he took all the blame on himself, dooming himself both to condemnation by society and to celibacy.

His answer to Sintyatin is striking: “I want my wife to get the right to divorce me, and I am ready to take the blame.

• - But then you will be doomed to celibacy.
• - What is it? So much the better: I became convinced that I was not at all capable of family life.
• “You are a most noble person,” Xintyanin answered him, shaking his hand.

Let us remember that the Lord also loves a person so much that, first of all, he gave him a priceless gift - freedom. God does not force the will of a person, does not force him to love Himself, but simply waits, and His patience has no end. The Lord is waiting and calling us to Himself, knocking on our hearts: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me” (Rev. 3 :20).

It should be noted that the "Apology of the Christian Life" in the work is understood not only specifically on the example of the actions of Leskov's heroes, but also in a broader sense. As noted earlier, apology is the writer's affirmation of Christian virtues through his works in the souls of the readers who read these works. But N.S. Leskov not only calls for a virtuous life, elevating it, but also encourages to delve into the understanding of faith and the essence of life in Christ. He makes us look inside ourselves, teaches us to see and hear God both with the eyes of our soul and with bodily eyes through the destinies of people, through the life of His creation - through nature. The writer writes not only about kind and righteous people who live according to their conscience, although, of course, he puts this at the forefront. He also writes about human passions, sins and infirmities. He can not be called a good storyteller at all. Leskov is a realist, and his reality is sometimes cruel. His contemporary fully recognized the world and the reality in which he lived, sometimes with pictures of revelry, drunkenness and robbery. But still, first of all, Leskov is a preacher writer, and he preached light and goodness, life according to the commandments of God, and wrote about the dark sides of life in order to show all their perniciousness and abomination. But good in his works always conquers evil, "in order to return the hearts of fathers to children, and the rebellious way of thinking of the righteous." (Luke 1:17).

Let us dwell on these issues in particular, namely, on topics that show the victory of good over evil, the sad consequences of evil and all its impurity, the denunciation of evil and its failure.

Theme "About the mad rich man." In a number of works, Leskov gives examples of the lives of heroes who had a passion for the love of money and were defeated by this passion. To what sufferings and sorrows has this passion led them and their neighbors, how dangerous for the human soul is not even possession, but the very desire for wealth. Our Lord Jesus Christ warned His disciples saying: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:24). The Savior also says in the Sermon on the Mount to the people: “You cannot serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24). And the prophet David in the Psalter exclaims: “Wealth, if it flows, do not add heart” (Ps. 61:11).

Leskov vividly shows this in his works, thereby warning us against this fire that scorches the soul.

In the story “The Lion of Elder Gerasim,” Leskov shows the attitude of a humble desert-lover to wealth. “My lion has a bad mind,” the old man answered, smiling, “he brought me something that I don’t need at all! On these camels goods of great value. It's fire!" This shows how the pure soul of the old man is afraid of wealth as a sin; how she runs away from him, knowing what the possession of this wealth, this fire leads to.

But is all wealth so detrimental to a person? No. It is not money in itself that destroys the soul, but the unwise use of it, clinging to it and serving it. After all, if we take many Old Testament righteous people, such as the patriarch Abraham and David the King, we can see that some of them possessed a great treasure. Abraham had many camels and lands and at the same time kept his soul in holiness and purity with chastity. But only those who seek wealth for the sake of wealth itself ruin their souls.

Look, for example, what happened to the heroes of the novel "On the Knives", who crave only money and, moreover, other people's money. What did they come to, what did this pernicious passion bring them to? They went mad and in their madness committed several murders and ruined the lives of their neighbors, thus achieving nothing as a result. These persons include Glafira Vasilievna Bodrostina, who decided to kill her own husband only in order to take possession of all his fortune and be free. Gordanov Pavel Nikolaevich, a proud and arrogant person, also participated in the plan to kill Mikhail Andreevich Bodrostin and his "friend" Iosaf Vislinev, who later went mad. What served the desire to own wealth, going over the heads of others? What is the reason for enriching someone else's wealth by killing? First of all, it is envy. And even such imperceptible smallest details of the novel speak about it, what can be seen from the meetings and conversations of the above-mentioned people. “While this hostile genius, with a face of an even pink color and with red hair folded at the temples into two bowlers, went to report to Tikhon Larionovich about the arrival of a guest, Gordanov looked around at a number of rooms that opened from the front, and thought: “however, this one is completely savvy . He will no longer have to lament and say: “Hello, helpless old age, burn out, useless life!” But there is nothing to be afraid of this and me - no, my plan is brilliant; my calculation is correct, and if there is only something to cling to and something to spread my wings on, I will not amuse myself with this petty-bourgeois situation, - I will begin to count rubles not in hundreds of thousands, but in millions ... millions ... and I will go, ascend, trample ... and ... " .

As can be clearly seen from the quote, the hope for wealth, the vision in it of the meaning of life and happiness. A person relies on it completely as a source of inexhaustible blessings, not even remembering God, His providence. This man is unfortunate!

“Pavel Nikolaevich Gordanov did not lie in the least to himself or to people that he had an original and correct plan for quick and enormous enrichment. You just need to finish off the old man, and quit, and then marry his widow and own both herself and her fortune.

In his work “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District”, the writer tells about the heroine of this work, the merchant’s wife Katerina Lvovna. Not only did this cruel woman, overcome by passion, take the life of her father-in-law and husband, she also killed the innocent nephew of her father-in-law because of a thirst for capital and a luxurious life.

“They write from Liven to the mayor that Boris Timofeevich did not trade with all his capital, which was more than his own money, he had the money of his young nephew, Fyodor Zakharov Lyamin, in circulation, and that this matter should be sorted out and not given into the hands of one Katerina Lvovna.

“At that moment, Fedya cried out furiously: he saw the pale, barefoot Sergei coming in.

Katerina Lvovna seized the mouth of the frightened child, open in horror, with her palm and shouted: “Come on, hurry up; keep it straight, so as not to beat!

Sergei took Fedya by the legs and arms, and Katerina Lvovna, with one movement, covered the sufferer's childish face with a large downy pillow and herself leaned on it with her strong, elastic breasts.

For about four minutes there was grave silence in the room. "It's over," whispered Katerina Lvovna.

This desire for money is so terrible that this woman did not spare even a child in order to enrich herself.

As previously stated, Leskov's evil is always punishable. “The Lord cannot be mocked,” as the popular proverb says. One holy father said that God takes away a person's life if a person is either ready for a heavenly life in the Kingdom of Heaven, or vice versa, there is no longer any hope for salvation and his soul has already died. So, speaking of this, you can see in the same novel "On the Knives" how the criminal and murderer Gordanov suddenly dies from poisoning. This death on the sly is worthy of the deeds of such a person. The Lord punishes evil and rewards according to merit, not only in eternal life, but also in temporal life. Jesus Christ said: “Judge not, lest you be judged, for by what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with what measure you use, it will be measured to you again” (Matthew 7:1-2). What do these words of the Lord mean? About just retribution, but retribution can already be made in this life. And many such cases and examples. From whom evil comes, to that it returns, if the soul of the one from whom this evil came did not repent. This happened to Pavel Gordanov even before his death. As he did with Vislenev, having sold him to the petty bourgeois Alina, so he himself found himself in the same position, "sold" to Glafira Bodrostina.

“Gordanov dressed up and, standing behind her with a travel bag over his shoulder, he looked at her dryly and sternly. Glafira could see all this in the mirror, and she asked him:

• - What are you thinking about?
• - I think about where other women have that feminine sensitivity that poets talk about?
• - And some women cherish it.
• - Are they taking care of it? um! Who are they saving it for?
• - For the elite.
• - For several?
• - Yes, a little. After all, you and many others have taught women that every exclusive attachment enslaves freedom, and who is a great friend of freedom if not we, the unfortunate creatures you have enslaved? Let's go, however: our things have already been taken.

And with that she went to the door.

Running down to the first terrace of the stairs, she half-turned to him and said with a smile: “Whatever measure a man measures to another, such a measure will be measured to him!” - and ran again.

And just as Vislinev, the most unfortunate victim of Gordanov, could not get out of his debts to his wife, Gordanov himself soon found himself in debt. God's retribution was not long in coming for such a terrible sin.

“Alina looked at him from head to toe with a cold, murderous look and silently went into another apartment and locked the door behind her. Gordanov also turned and left, robbed, humiliated and abandoned.

Difficult days came for Pavel Nikolayevich, days he had not known for a long time, and days that no one else could have endured with the firmness and calmness with which Gordanov endured them. The situation of Pavel Nikolaevich was truly tragic; he not only lost his fortune and was far thrown away from the realization of his most cherished dream, he remained indebted to various persons.

Also, God's punishment befell Glafira Bodrostin - the main criminal in the murder of her husband.

“Something strange happened to her: she was afraid to see a dead husband, she was afraid not with superstitious fear, with which a dead man scares away a simple-hearted person from himself, but with fear of an almost conscious and irresistible natural danger. Something stuck to her against her will, from which she could not get rid of. At first this amused and occupied her, then it began to annoy and confuse her, and finally even to frighten her for minutes. It justified the words of Albert the Great that there is no person in the world who is completely inaccessible to the fear of the supernatural.

She believed that the villainy to which she aspired would not go unpunished to her, according to some same irresistible law, according to which, for example, she uncontrollably committed this villainy, having lost the desire to complete it.

From the last quotation, one can clearly see what property evil has. Glafira has completed her villainy, no longer even though it. Evil, like any passion, has the ability to take over the will of a person and enslave him to himself, which happened to Glafira. She was no longer able to stop herself, as her will was already paralyzed. And what is more terrible is evil, that if it is not abandoned in time, then it will gain its momentum with new and new force. It becomes already a passion, from which it is most difficult to get rid of. The desire to get rich and be independent led Glafira to the fact that she could no longer not want this. She, as a slave of her passion, was already subordinate to her, coming up with more and more steps of the most daring plan to get rid of the world, both her husband and all the unwanted people who prevented her from achieving her goal. Yes, she, perhaps, did not want other deaths and victims of this plan, such as, for example, the spiritualist Svetozar Vodopyanov, Visleneva's sister Larisa, the nephew of her husband Külewein; but her distraught servants Gordanov and Vislenev did it. While serving Glafira, they also served their own selfish interests. Gordanov - the desire to get rich, Vislenev - the desire to possess Bodrostina and the whole fortune. But ... this is a small digression.

God's punishment to Glafira also consisted in the fact that she ended up by involuntarily becoming the wife of her blackmailing servant Ropshin. Subsequently, this Ropshin blackmailed her for the rest of her life with Bodrostin's will, which was replaced by the order of Glafira herself, and almost did not give her any money, which she so greedily aspired to all the time.

In the story "The Villain of Ascalon" the author punishes evil with justice. Yes, and how else? After all, good always triumphs over evil. The Lord said, “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay” (Rom. 12:19). And the vengeance of the Lord took place already in this life to cruel sinners and voluptuaries. For the cruel treatment of the prisoners of the Ascalon dungeon, the guards of this dungeon and the judge were punished by God. For these guards of Tivurtiy and Ravvul kept both innocent prisoners and Christians in difficult conditions for a person: they did not give them food and did not take care of them. Moreover, all the above-mentioned persons put pressure on the meek, chaste Tenia, trying to deprive her of purity, and mocked her husband Falaley.

“Listening to Tenia’s story, both robbers thought about it and then said: “We will avenge you, we are two brothers and both robbers, Tiburty has depleted us both.”

Tenia answered them that she does not want revenge, and if they feel sorry for her, then she asks them to take her to the cemetery and help find the grave from which the prophetic skull protrudes.

But God Himself took revenge on the villains for their evil deeds. “The extremely strong villain Anastas hit his shackles on the heads of Tivurtius and Ravvula so that they fell, and he squeezed them and pushed them into the leprous pit. And Tiburty and Ravvula screamed, and Anastas threatened to kill them if they climbed back. “Anastas recognized them and, spitting on Milia’s red toga, shouted so loudly that everyone could hear: “You are the most fierce villain of Ascalon!” And when he shouted this, two unknown people broke through the crowd, both of them were naked, but with knives at their hips, and in the midst of general confusion, they rushed at Eulogius and Milia, and stabbed them to death in front of everyone ... ".

In her chilling story “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District”, Katerina Lvovna, the murderer of her father-in-law, husband and child, was severely punished by the fact that her lover Sergei not only cheated on her, but beat her half to death with all the prisoners. Sergei, for whose sake she took the life of her father-in-law Boris Timofeevich and her husband Zinovy ​​Borisych, turned away from her with contempt and began to mock her in every possible way when they were already at the stage with him. And her proud, zealous heart was not humbled by this God's admonition. As the psalmist David said: “The Lord punishes me, but he will not put me to death” (Ps. 117:18). So here she still had time to repent, but she did not want to.

The author through this story shows us that evil in this life is certainly punished and everything secret becomes clear. And the Lord enlightened Katerina Lvovna, but the property of passion is such that it is often impossible to stop it, since the person himself wants to servility to her, which we saw in the case of Glafira Bodrostina. “Katerina Lvovna was trembling. Her wandering gaze focused and became wild. Hands once or twice, it is not known where, stretched out into space and fell again. Another minute, and she suddenly swayed all over, never taking her eyes off the dark wave, bent down, grabbed Sonetka by the legs, and in one fell swoop flung herself over the side of the ferry with her.

But at the same time, from another wave, Katerina Lvovna rose almost to her waist above the water, rushed at Sonetka, like a strong pike at a soft-finned raft, and both no longer appeared.

Now I want to touch on an equally important topic, the topic of conscience. Everyone has a conscience, and it lives in the soul of even the most sinful person. It is not by chance that Nikolai Semyonovich shows us goodness in his negative characters, or rather, grains of goodness. For what? The author teaches us about love, about which our Lord Jesus Christ speaks: “But I say to you: love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven” (Matt. 5). ; 44-45). What do these words of Christ tell us? They tell us about love, true love for our neighbor, regardless of the faces. Without this love for enemies, man cannot be perfect, says Christ. He teaches us to love everyone: the good and the bad, the righteous and the unrighteous, because all are children of God, created in the image and likeness of God. Because love corrects, love cleanses, makes friends out of enemies; because the demons that teach enemies and foes to attack us are scorched by this love of ours like fire. And the writer teaches us the same love for all his characters. He shows the light even in the "darkest" of his characters. He wants us to see the image of God in the sinner and not turn away from him, but pity him and sympathize with him. The writer does not teach us to hate. To do this, so that we can distinguish, separate sin from the person himself, from his soul, Leskov shows us the conscience of even the most dead people in his works. And conscience is the voice of God in the human soul. Thus, the Lord calls every person to salvation, He cares about the soul of everyone. Here you can see the inexpressible mercy of God to the perishing sheep, but not everyone hears the voice of God...

To begin with, let's take the familiar novel "On the Knives" already familiar to us. Here, not only the actions of certain individuals, but in this situation of negative heroes, as well as their feelings, thoughts, experiences, conscience were analyzed. As in the palm of your hand you can see every person in the works of Leskov, all the qualities of his soul. It reveals the personality of each. “Gordanov was convinced that he was handing Vislenev into such a tight rein that even after that, he himself, Gordanov, became familiar with a feeling close to compassion when he looked at Vislinev, who was vigorous and did not know tiredness.” “He proved to Kishensky that his actions with Vislenev exceeded every measure of human meanness; that the patience of their victim is obviously sawn through, that it is imprudent and stupid to drive a person to despair. Sometimes in the soul of Pavel Nikolaevich Gordanov compassion arose for Vislenev, whom he sold into slavery to Alina. And this, of course, his conscience spoke in him; he protected him from his tormentors.

At the end of this novel, at the end of this story, when Gordanov was dying, he wept bitterly. “But he remembered his illness only when he untied his hand and was horrified: around a small injection, in the palm of his hand, there was a gaping dark border, like a bank of aspidic silver. "It just wasn't enough"! - whispered, growing cold, Gordanov, and, clutching his head, he fell completely dressed in bed and buried his head in the pillows, sobbing for the first time since he began to remember himself. Here you can see how the writer regrets Gordanov - a man who has done a lot of evil in his life, but is still capable of tears. Yes… a person with a dead soul would not cry… Yes, these are not tears of remorse for what they have done, but tears of self-pity, but nevertheless, this suggests that there is something good in every person. God gives this good to a person, calls him through his conscience, turning him away from the path of the unrighteous. The writer regretted it... so we should regret it too.

Standing apart in this topic is the "Legend of the conscientious Daniel." This legend tells us that the young man Danila once lived in the hermitage of the desert together with hermits. But once he was captured by the barbarians and killed one of them there. After this murder, the young man was tormented all his life and could not forgive himself for his sin. Now we will see what meaning the author put into his story and what he wanted to show us through it. Throughout the story, the author shows us the pangs of conscience of a young man. Danila's life was aimless due to the fact that Danila himself subjected himself to punishment for this sin, he spent almost all his life in prison of his own free will.

This legend, although small in content, requires a serious analysis of the life of this man. The main sin of Danila was not the murder of a barbarian, but the trial of himself. The Lord is the lord and judge of all, but Danila "managed without God." At the end of the story, the writer shows us the voice of God to Danila, who tells him to “look not so high, but lower, and, having done evil, do not waste time and energy on talking, but should have done the deed.” Here the author deals with the topic of human conscience and what it is. This subtle, deep, controversial topic is revealed by Leskov in its entirety in this legend. Conscience is the voice of God in a person, and this is undoubtedly, but not everyone is able to hear it. To be more precise, everyone can hear his conscience, but only a person with a pure soul, who has the gift of prudence, can understand it. Danila did not reason for a long time: since he did evil, he must suffer punishment, no matter what. For him, God is the punishing Judge, and not the merciful Father, who forgives the children of His sinners. This misperception of God, this ruthless cruelty to oneself, this attachment to the letter of the law made Danila blind to love for God and people. The Lord calls us to hate sin, not ourselves! But Danila hated himself even then, when God had long forgiven him for his murder. All the patriarchs acquitted him and did not impute it to him as a sin. But stubborn resistance to the words of everyone, and once again of all the patriarchs, led him to even greater alienation from God. What was he doing? He's been self-deprecating all this time! All my life, instead of doing good deeds. But the Lord is love, and forgives those who repent. Danila forgot about it, but the Lord did not leave him and did not let him perish in his spiritual madness. “I am your friend because I haunt you, and you are your enemy because you are looking to forget me. Without me, you could be left with a seduction that would destroy you, ”the Lord says to him in the voice of an Ethiopian in his conscience. Here, in these words, the author reveals to us one more property of conscience. Conscience was given to man so that he would not be exalted. Having committed a sin, especially a serious one, a person is tormented. But how does it hurt? He repents of sin, understands what evil he has done, then God immediately forgives and erases his sin. But the memory of a person about this sin, if it is especially heavy, remains in a person all his life. For what? So that a person does not exalt himself with his righteousness and remember that he is a sinner and cannot forget that he is a sinner and does not boast, because only a humble heart is pleasing to God.

This legend shows us what a deep and sensitive heart the writer had, what an exalted and wise soul he had, how reasonable and skillful he was in spiritual life. Through his creations we also learn wisdom, and our soul rises. With this legend, the writer also tells us that we should not strive to become perfect in an instant, as both Danila and the hermit Hermias strived in the work “Buffoon Pamphalon”. It is beyond the power of man, and it is impossible for man to consider himself perfect. The Lord calls us, saying, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). This is a call of Christ to action, to the unceasing creation of virtues and life according to the commandments of God, but not to doubt, which Hermias and Danila came to a dead end. Hermias had open conceit, for he believed that there was not a single righteous person left on earth besides him. Danila, on the contrary, had a hidden conceit, but it was, otherwise, where is the humble awareness of oneself as a sinner and the creation of good deeds?! What one had, the other lacked humility.

Now let's touch on and reveal the topic "External piety." I would like to say that Nikolai Semyonovich Leskov pays the most attention to this topic in his works. As previously mentioned, the writer tries to show the reader not the external form, first of all, but the inner spiritual content. The conflict between the outer world of man and the inner world is clearly outlined in his creations. Explaining better, we can say that this confrontation - antithesis, when the external does not correspond to the internal, is deliberately found in every story by Leskov. Pharisaism, so often found in the Gospel, is just as common in our life and in the times and times of the writer, as can be seen in his works. The writer shows us all the self-interest and unrighteousness of the Pharisees. And showing us his unsightly and dark essence, he fights with him throughout all his works and his whole life. For hypocrisy - outward piety - is hypocrisy, denying the truth of God. The writer reveals to us how sometimes this sin is hidden in the human soul and how it is then revealed at a “convenient moment”. When a person forgets God, and most of all forgets about his soul, about goodness and compassion, living only in the letter, and not in the spirit, then his heart also hardens to the suffering of others. According to the Lord's word, this becomes "neither cold nor hot" (Rev. 3:15).

Now we can begin with a description of the life of our heroes that surrounded them; the society and customs of the time in which they existed, as well as those persons who were distinguished by external piety, but inside were "the essence of ravenous wolves" (Matt. 7:15). And you will see that in every story, in every story of Leskov, there is hypocrisy. And once again, we can say that this is no coincidence. Thus, the author preaches, teaches us not to be wolves in sheep's clothing, not to be hostages of the letter, cold-hearted. For this we see all the impurity of hypocrisy, in order to hate lawlessness again and again and love the truth. And again, here Leskov, voluntarily or involuntarily, imitates Christ, fighting, like He, with the rooted vice of hypocrisy. Our Lord Jesus Christ constantly denounced the scribes and teachers of the law of Israel in their greed, lies and hardness of heart, saying: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, that you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, while inside they are full of theft and unrighteousness. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, who are like painted tombs, which look beautiful on the outside, but inside are full of the bones of the dead and all kinds of uncleanness. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you eat the houses of widows and hypocritically pray for a long time: for this you will receive the greater condemnation” (Matthew 23:25, 27, 14). So the works of Leskov are, as it were, gospel stories and parables, often simple in their content, but deep in their meaning.

In the very first work from the collection of legends “On God's People” in “the first Christians”, the reader comes face to face with the vice described above, both among Christians and among other faiths. Here the theme of faith is already touched upon, the theme of the spiritual state of a person who lives according to his faith and does not live. This is "The Tale of Fedor the Christian and his friend Abram the Jew." This story tells us that before the official separation of faiths, all people of different religions lived together and in harmony. Also, the parents of Abram, Jews and the parents of Theodore, Christians - housemates loved and respected each other very much. But when in Constantinople the Christian faith was declared the main of all faiths, and people of different faiths were forbidden to communicate with each other and they were told to distribute their children to the corresponding religion of each school, then everyone quarreled.

It would seem that such a simple and clear picture: the cause led to the effect. Christians began to consider themselves better than others once their faith is now the main one, and they began to despise other faiths. Others followed suit. As a result, each faith began to consider itself better than the other, better than everyone else. Why did it all happen? What is the mystery here? Christians began to consider themselves better... Here you can clearly see how human pride worked. And its logic is simple: since we were elected the main ones, it means that we are the best of all, and the others are the worst. And just as the presence of passion in people does not depend on the faith that people profess, it also has the property of being transmitted to others. This is where the unfortunate chain came from. “And the evil is that each of the people considers one of his faiths to be the best and the most true, and defames others without good reasoning,” answered the children's teacher Panfil. And this human pride here can only be called hypocrisy.

What is this small but reasonable story about? What did the writer want to show them to us? Why, after all, the parents of both sons died in a quarrel with each other, but their children did not? Let's start with the last one. The Apostle Paul said: “Love does not exalt itself, does not pride itself, does not seek its own…” (1 Cor. 13:4-5). And these wise words about love are written in the heart of each of us: both in the heart of a Christian and in the heart of a pagan. A truly loving person knows them, because the one who loves is not proud, does not seek his own. So it has always been, is and will be, because the properties of love are always the same - love is sacrificial, first of all. But only those who want it, those who are pure in heart, who prefer the truth to lies, cherish it in themselves, cherish it in themselves. This is the love for neighbors that Jesus Christ constantly tells us about: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:39). It turns out that the parents of Theodore and Abram did not really love each other, but only respected, until the matter touched the spiritual world of each, their faith. It was outer love. Also, the rest, those who considered their faith to be the best, and denigrated others, also did not love their neighbors. Their faith was external, not internal, because everyone should love and respect others according to faith, no matter what faith he may contain. This is external piety: to be a friend only to those who are by faith.

The young men Abram and Theodore learned enmity from their own parents, from whom they once learned friendship with each other. Their families were always role models for them, so the children, like their fathers, hated each other. But what happened all the same then, what prompted them to reconcile and never be at enmity again? Theodore saved Abram from being beaten by Christians. Why did he do it and not pass by? Because Theodore loved Abram, he took pity on him, seeing a clear injustice. Theodore was devoted to Christ in his heart. He said: "Christ did not allow us to hate anyone, but commanded us to love everyone." Theodore was a real, and not external, Christian in the depths of his soul, and this case showed this.

Leskov tells us with this story that the main thing is not in which faith which of us was born and is, but the main thing is to always remain a person with a capital letter of this word. After all, the Lord of each of us at His Last Judgment will not ask what kind of faith someone held, but will ask us if we fed Him when He was hungry? Did you drink when you were thirsty? Did you clothe him when he was naked? (Matthew 25:34)

In At the End of the World, we also encounter the external faith of the "external" preachers. The Lord admonishes the hero of our story - one bishop by distribution, who received his cathedra in Siberia, really at the end of the world. And God admonishes him, placing him in conditions between life and death, teaching him a lesson for life. “Vladyka kept advocating how to convert the pagan tribes of Siberia to the Christian faith, and he put concern about this in the first place. And Vladyka wanted the whole thing to be done with haste as soon as possible. It is necessary to deal with business, and not play the fool; Moreover, the number of baptized Gentiles should also be reflected in the documents and presented to the higher authorities, and the larger the number, the better, ”the active bishop reasoned.

“Of course, I didn’t listen to Kyriakos, but on the contrary, I wrote to the neighboring bishop to give me his Zyryan for support. Zyryanin was sent to me. I immediately sent him to the steppe, and two weeks later I already had joyful news from him: he informed me that he was baptizing the people on all sides. He was afraid of one thing: would he get the crosses, which he took with him a very hefty box?

So, I think, when I finally got myself a real master for this case! And he was very happy about it, and how glad! Hurry up somehow to finish in one direction, and when a clever baptizer is caught, so let the mediocre baptize everything, maybe people will become calmer.

It seems that, at first glance, everything is going well and as well as possible. But this is only at first glance. There is an action, and a good action, such a successful one - Zyrian Peter and missionaries like him baptize people, convert them to the Christian faith. But every action must have its own result. What was the result of this hasty baptism of the Gentiles? The Lord Jesus Christ said: “By their fruits you will know them” (Matthew 7:20); “Every tree is known by its fruit” (Luke 6:44). And the result was sad. “I buried Kyriak under a block of earth on the banks of a frozen stream and immediately learned from the savages the vile news that my successful Zyrian baptized ... it’s a shame to say - with a treat, simply - with vodka. It covered the whole thing with shame in my eyes, and I did not want to see and hear about this baptist. But for a holy deed that cannot be done somehow in vanity, it is better not to touch at all - “do not give madness to God.” Yes, and the savage Christian, given to the companion in the desert Kyriakos, left the latter to die of starvation, having eaten the Holy Gifts himself, he fled to save his life. This was none other than the same "Christian" baptized by the Zyryan preacher. He had no faith, and not only faith, but also no conscience. The same savage that was with Vladyka saved his life. Christ said that: “A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit” (Matt. 7:18); so the “external faith” of the “external preachers” also bore the corresponding fruit, for the goal of this Zyrian and these missionaries was “not to plant a good seed of faith in the hearts of savages, but to increase the number of those who were baptized, and receive a reward for that. "Salon Christhood" the bishop calls this external faith.

“The abomination of desolation stood in the holy places where the fonts of these greyhound baptizers were, and ... everything was confused in this - the mind, and the heart, and the concepts of people, and I am a thin bishop, I could not do anything with it, and a good one will do nothing until ... until, so to speak, we will seriously engage in faith, and not boast of it like a Pharisee, for a blazir.

The story "The Sealed Angel" tells us about the Old Believer faith and its jealous ones, who opposed the Orthodox faith. In this story, the writer shows the essence of the Old Believer faith and its difference from the Orthodox. He shows this quite well, setting out in detail in the actions, words and thoughts of her followers the attitude towards the shrine. Moreover, to which shrine: to the images, and especially to the image of the Guardian Angel. And what can we see in this relation of them to the images that the writer shows us through that? In this story we see the most zealous attitude to icons, to the texts of prayers and books. And what came out of this jealousy not according to reason? From this external, more than internal piety, boasting of its ritualism. The Lord enlightened those who had gone astray with their own icon, over which they trembled, and led them into the courtyard of His pasture. “I also have other sheep that are not of this fold, and them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice, and there will be one flock and one Shepherd” (John 10:16). “Meanwhile, such grief awaited us, and it was arranged for us, as we only later understood, not by human cunning, but by the very sight of our guide. He himself desired insults for himself in order to give us a holy comprehend grief and then show us the true path, before which all the paths we have traveled up to this hour were like a dark jungle and without a trace.

So what is the main difference between the Old Believers and Orthodoxy? This is also the difference between the letter and the spirit (2 Cor. 3:6), external piety from internal piety. And the author shows it well in his simple story. This very attitude of the zealots of the old faith to the icon of their Guardian Angel is wrong, if it is not the worship of an idol, then at least it borders on it. The Lord gave us a commandment: "Do not make yourself an idol." After all, the Old Believers, while worshiping the prototype, worship at the same time the image itself (the board, the colors that depict the prototype itself). But they cannot admit this, although, in fact, it turns out that way. For for them the external, which is a rite, is no less and even more important than the internal. This attitude is even evident from the “little things”: “We all gasped and, covering our eyes with our hands, fell on our faces and groaned, as if in torture. And so we cried out that the dark night found us crying and wailing for our sealed angel, and then, in this darkness and silence, on the destroyed shrine of our father, the thought came to us: to keep track of where our keeper would be taken, and we swore to steal it, even with the danger of life, and print it.

If you pay attention to this quote, then, at first glance, you can see deep sorrow here, desperate people who rightly resented the officials who took away the icon from them. But, if you look deeper - into the very reasoning of these unfortunate ones, then we can see that they are ready to do anything to return the icon, they are deprived of their keeper! Isn’t it extreme to expose your life and the fate of everyone to such danger, to go to theft and everything just to return the angel?! After all, who is our guardian if not the Lord God? The Old Believers, however, forgot about it ... For them, if not more, then the same keeper became an angel, or rather, an icon of an angel. Here one can also see their insubordination in the face of what happened, a truly terrible event, although this insubordination has its roots deep into the schism itself. It is hidden by outward piety, by the outward rite of churchliness.

Such a zealous attitude to a thing, in this case to an icon (to wood, paints, the way of writing an icon) among the Old Believers is, as it were, a magical attitude. After all, the icon of the Guardian Angel for them is essentially a talisman that protects them from all sorts of troubles and evils. Attachment to the material more than to the heavenly. “He is dear,” we answer, “to us, because he was written in hard times with a pious hand and consecrated by an ancient priest according to the complete breviary of Peter Mohyla, and now we have neither priests nor that breviary.” "We are sure, sir: this drying oil is strong, like the old Russian faith itself."

And the two companions of the Old Believer were looking for precisely that iconograph Sevastyan, who, in their opinion, possessing the art of ancient art, could write for them the image of an Angel. Others could not, as they believed.

In his story, N.S. Leskov devotes almost a whole chapter to describing the methods of depicting icons by ancient masters-painters. The Old Believer tells in detail about the art of icon painting to the Englishman Yakov Yakovlevich: methods for making paint for painting icons, types of writing itself, methods for applying oil, and what should be the face of the icon itself and other subtleties. Along with this, there is a comparison of the ancient art of the image with the modern, with the writing of the ancient spirit with the spirit of the new today's ungrateful. All this ritualism, all this beauty and elegance of the image to the smallest detail, as it were, obscures the main essence of the icon itself, which is not visible to the Old Believer. After all, the main thing is not the beauty of the image of the prototype, but the prototype itself. This is where tradition comes first. Secondary over the main. The author deliberately shows this to us in this long-winded description of the ancient letter, so that we can see where there is content, and where there is only an outer shell, inside of which there is spiritual emptiness.

“None, they say, secular artists do not have the same art: they have oil paints, and there vapes on the egg are dissolved and tender, in painting the letter is smeared, so that it only naturally shows in the distance, but here the letter is smooth and very close clearly; and a secular artist, I say, cannot be pleased even in the translation of the drawing itself, because they have been studied to represent what is contained in the body of an earthly, life-loving person, and the sacred Russian icon painting depicts a type of celestial face, due to which a material person even has a devout imagination can not.

In the new schools of art, the widespread corruption of feelings is developed and the mind obeys the vanity. The type of high inspiration has been lost, and everything from the earth will take off and breathe earthly passion.

This quote clearly shows the superiority of the Old Believer over the Orthodox. There is pride in their "art", their traditions, their piety.

The Lord wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4). The writer ends his instructive story with the fact that God also enlightened these erring schismatics and brought them to Himself, joined them to His Orthodox Church.

“And we are with you, Uncle Luka! - yes, all in one flock, under one shepherd, like lambs, they crept up, and as soon as they understood what and where our sealed angel was leading us all to.

And for us, it doesn’t matter what ways the Lord will seek a person and from what vessel he will give to drink, if only he would seek and quench his thirst for unanimity with the fatherland.

The theme of external piety is also touched upon by Leskov in the story "The Enchanted Wanderer". The same missionaries, as in the story "At the End of the World" turn out to be only external executors of the law for the same reason of neglect of the spiritual. When the wanderer of this story, Ivan Flyagin, was in a long captivity among the Tatars, one day Russian missionaries came there to teach the Tatars the word of God. Then this wanderer prayed to them for help, but due to their hardness of heart, the missionaries did not hear him and, having completed their "mission", left.

“Both stand in the middle of this rabble and the Tatars teach the word of God.

And what! And what! See! See? How grace works, now it has already touched one of yours, and he turns from Mohammed.

And the Tatars answer that this, they say, does not work: this is your Ivan, he is one of yours, from Russians, only he is living here in captivity with us. The missionaries became very dissatisfied with this. They don’t believe that I am Russian, and I butted in myself: “No,” I say, “I am definitely Russian! Fathers, - I say, - spiritual ones, have mercy, help me out of here! I have been languishing here for the eleventh year in captivity, and you see how mutilated I am, I cannot walk.

However, they did not respect these words of mine in the least and turned away, and let's continue our work again: everyone is preaching. The tormented captive clutched at them like a drowning man at a straw in the hope that his brothers in Christ would help him out, but these, hardened in heart, did not heed his words. For they did not preach the word of God with their hearts, but only with their mouths. Without losing hope, Ivan turns to them for help for the second time. “But what,” they say, “it doesn’t matter, son, where to disappear, and you pray: God has a lot of mercy, maybe He will save you. No, - they answer, - you, child, do not interfere with this. Wherever we go, we don’t quarrel… it doesn’t befit us. But you remember that you are a Christian, and therefore we have nothing to bother about you, your soul, even without us, the gates to paradise are already open, and these will be in darkness if we do not join them, so we must bother for them. And show me the book. After all, they say, you see how many people we have here in this register, it’s all we have joined so many people to our faith!

The Apostle James says: "faith without works is dead" (James 2:17) and "by works faith has been made perfect" (James 2:22). These missionaries had a dead faith - they did not help the one asking them for help and explained this by the fact that where they come - they do not quarrel there. In other words, they do not spoil relations with anyone, so as not to frighten away those who have not yet been baptized. But is their reasoning correct? No. “Every plant that my Heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted” (Matthew 15:13), says Christ. So, these missionaries only outwardly believe in God, but they believe more in themselves, in their own strength, that it is they, and not the Lord, who lead people to faith. Their outward service, self-confidence and boasting were punished by the Lord. Their bodies were torn to pieces by the same Tatars whom they led to the faith. Since a bad tree bears bad fruit (Mt. 7:17), their outward faith gave birth to the same outward faith in the newly baptized. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the author wrote about their cruel death. “For judgment is without mercy to him who has shown no mercy” (James 2:13). For them, only the number of baptized people was important, and not the quality of their faith. This cruel death served their souls as their last lesson, and perhaps it was the expiation of their sin. Further, the author cites the thoughts of the wanderer: "But with the blood he atoned for his sin." He is a missionary who died at the hands of the Tatars. The writer teaches us thereby to pity even the most desperate sinner. Perhaps, tormented by the Tatars, before their death in their souls they brought repentance, but only blood could wash away their sin of mercilessness. This is how terribly the Lord can admonish a sinner when other methods have either been tested or failed to bring the soul to repentance. “God wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4).

In this story, we also come across the “external” form of serving God at the confession of a wanderer to his parish priest, Father Elijah. This can be called looking for examples of hypocrisy in the text, but this is not so, since we ourselves see how Leskov pays attention to this in order to teach us not fake, as here, but sincere faith. He shows us all the emptyness, emptiness and cruelty of the "external" rite, the observance of faith that does not have a spiritual core, the basis of which is Christ. And God is love. At home, Ivan is not accepted and is not understood. “Well, they flogged me in the old way, in a discharge hut, and I come to Father Ilya, and he began to confess me and for three years did not allow me to receive communion ...”. Father Ilya forgot that love is above the law. “Well, you never know,” he says, “what; you waited, but why did you, - he says, - keep Tatars with you instead of wives ... You know, - he says, - what I still graciously do, that I only excommunicate you from communion, and if you were taken as it should according to the rule of the saints father to correct, so it is necessary for you to burn all your clothes while alive, but only you, - he says, - do not be afraid of this, because this is now not allowed under the police law. The author here again and again shows how much the external form: the pectoral cross, priestly clothes to a small extent corresponds to the internal dispensation of a person or does not correspond to it at all.

It should also be noted that we also encounter hypocrisy in the story “Buffoon Pamphalon”, which we repeatedly mention. We see this in the fact that the “pious” friends of poor Magna refused to help her and the buffoon, and severely beat the latter. The society of the people of Damascus perceived these women as one of the most worthy and pious people. For their life before people was pure, but in fact, before their conscience and God, before the unfortunate, they were unclean. Their piety was only visible and covered the impurity of their souls. Just as our Lord Jesus Christ, denouncing the Pharisees, said: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, that you are like painted tombs, which look beautiful on the outside, but inside are full of the bones of the dead and all uncleanness” (Matthew 23:27).

Also in the story “Beautiful Aza”, the Christian community, in which the girl came to be baptized, turned away from her with contempt. Christians, unworthy of being called by this name, did their best to hide their contempt for the harlot and their superiority over her. They tormented her for a long time, not giving her baptism, and tormented her even to death. “The clergy told the bishop, and he ordered to appoint Aza a catechist, who was to explain to her the symbol and all the dogmas of the faith and then certify her knowledge, and then Aza would be baptized.

But Aza did not wait: her impatient desire to receive a Christian name and live with Christians together consumed her; she complained and wept, "and everyone neglected her." And not only this Christian community turned away from her, but also all the people who knew her when Aza became a harlot. Nobody wanted to understand her."

Why does Leskov so often cite examples of hypocrisy among Christians? Isn't he thereby turning people away from the Christian faith? Isn't his preaching an anti-preaching of faith? No. Thus, he shows the reader that Christians are by no means sinless people, but the same people as everyone else. Thus, he destroys the barrier between believers and unbelievers. Why is he doing this? What does he mean by this? What does he preach? On the one hand, if Christians are also subject to passions, like non-Christians, then we can conclude that they are the same as all people, and from this it follows that everyone can become a Christian, that Christianity is available to everyone. For God wants everyone to be saved and to come to the understanding of the Truth (1 Tim. 2:4). Being a Christian is easy, you just have to want to. There is no barrier for everyone. It is this remoteness, even the superiority of believers over unbelievers, that Leskov destroys. This sermon is expressed not directly verbally, but hiddenly, in stories. After all, in his stories he writes about evil and good Christians. I will make a small digression. Unfortunately, in our time there is a condemnation of the priesthood, which lives luxuriously and drives expensive foreign cars. And this is an obstacle for people to come to the temple. We can say that this is a temptation for them. But in most cases, people who condemn priests justify themselves, their laziness. And even if they do not justify, they forget that priests are the same people as you and I. That all are sinners, except God is holy. People are sinners, but the Church is holy. And this is a confusion of concepts, and a misunderstanding that Christians are not saints, but called to holiness, like every single person, and at that time and in our time lives in the minds of many people. So, this is taken for comparison with our time. This is what Leskov is fighting against, this misunderstanding and idealization of Christians by simple unbelievers. Everyone is a sinner, as the writer says, but God loves everyone and calls to Himself. The entrance to the church is open to everyone, but when you come there, you must try to keep the commandments of God.

On the other hand, in addition to this silent sermon of the availability of Christianity for everyone, the author also addresses the Christian readers themselves, warning against temptation. So that we Christians do not plunge our neighbors into temptation, not to be Christians only externally, but to be Christians internally. This is a lesson for all of us Christians. For the Lord said, “Whoever offends one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he was drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matthew 18:6). So that there is no temptation for unbelievers, so that they know that such things exist. Because if they run into that, they might as well leave the church altogether to be ready.

Someone can say that the writer turns readers away from Christianity, when so often one can find examples of external and evil Christians in his works. But how can people thus turn away from the faith, if they see that these false Christians are in fact not Christians, not followers of Christ, but Pharisees? And the Lord Jesus Christ Himself fought with the Pharisees. And even if this example of external Christianity in the stories turns away someone, it is only the one whose heart is not ready to accept the faith, does not want to accept God, or the one whose hour has not yet come. For this writer is a missionary, a writer-preacher, and as in the parable of Christ about the sower, not everyone can accommodate the truth of God, which the writer in his creations is trying to convey to his reader. “A sower went out to sow his seed, and as he sowed, something else fell by the wayside and was trampled on, and the birds of the air pecked at him; and another fell on a stone, and ascending, withered, because it had no moisture; and another fell among the thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked him” (Luke 8:5-7). After all, Leskov's sermon, his works themselves are, as it were, the essence of the seeds of faith, and those who are not ready to accept these seeds will turn away just as people who come to the temple not to find God there turn away. This means that such a person is not ready to accept God with all his heart.

And in the story "The Villain of Ascalon" we are confronted with true and false Christianity. The true Christianity of the converted Falaleus and the false Christianity of the merchants who suspect him of theft, which he did not commit. "Trust me - I'm a Christian, and I can't lie."

“But the merchants, in their turn, answered Falaley that they, too, have now become all Christians, like their emperor, but that this does not change things and that, how much Falaley owes them for goods, they want to receive all this from him.

And the merchants gave their friend Falaley, their shipbuilder, to an experienced and cruel borrower for the right and milking to the fullest extent.

These merchants treated their friend Falaley cruelly - they betrayed him. They exchanged friendship for money, did not want to forgive the debt and did not believe him. Although they considered themselves Christians, in fact they were not. The words of the Lord's Prayer: "and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors," they left without attention. Their outwardly accepted faith for the sake of fashion and as a salutation to the law and the emperor did not change their cold hearts. After all, they accepted the faith not because they wanted to become Christians, not for the sake of God, but for the sake of the emperor. Thus, they justified their hypocrisy by obedience to the law of the earth, and not to the law of heaven. And the justification for themselves for them was that the emperor accepted Christianity, which is why they accepted it, while remaining spiritually blind.

In the same story, we also see the judge, the greedy voluptuary Milia, who came to the city to execute the robber. This Mily distributed donations to Christians from Queen Theodora, but he considered himself a Christian. He helped only his own by faith. “Milius was embarrassed and answered her that he was sorry why she told him that she was a pagan. “Now,” he said, “I cannot give you the help that I wanted to do.” The Lord Jesus Christ said: “And if you love those who love you, what thanks do you have for that? For even sinners love those who love them” (Luke 6:32).

In the Egyptian story "The Mountain" we also find examples of outward piety. For example, as soon as we open this story, we read about the Christian Zeno the goldsmith, who was rejected by his own Christians. “Zeno the goldsmith was a hidden Christian, but the community of Alexandrian Christians did not consider him his own, and he himself kept aloof from it. They considered him to be on the wrong path.

Zeno was a true Christian. So why did the Christian community consider him to be on the wrong path? Is it because they themselves were on this path? Yes, that's why. This is later evident from the story, when many noble Christians of Egypt and the patriarch himself became cowardly, and, having thrown their own, fled. It turns out that Zenon simply blinded their eyes with the light of his righteous life, so they could not bear him. For they did not want to accept the faith so deeply, as Zeno deeply and sincerely accepted it, and therefore rejected it from themselves. Their faith was more external than internal. Zeno was rejected from the community of his Christians just as Christ was rejected by his own. “He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own did not receive him” (John 1:10-11).

Here you can also draw a parallel with Leskov's story "About Theodore the Christian and about his friend Abram the Jew." Theodore, as you remember, was also rejected by his own Christians for a good deed and sincere faith and devotion to Christ, also for the same reason. The Christians of the Alexandrian community revered Zeno as being on the wrong path. The holy fathers say that if a person with an unpurified soul falls into some kind of sin, for example, condemnation, and sins with this, then he begins to consider everyone else guilty of this sin; this is self-justification. So these Christians themselves were on the wrong path. N.S. Leskov shows us how dangerous it is to be called a Christian, but in reality not to be one. Thus the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles.

Now we will consider the work "Musk Ox". What is it about? What did Nikolai Semyonovich want to convey to his readers? The main character of this work, Vasily Petrovich, was nicknamed the Musk Ox by the people around him. Why exactly? What kind of animal is this? This is a mixture, this is a combination of two animals that are opposite in their constitution - a meek sheep and a furious bull. This Musk Ox was a strange person. The author, having described his portrait at the beginning of the work, continues to reveal the features of his character throughout the story. Thus, as if giving us a good study of the soul of our hero and draw a conclusion about this person ourselves. And we can safely say that this story is entirely devoted by Leskov to the topic of external piety that we are analyzing. The personality of this hero is full of apparent contradictions: it is both complex and mysterious and just as simple. And the reader can be like this to the end and would not understand the character of our hero, if not for the bright conclusion of this story. The musk ox hanged himself. With this end of his work, the writer, as it were, strikes the reader and at the same time allows us to understand and see the soul of the hero to the end, while making his own conclusions.

Now let's turn to the Musk Ox himself. What was this person like? It is difficult to even judge him, but one thing is clear: he was a lost man, a man with a high opinion of himself and simply a lazy person. He considered himself a believing person and knowing a lot by faith. And it was his self-conceit, this outward and invented piety that ruined him. A revolutionary and a rebel at heart, in appearance he was defenselessly pathetic and simple. So what was his outward piety? And it manifested itself in him in relation to certain things, phenomena, people in general. “He never showed any of us that he loved anyone; but everyone knew very well that there is no sacrifice that the Musk Ox would not bring for each of his relatives and known. Christ taught us to do good to everyone and even enemies, and not just our own as pagans. Also, Vasily Petrovich called pigs all those with whom he did not agree, which shows us his contemptuous attitude towards the rest.

Reading this story, you feel both dislike and pity for this man. He was not a Pharisee in the truest sense of the word, but he lived like a Pharisee and his convictions were Pharisees. To some extent, this man was also an ascetic: he did not care about clothes, about dwelling, about bed. “The bare-board bed that stood in his apartment never rested his body for long.” At the same time, he was "out of this world" - he went to the cemetery every day in the field. "The eccentricities of Vasily Petrovich taught the entire small circle of his acquaintances not to be surprised at any of his antics." What else can be said about the Musk Ox? He did not find a place for himself, no dwelling, no shelter, no work. What was the meaning of his life? Yes, in nothing, in itself, to put it simply. An immense pride and contempt for others possessed this man. No matter how unambiguously and cruelly it was said, but it is so. Or rather, stubbornness, sometimes quiet and silent.

“Robbers and strangers,” he wrote, “for me, are better than these rich Russians! And everyone is for them, and the hearts burst when you think that this is how it should be, that everyone will be for them. I see something wonderful: I see that he, this Alexander Ivanov, stood in my way in everything before I recognized him.

That's who the enemy of the people is - this kind of well-fed dork, a dork who feeds the erratic need from the grains of his own, so that she does not immediately die and would work for him ...

With my thoughts, the two of us cannot live in the same world together.

What do we see in these words? Envy and offended pride, notorious pride. Envy of the person who took care of him, accepted him, warmed him up and gave him a job. Ingratitude and arrogance are visible in these caustic words of the Musk Ox. For his mind, his philosophy, his truth, himself he opposed to this world. “Don’t turn your legs, and it will be with you, but for us, such musk oxen,” he said, hitting his chest, “this is not enough for us. Heavenly punishment will fall on us if we are satisfied with this. "We are our own, and our own will know us."

Mira, as it is said, he fled. He lived in a monastery, fleeing from the world to "Permian Palestine", fleeing from one job to another. Why did he run the world? Was it the world, were people trying to harm him?! No. On the contrary, everyone loved and pitied him. He despised this world as imperfect, as not the way he would like it to be. Despised from his pride:

“Oh, you canary factory! Mosquitoes will bite";

“What is hidden in the people there?

The foolishness lurks in them."

After all, he deceived himself, thought highly of himself, thought that he only knew the truth, the truth of the Gospel, the truth of life. He had his own faith. His soul instinctively sought this truth and was deceived in its own pride. But he was looking for his own rather than God's.

If we return once again to the nickname of our hero, it will be interesting that the very word "musk ox" is essentially the designation of a Pharisee. Why? Let's remember who our Lord Jesus Christ called sheepwolves? False prophets. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:15). So, a wolf in sheep's clothing, as well as a sheep (according to the etymology of the word) in bull skin, are different, of course, but they have the same essence. A sheep dressed as a bull looks less aggressive in our mind than a sheep dressed as a wolf, but no less dangerous. If you meet a wolf, he will rush and bite you to death. The wolf plunders and kills, the wolf is an excessively predatory and dangerous animal than the domestic cattle of a man - a bull. The bull, if you meet a person, will not cause harm, but if you touch him to the quick, do not expect mercy, he will rush at you and pierce you with his horns! The bull is tamed, but the bull is also dangerous. And it is no coincidence that the author named his hero so. The reader, who knows the gospel inflow image of the false prophet, is not difficult to guess that Leskov gives us such a nickname to understand the character of this person Vasily Petrovich. Defenseless and simple on the outside, he was stubborn and aggressive on the inside. This is what outward piety is. Those around him felt sorry for him, because he was pathetic, he was not like everyone else - “blessed”, as they called him in the monastery. He was pitied by good people who loved him as best they could and accepted him as he was. And he really was to some extent worthy of this regret, worthy of this love, like any other person - God's creation. His soul was not evil, she was embittered at everyone not like him, and not like everyone else was like him ... He felt sorry for the children, felt sorry for his wife, whom he had never loved, once even sent her money in case the child was born. He protected Alyonka from the shameless barchuk, for which he was expelled from work. After all, he has a kind soul, but embittered at the whole world of God, at people.

So he did not find a place for himself in life and ruined his life with his own hands, his truth and his own wisdom. His death was a challenge to this world. He committed suicide because despondency completely took possession of his soul. “I will make way for him, for he is their favorite. At least he will give himself up for someone’s needs, but mine, I see, is not good for hell. No wonder you called some animal name. No one recognizes me as their own, and I myself have not recognized my own in anyone. Death from despair, from despondency. All his life he sought understanding, and met only regret. And those who tried to do good to him often received evil from him in response, as in the Russian proverb "do not do good - you will not receive evil." With his death, he wanted to make people pay attention to himself, since in life no one took him seriously. Thus, he wanted to make people think about their negative attitude towards him, as he considered it, so that they would curse themselves for that. This is pride, according to the words of the holy fathers.

Now we will talk about one pan who lived on the banks of the river in Little Russia, the memory of whose eccentric and perverted life remained in the hearts of eyewitnesses. So the time has come to consider this work of Leskov in his cycle of Christmas stories as "The Epic of Pan Vishnevsky." What is, strictly speaking, an epic, and why suddenly an epic? The epic is an extraordinary, apparently, an event that is remembered for a long time, which struck many with itself. This incident that happened to our hero pan cannot be called otherwise than his whole life. So what kind of life did he have and how did it differ from the lives of the rest of the people around him? This question can be answered briefly: his life was a perversion, as evidenced by the immoral and bizarre behavior of this man. But it is possible to answer at length the question of what his life was like, or rather, the personality of this Stepan Ivanovich Vishnevsky. He was a direct, simple person and, at the same time, vicious in nature, as they say and as indicated by his terrible actions and immoral deeds. Let's start with the fact that he is “because he is joking and knowing everything in Khryantsuz and in the language of embedding, and in his tongues, having learned to praise the Lord. Ale's back is so lazy." Here you can stop for now. And what do we see? “Having learned to praise the Lord in our tongues.” Here Leskov from the very beginning shows us nothing more than the faith of this gentleman. But for what? So that later we can see that not every faith is faith in God and that faith is different. But for now, let's leave the question of this pan's faith and move on to a consideration of his life. “Vishnevsky's house in Moscow was inaccessible to the police and, for one reason or another, soon gained a very mysterious and somewhat unflattering notoriety. Most of all she was helped by Vishnevsky's immoral instincts towards women, or, perhaps, more precisely, towards female children. Here one can only marvel at all the vileness and cruelty of the nature of such a noble and respectable person. Look further:

“Stepan Ivanovich, having received such a message, left a separate home and came to his wife, who completely reached the point that it became boring for him to live in the same house with her.

She not only caressed and did not live the favorites chosen by her for her husband, but nursed and nursed his children, of which, with such a patriarchal order of panorama life, a lot were born in Farbovanaya.

What do we see here?! The wife herself helps feed the fornication passion of her beloved husband. Contributes to this insatiable passion of his. But our speech will not go about Stepanida Vasilievna, whose reckless love swallowed up her whole mind. Pan's insane passion for fornication left its mark on the consciousness, will and personality of this man. Nothing uncontrollable lust also became the cause of his vices. But more about that later.

Let us now return to the question of his faith. Pan Vishnevsky considered himself an undoubted believer, and therefore a pious person. The following lines confirm this:

“Stepan Ivanovich, who, according to his own consciousness, “had not studied the catechism,” well developed and very concretely took shape the order he had compiled for the acceptance of the heterodox.

He considered himself in the fullest plan to bring everyone, as he put it, "into his baptized faith" - and freely and unhindered achieved everything that he wanted to achieve. Here is the faith of the pan. But what is this faith and what is its essence? He has his own faith, his own philosophy. It is impossible not to recall with this our Musk Ox, who also had "his own faith." But can faith be "one's own" and understood by a person in the way he wants it? What is this selfishness in faith? Our Lord Jesus Christ brought us faith in Himself, faith that He is the Son of God: “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has eternal life. I am the bread of life” (John 6:47-48). Faith is one for all and the commandments are given to us alone. Why, then, does the pan have “his own” faith and even his own rank, who is allowed to be accepted into “his” faith, who is not, and at the same time despised. What it is? This is hypocrisy, for the Pharisees accepted into their faith those who were pleasing to them. They also had “their own” faith - faith not of the spirit, but of the letter. Let us remember how they did not accept the blind man healed by the Lord: “A man who received his sight said to them in response: it is amazing that you do not know where He comes from, but He opened my eyes. If He had not been from God, He could not have done anything. They said to him in response: you were all born in sins, and do you teach us? And they cast him out” (John 9:30; 33-34); and they did not accept Christ Himself and crucified him. We see the same external piety in Vishnevsky - his own understanding of faith, which does not allow any other understanding, true understanding, which we can clearly see from his appeal to the priest, and therefore to the Church, for the faith of the pan, invented by him, is also most beneficial. “Stepan Ivanovich himself found out about everything: people saw how the priest spoke with Gapka, and informed the pan, and he now demanded his spiritual father to confess.

Vishnevsky got furious and yelled:

• - Aha! .. I know you now: it was you who smeared yourself before her ... did you think that she was changing me for you?
• - What are you, what are you, your grace ...

Nothing "my grace". My mercy will only have mercy on you because, as your spiritual son, I don’t order you to beat you, but let them take you away, like a slid, and lead you through the village, Schaub Bachili, Yaksh, you’re a bad boy ... "

They took the unfortunate man, undressed him, put him into a sack of matting, from which one head was exposed through a hole, and fluff was poured into his hair, and in this form they led him through the whole village. That's all his faith, that's all his shamelessly ostentatious piety! Pride feeds his faith, but it does not allow him to hear the truth, which is contrary to his lustful nature. Pride did not allow the Pharisees to accept the Savior.

The author himself makes a conclusion about his faith. “In matters of faith, he was a round ignoramus and did not indulge in criticism or philosophy of religious issues, finding that “priestly things were here”, but as a “knight” he only protected and defended “his” faith from all “non-believers” . And at this point, he looked at the matter with a popular view, revering “Christians” alone Orthodox, and he considered all other so-called “non-Orthodox” Christians to be “distrustful”, and Jews and “all the rest of the bastard” - scoundrels. On the one hand, it is certainly good that he considered all Orthodox Christians, but this is only because he considered himself Orthodox. His own are brothers for him, and all the rest are bastards, because they are not his own.

Yes, in this story by Leskov, we saw the hypocrisy of a proud, cunning and wayward person who knows his worth. Yes, the author once again showed us not only the cause of this hypocrisy - pride, but also its consequence - flagrant vices, one of which was insatiable lust, and as a result, clouding of the mind. Is it for the writer to show us this chain of a person’s fall, so that, having passed a sentence, we would condemn him and say: “Yes, he was a Pharisee - that’s how he should be!”? It's pretty clear who he was. No, the author told us about his life so that we would be afraid of this sin of hypocrisy, seeing its impartial and terrifying consequences for a person, and, in the end, the madness of the soul and flesh of this pan. The author teaches us not to seek our own, but to seek God. He also teaches us pity even for the most fallen sinner. He teaches us to look at sin as a disease, which is why he called the cycle of stories only “psychopaths”. Sin was the cause of the disease of the soul, perversion and disturbance of the psyche. “Such were the wild deeds of this original, which now, in our reproached time, would be impossible, or they would probably be counted as psychopathy today, but Vishnevsky’s very tastes and sensations were tinged with psychopathism,” he writes at the end of his epic . Summing up the two works of Leskov that we have analyzed, we can say that the author does not so much point out to us the shortcomings of the character of these heroes: such as rudeness, cruelty, but rather speaks of the eccentricities and oddities of these characters. And this is not accidental, because by this the writer just points out to us the illness of the souls of the heroes. The writer himself calls on these unfortunates to pity, and not to condemn, just as Christ pities even the most vile sinner, for sin is a disease, it is psychopathy in other words.

As a special virtue N.S. Leskov singles out - foolishness for Christ's sake. And this Christian type of asceticism, so unlike the others, the writer puts in a separate column along with other types of virtue. The theme of foolishness, wandering, which we have outlined, is one of the deepest, completely unsolved topics. What does foolishness for the sake of Christ mean? Why does the author need so many of these holy fools, found in many of his famous works? What does he want to say or show to the world with their help? And he wants to show another world - the eternal world, to which the soul of the foolish wanderer is closer than all other human souls. Foolishness is such a feat that is not understandable to an ordinary person, this is something out of the ordinary. And it is not understandable to a person because it is so difficult that it requires complete renunciation of oneself, such a renunciation that no other Christian achievement requires. It was not for nothing that the people called the blessed ones - “wretched”, which means “with God” - this man is with God. This, at the same time, is both a prophet and a seer of human destinies.

In Leskov’s novel “On the Knives”, the girl Vera and Svetozar Vladenovich Vodopyanov can be called such blessed out of this world. Readers are drawn to their personality, and their identity is a mystery even to those closest to them. The girl Vera, it was not for nothing that the author gave her such a name, was a speck of light in the novel, which accompanied the selfless heroine Sasha Sintyanina in her difficult life. The latter, having married not for love, sacrificed herself for the salvation of others. So this girl, Vera, who had been sick since childhood, was her adopted daughter - her stepdaughter. Sasha took care of her meekly and carried this care with love, like her own cross, for which she was rewarded by God. This, as it is said, was an unusual child, blessed by the Lord and had the gift of foresight. Her sometimes frightening actions showed something that no one wanted to believe, but something that alarmed the rest. This unusual girl gave her stepmother hope for a new future life in which she will marry the one who secretly loves her all these years of forced marriage. At night, Vera gave Alexandra the engagement ring of her late mother Flora and said that by accepting it, Sasha would be happy, which exactly happened a few years later, when she married her beloved after the sudden death of her unloved legitimate husband. Evidence of the girl's perspicacity was also the fact that she once saw Mikhail Andreevich Bodrostin, then still living and well, dead with a cut jacket on his back. As if through her everyone saw this terrifyingly strange vision, which later became a reality; Mikhail Andreevich was killed and after death they put a cut jacket on him. Everything came true exactly as the poor girl saw. And with her vision of Bodrostin's death, Vera denounced his future killers, trying to reach out to their hearts, to their conscience and stop this murder. This is what God did through her. God does not force the free will of man, God warns us, knocks on our hearts. In this situation, the Lord sent his Faith to his servant, as in His parable about the evil vinedressers, “finally he sent another son beloved to him to them, saying: they will be ashamed of my son. But the husbandmen said to each other: this is the heir; Come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours” (Mark 12:6-7). It is necessary to make a reservation that Leskov's holy fools are not necessarily capable characters, as in the case of the girl Vera, which does not prevent us from calling them holy fools in the sense of "strange", "wonderful", "not like others" people. For the author, apparently, also includes mentally ill people in the category of holy fools, in order to show us that the insane people considered by all are in fact the chosen ones of God with a very subtle, transparent virtuous soul, which is hidden from human eyes by the outward madness of the mind.

Now it is time to pay attention to the personality of Svetozar Vodopyanov. This is an even more mysterious person in the novel. Who was this Vodopyanov? The well-known lunatic. Was he really crazy? No, he wasn't. He, too, was blissful, a holy fool, a striking proof of which is his very death and his words before his death. He was mistakenly killed instead of Bodrostin. Thus, this person took the death of Mikhail Andreevich upon himself a few days before the death of the latter. Faith denounced, stopped evil, and Svetozar Vodopyanov took this evil upon himself, gave his life "for his friends." Maybe it happened so that the count had a few more days of life left for repentance before he was killed. Having fulfilled his mission on earth, Svetozar went to the Lord as did Vera, who died an unusual death as if from grief immediately after the death of Bodrostin. As an angel who fulfilled the commission of God, he ascended to his Father and Creator. He also predicted his own death and after that - the general resurrection of the dead. The gift of his prophecy was revealed at the end of the life of this hero, before that he was hidden. At the beginning of the novel, it is not by chance that the writer shows us Svetozar Vladenovic as the “crazy Bedouin,” as he was called. He writes about him as a madman, carrying all sorts of nonsense and not at all like any holy fool in the truest sense of the word. Yes, he talked about God and demons, but he only reasoned, and, moreover, in such a way that it was not clear which God he was talking about. Why did the author not immediately reveal his holy soul to us? Because he wanted the reader to understand that not everyone who looks crazy is actually one. Nikolai Semyonovich teaches us again and again to look not at the external, but at the internal and never make hasty conclusions about a person, because external behavior does not always speak about the internal.

In part, the hero of Leskov's work "The Enchanted Wanderer" Ivan Flyagin can also be attributed to the holy fools. The indirect characteristic of this character, comparing him with God's baby, is significant. It refers to the gift of prophecy that God bestows on the elect.

“- And then when did they take you out? Right, in frosts, because it became cold?

No, sir, this is not because, not at all for the cold, but for another reason, since I began to prophesy.

“And then my petition was fulfilled, and I suddenly began to understand that the saying was approaching: “when peace is spoken, all-destruction suddenly attacks,” and I was filled with fear for my Russian people and began to pray and all the others who would come to me to the pit , began to exhort with tears, pray, they say, for the subjugation of every enemy and adversary under the nose of our king, for there is an all-destruction near us. And tears were given to me, marvelously plentiful! .. I was crying about my homeland.

In the context of the story, Ivan's journey can be considered as a kind of holy fool's journey, which performed communicative and moral (educational, instructive) functions.

The buffoon Pamphalon, the story of which is included in the cycle "The Tale of the First Christians", can also be attributed to the category of the above-mentioned heroes. The buffoon Pamphalon cannot be called a blissful or foolish person in the full sense of the word, because he involuntarily took on this burden, but all his actions and his life seem crazy, wonderful to the society in which he lives. Even his words are strange and incomprehensible to people alien to this spirit - the spirit of God. With his buffoonery, this man earned himself a piece of bread, saved his mother from starvation. At night, he entertained hetairas and harlots with his cheerful jokes, dances and laughter. But thanks to this, thanks to such a “shameful”, condemned and incomprehensible life by everyone, he achieved the highest humility and not only. He saved the family of poor Magna from imminent death, whose husband was in prison for debts, whose children they wanted to castrate, and make her herself a harlot. He gave away all his money earned during the night - the money that he got as a result of human cruelty, when he was beaten and laughed at as a nonentity. And not only did he give all his means - he gave his life to save others. “Having put on clean clothes, I wanted to go to the former monk Ammun, who is engaged in all kinds of affairs, and enslave myself to him for a lifetime, if only to immediately take the money and give it to ransom the children of Magna from the eunuch.” His heart was moved by love for his neighbor, that love, higher than which there is no other, according to the word of the Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ: “There is no greater love than if a man lays down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). And the Lord, seeing such a sacrifice, Himself saved this woman in a different way.

There is at first glance an imperceptible, but interesting detail in the works of Nikolai Semyonovich, which speaks of the sensitivity of his God-fearing soul. This is nothing more than a description of nature. "What's wrong with that?" - you say. After all, every writer in one way or another necessarily describes nature in his stories. But here I want to say that describing nature, natural phenomena and events taking place against the backdrop of the life of heroes, the narrator reveals to us the other side of life. Thus, the theme of nature in the works of Leskov occupies a special place. Nature: trees, the sky, the sun, grass, the sea, animals - this is all living things, it all also has a soul, for the Spirit of God is everywhere, and everything breathes and lives with it. “Let every breath suffice the Lord” (Ps. 150:6). And everything lives and breathes by the Lord, and everything is for man, everything serves man and everything feels him.

Let us remember what happened during the Savior's agony at the hour of His death. “Jesus, again crying out with a loud voice, gave up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom; and the earth shook; and the stones split” (Matthew 27:50-51). “And it was about the sixth hour of the day, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour: and the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was torn in the middle” (Luke 23:44-45). What we see: the earth shook, the stones split, the sun darkened, darkness fell over the whole earth, and even the veil was torn in the temple. All nature was indignant and shocked by the suffering and death of its Creator! And does this not tell us about her life?! Man comes to know God through nature. “The centurion and those who were with him guarding Jesus, seeing the earthquake and all that had happened, were terrified and said, “Truly this was the Son of God” (Matt. 27:54). And the holy Apostle Paul in his epistle says: “For His invisible things, His eternal power and Divinity, are visible from the foundation of the world through the contemplation of the creatures” (Rom. 1:20).

In the story "At the End of the World" we can see how the bishop's soul is gradually cleansed by the trial sent to him by God - the suffering of hunger and cold. Vladyka was waiting for death as deliverance from torment, as a person no longer having any hope of salvation, as a mortally ill person lying on his bed. “I did not believe in any possibility of salvation and waited for death; but where is she? Why hesitate and someday will gather to come? How much longer am I tormented before she caresses me and calms my torment?..” When a person is already on the threshold of his life, his soul is involuntarily cleansed through it, as if preparing for the future life. This often happens unconsciously and subconsciously, which indicates that the all-good Lord Himself purifies the soul of the sufferer through suffering. He Himself purifies and elevates the humble soul and does not grumble at torment. This is what happened with the lord. The Lord touched his heart, and a spiritual vision opened up in him. He began to see what he had not noticed before; I began to see what I had not attached importance to before - I began to see the beauty of God's world. “For an hour, the sun jumped out behind the distant hills and began to pour over the snow covering these hills with a surprisingly pure pink light - this happens there before evening, after which the sun immediately quickly disappears, and the pink light is then replaced by the most wondrous blue. So it was now: everything around me near me turned blue, as if sprinkled with sapphire dust - where there is a rut, where a footprint or just stuck in the snow with a stick - everywhere like a bluish smoke swirled, and after a short time of this game everything immediately grew dark: the steppe was like covered with an overturned bowl, and then again relieves ... turns gray ... ".

How subtle and sensitive the soul of a person becomes, “tempted, like gold in a furnace” (Wisdom 3:6), enduring suffering with meekness. From admiration for the beauty of nature, from his vision of this beauty and the meek consciousness of his fate, a pure prayer to the Lord poured out from the depths of his heart. "Abba, Father! I can’t even bring you repentance, but you yourself moved my lamp from its place, and you yourself guarantee me before you!” See how his soul has changed! As nature, the very nature in which he perished began to be perceived by him as a miracle of God, as a good ray of the sun, as blue skies, peace and silence. His soul was transformed, there was peace and admiration in it, for it was cleansed by suffering and felt God. God is known through nature. And Leskov in this moment, in this time on the threshold of eternity, as if along the steps of purification, showed the transformation of the human soul: from humility in one's lot before the Lord and neighbor - to seeing the beauty of God's world (the nature surrounding it), to fiery prayer to God, and, through this - love for a person - a native who saved his life.

In the writer's works, nature itself reflects the inner state of a person. For example, in the story "Mountain" the author emphasizes the beauty of the soul of the protagonist Zenon with the beauty of the nature surrounding him. “Everything was quiet around; the blue sky spread out like an evenly covered tent; the sun was warm, there was heat in the air; blackbirds sat in a row on a white ledge and sang. Around the house there were many lilies and roses, and near the walls and at the white marble threshold lay whole layers of green diarite. It was fresh, quiet and chaste here: the artist lived here. Nature is as good as Zeno himself. If you think about this description of nature, then here you can see the metaphorical nature of the presentation: “Everything was quiet around ... there was heat in the air,” - this is, as it were, the peace of the soul; “the sun warmed” - light, the radiance of the human soul; "on a white cornice, at a white marble threshold" - purity of the soul; "Blackbirds sat in a row and sang, there were many lilies and roses" - many good deeds, the singing of birds - the life of the soul, the soul is alive by the Holy Spirit. The goldsmith Zeno was a true Christian. His soul, devoted even to death to the Lord, was itself like a flower, emitting a fragrant aroma around itself. He was like incense, burning with love for Christ and exuding a pleasant smell. Everything around him was beautiful: the nature that surrounded him and about which he “like Adam in paradise” took care of, his occupation with gold, his very dwelling. Everything around him lived life - blossomed and sang. Everything rejoiced about the beauty of his soul, all nature felt the saint of God and served him.

Also in this story, we see how nature reacts to human sin, how it feels it and how it responds to it. Thus, she, as it were, convicts the sinner, gives him to think about what he has done. All creation serves the Lord and man for salvation, all animate and inanimate nature takes care of him. Life is not compatible with death and does not want to accept it, while death is a sin. This is how we see the state of nature in the case of Nephora, who tried to hide, quickly hide from her sin, not to see her sin of temptation and run away from herself. Look at what is happening to nature at this critical moment: “There was complete silence and desertion here” on the banks of the Nile. This is not the silence in the air that surrounds Zeno, speaking of peace and peace of mind; no, here, on the banks of the Nile, Nefora was met by another silence - deadness, desertion, like emptiness. As her soul was dead at that time, struck by sin, so the nature of the Nile River, the deserted shore, also told her about it. The narrator immediately writes how Nefora got home and in what she sailed along the Nile. And this is also no coincidence, and you will now understand why. “The collier did everything he undertook, and Nefora made a long and uncomfortable movement along the Nile in a heavy and dirty coal thick-bottomed barge, lying under a coal tub. As soon as in the evening she reached her dwelling, where she went up, waiting for darkness, all smeared with mud and coal dust. Dirt and dust here were the personification of her sin, for just as her soul was dirty and blind, so was her body dirty and dusty. The writer points us to this comparison through external images. From form to content. Silence and desertion, uncomfortable movement along the Nile in mud and uncleanness - with all this, the author shows us the most unfortunate and fallen state of the heroine's soul. She was afraid to appear on the street in the daytime in her beautiful headdress, she waited for the night to enter her dwelling. “For everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works be convicted, because they are evil” (John 3:20).

By the manifestations and movements of nature, the Lord exposes and punishes iniquity. Let us recall from the Bible how the Red Sea flooded Pharaoh's chariot and parted for the people of God to pass, how the earth in the desert cracked and swallowed God's blasphemers: Korea, Dathan and Aviron, how the Lord sent executions to Egypt to admonish sinners. So in this story "Mountain" God denounces evil, shaking the mountain, thus showing that there is truth. The prayer of the righteous makes the mountain move from its place. And look - what the weather was like when a frantic crowd of revelers and onlookers was heading to the mountain in order to see, as they considered, the shame of Christians, to laugh at them.

“A most terrible thunderstorm and a most terrible downpour, of which people have no idea in Europe, and which constitute the rarest phenomena in Egypt, broke out over Alexandria. A terrible cloud rushed on the wings of a destructive storm - lightning flashed in all directions, and in the intervals they could not be seen at all.

A terrible wind created a great commotion, and the ships tossed up, hitting one another: their ibis and fish tails broke, and the high masts, swaying, waved their unfurled sails like fighting giants. Finally, lightning flashed, thunder roared, and a downpour struck, as if an entire ocean had fallen from heaven to earth. Crushing streams rushed from the mountains, everything in the valleys was seized and flooded with water.

Thus, the Lord puts unrighteousness to shame and punishes sinners who do iniquity. All nature, hitherto quiet and calm, is indignant and indignant, seeing the mockery of Christians. She avenges the saints of God, who marched under the threat of life to move the mountain. Thus, nature says: “Stop, unbelievers! Do not tempt the Lord of Hosts!" But curious sinners did not heed her voice, being in their drunken madness, for which they were ashamed. God moved the mountain at the prayer of the righteous, and the rivers of the Nile watered the thirsty land. God moved the mountain, as once He burned the sacrifice of Elijah, doused with water, so that they could see His light and understand who the Lord their God is, for God cannot be mocked.

We also see a terrible and dull picture of nature in the story “Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District”. See how accurately the writer in describing nature reflects the internal state of the prisoners and the main character. "A cold, rainy day, with gusty winds and rain mixed with snow, met the party unfriendly, advancing outside the gates of the stuffy stage." Nature is unfriendly, she does not rejoice in prisoners, as she rejoiced at the Christian Zeno. “A most desolate picture: a handful of people, cut off from the world and devoid of any shadow of hope for a better future, are drowning in the cold black mud of a dirt road. Everything around is terribly ugly: endless mud, gray sky, leafless wet willows and a crow ruffled in their splayed boughs. The wind groans, then gets angry, then howls and roars. Let's stop here and pay attention to the environment surrounding the prisoners. She is despondent and sad. And here, too, it is impossible not to see an allegorical turn - a comparison of nature with the state of mind of prisoners. "A handful of people are drowning in the cold black dirt of a dirt road." What is dirt compared to? With sin. And: cold, black mud. Cold black sin, cold hard heart, incapable of any love, any good. The blackness of dirt is like the darkness of sin; darkness, in which there is no light and heat - that's why it is cold. The gray sky indicates to us despondency, to the fact that there is no longer any hope for these people. They deprived themselves of it by their crimes, crying out to God for vengeance for them - that's why they ended up in prison. "Leafless wet willows". One mention of a tree that has no leaves gives an association with a tree that no longer bears fruit, which, as in the Gospel, is “cut down and thrown into the fire” (Matt. 3:10). To people who are unable and unwilling to do good deeds, Christ said: “Every tree is known by its fruit” (Luke 6:44). And these people not only do not have fruits, but there are no longer any leaves, for the fruit, like a good deed, which happens "a hundredfold, another - sixty, and another - thirty" (Mark 13:8), and the leaves are good intentions, in other words, the grace of God. After all, what does leafless rakita mean in this case? An indication of the deadness of the human soul, for leaves, shoots, greenery are a sign of life. And if you also think about the fact that there is a ruffled crow in the splayed branches, then we can say that this indicates to us the deadness of the souls of these people. The branches of the willow are spread out in the same way as the arms and legs of the dead are spread out, which it is sometimes difficult to connect even with a rope, because living blood no longer flows in their veins. And in these boughs there is a ruffled crow - it ruffled from the cold in order to keep the warmth in itself. From the cold, because the branches are dead and leafless, there is no warmth in them. And what does this crow itself mean? Why is she mentioned here? And let us remember what our Lord said: “For where there is a corpse, there the eagles will gather” (Matt. 24:28). And look: in all this, how much you can find, see and feel comparative turns, allegories and associations! How correctly the author makes it clear to the reader about this, makes it clear the internal state, in this case, of the prisoners, describing only the nature, only the appearance of phenomena and objects! And even this bleak picture of nature for these people is, as it were, God's punishment for their sin - there is no sun and heat for them. And one cannot even say that this is God's punishment to these people - it would be too strange and loudly said - this is only an indication to them of their vices. Admonishing the perishing, turning their attention inward and expecting repentance from them - for our Lord is good and will save the penitent sinner. “The wind groans, then gets angry, then howls, then roars.” What does it look like? What is the comparison here? The wind is like a soul; she is invisible, but she is, like the wind. The prisoner's soul groans, gets angry, howls and roars. It's like death throes. The Spirit of God lives in every soul, despite the darkness of man's sins; the Lord breathed into each one the breath of life. The soul, smitten with sin, groans like a wounded one; she roars, cries and is angry because sin has entangled her and deprived her of light. Yes, and this is also the author's indication of the state of the soul of a perishing sinner; an indication that you can still save your soul, heal it from the wound of sin, repent before it's too late.

Now let's look at the tragic ending of this work. There we see the raging waves of the leaden Volga, swallowing two women. The river was indignant and noisy, there was the same storm as it was in the story "The Mountain" on the Nile River, breaking the ships and ships of the curious tempters of God moving towards Mount Ader. Why did the Volga rage? What does it say? This suggests that the river, feeling the impending crime of "Lady Macbeth" - her desire to avenge herself at all costs, no matter how opposed to this, as if indignant at human malice and let it know, trying with her movements of the waves, as it were stir, revive, wake up the dead, dormant soul of the prisoner and murderer Katerina. The river thus warned her of trouble, thereby trying to stop her thirst for revenge, but this did not help the dead, embittered soul.

And I also want to say about the case with nature - with animals in Leskov's novel "On Knives" in its last part. There, in my opinion, a parallel is clearly shown between the death of cows in that village and Mikhail Andreevich Bodrostin. And even the very chapter about the death of Bodrostin is called “Cow Death”. Cattle, struck by pestilence, began to die just a few days before the death of the owner of the village. With this literary device, the writer draws our attention to the connection between nature and man. Animals felt the coming premeditated murder, they felt misfortune and perished. And people at that time tried to exterminate an unknown disease of cattle with their magical ritual of making fire from logs in the forest. But the fire, symbolizing destruction and unbridled terrible power, did not want to appear for a long time, as if resisting the will of the intruders. And even in this, harmless at first glance, action with this fire, the writer shows us an insatiable desire to end the “interfering” person, because. fire was mined with a furious, insatiable desire to get it at all costs. By all means, kill! “Another second, and the fire is mined; the gripping sons, smoking sweat, leaned even harder; breaking away, they fell at once: the shattered log screeched, swung, and hurt many painfully.

Heavy groans were heard, then laughter, then in different places an infernal noise, an exclamation, a call for help, and again a terrible, desperate groan; and everything calmed down again, as if nothing had happened, while something remarkable happened: Mikhail Andreevich Bodrostin was not among the living ... ".

What connects the Christian virtues, shown with such zeal by Leskov in his righteous heroes? What gives the immortal spirit to his creations? What gives vitality to do good and bring light to his characters? Faith. Faith in God, in our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is this belief that his works breathe. They are alive and will live by his faith, and in our time they are especially relevant, which speaks of today's real revival of Russia, the revival of the Orthodox faith in Rus'. After all, if you look closely, then every positive hero of Leskov’s works, if not explicitly, then in the depths of his soul, is a believer. Faith for him is a kind of guideline that encourages him to do good to his neighbors and live according to the commandments of God, to give his life and his soul to those in need, to go towards evil, defeating it with goodness and truth, to resist endless passions and, most importantly, to love.

After all, faith in God is inextricably linked with love for others. And this faith in Christ the Lord, like the flame of a lamp, glimmered in the hearts of virtuous heroes. She shone uncreated light on them, on them and their neighbors in this world, and gave a true understanding of the meaning of life and the essence of things. Prayer was on their lips, testifying to the close connection of their heart and soul with the Creator God.

“SPIRITUAL AND MORAL VALUES OF RUSSIAN CLASSICAL LITERATURE Alentin Rasputin, speaking of the great educational feat of Russian literature of all eras, noted: “In ...”

E.I. Dvornikova

SPIRITUAL AND MORAL VALUES

RUSSIAN CLASSICAL LITERATURE

Alentin Rasputin, speaking about the great educational feat of the Russian

literature of all eras noted: “In the dark times of atheism, literature to help the church warmed the people with the light of the hope of heaven and

did not allow the souls to overgrow with filth. Bells rang from books and

ritual bells sounded, the epic self-movement of life did not stop in them ... and sunsets spread over their native land of such beauty that the reader's soul cried and rejoiced with delight ... Literature was not blind and noticed the onset of evil, but it was for her to renounce good is tantamount to praying to renounce God” (from “Speech at the presentation of the literary prize A.I. Solzhenitsyn on May 4, 2000”).

The concept of “Russian writer” therefore has long meant something much more than just a writer, and at the same time, as Dostoevsky spoke of, something more than just a Russian, that is, a nationally and regionally limited “master of culture”. All the great Russian writers sought to kindle guiding stars that would live forever in human souls.

Russian literature is “an amazing phenomenon” (M. Gorky), “it is something inimitable, unique, something that concentrates a huge cognitive, emotional, aesthetic and spiritual experience in a highly artistic form; ... these are works that have concentrated significant eternal values”, and “value is something all-penetrating, determining the meaning of the whole world as a whole, and of every person, and of every event, and of every act ...” . Russian thinkers (N.A. Berdyaev, V.V. Rozanov, P.A. Florensky, S. Bulgakov, I.A. Ilyin, K.N.

Leontiev and others) represent the humanism of Russian writers as a majestic quality of E.I. Dvornikov's property of the Russian spirit. Humanism is a system of universal human values ​​- a set of ideas, principles, traditions valued by peoples for many centuries. They are higher than narrow-class, national, political ones. Universal human values ​​are objects and phenomena of both spiritual and material order, which have significance for society, for all social groups and every individual, the ability to satisfy the interests of a person; ideal, spiritual values ​​are aesthetic and ethical views, moral principles and attitudes of a person towards goodness, improvement of thoughts and actions, justice, honor, dignity, mercy and, as the highest manifestation of spirituality, humanism in relations with people and between people.

A work of art is “living knowledge” (V.P. Zinchenko), the main features of which are openness, innuendo and incompleteness. A.S.

Pushkin, N.V. Gogol, F.M. Dostoevsky, N.A. Nekrasov, A. Maikov and others see life differently, each of them creates his own artistic world, “the inner form of a literary work”. Each writer has his own logic, his own point of view on the world and man, his own system of values. The author, of course, has his own concept of being, but he does not suppress the personality of his characters, although he can enter into a dialogue with them. Many works are built on the polyphony of voices, the dialogue of personalities.

“Not many characters and destinies in a single objective world in the light of a single author's consciousness unfold in works,” wrote M.M. Bakhtin, but it is precisely the plurality of equal consciousnesses with their worlds that are combined here, preserving their non-fusion, into the unity of some event. The artist argues, agrees, supports, refutes, develops, destroys, continues what his predecessors and contemporaries have done. And here it is important to hear the different voices of different writers, saying that "the secret of human existence is not only to live, but in why to live" .

Russian classical literature not only shows life as it is, but also awakens “in a person aspiration for life as it should be” (Yu.N.

Sokhryakov), it is "a deep, never ending, never exhausted thirst for righteousness, a dream of perfection" . Many works of Russian classical literature cause heated literary and public discussions.

This is the “Thunderstorm” by A.N. Ostrovsky, "Fathers and Sons" by I.S. Turgenev, "Who is to blame?" A.I.

Herzen, "People of the 40s" by A.F. Pisemsky, novels by I.A. Goncharov, the play "The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov and many others. The works reflect those phenomena that can be designated as the sociodynamics of culture, i.e. study of the processes and phenomena of the movement of culture "depending on the change, development of society"

And "it is possible to form an objective opinion about an era only by looking simultaneously from many points of view that are incompatible with each other." Writers do not simply record or illustrate certain social and cultural phenomena, but penetrate, “get used to” them, trying to understand their leading problems, the movement of the general E.I. Dvornikova stvennoe and individual consciousness. The author's position in such works is so ambiguous that it often provokes fierce criticism. Therefore, from the standpoint of the sociodynamics of culture, the right way to get rid of the stereotypes of interpretations and evaluations of a literary work is to read it as a text of culture that reflects the clash and dynamics of different points of view: social, political, ethical, aesthetic, philosophical. At the same time, among the comparisons one can distinguish: intra-text (comparison of different assessments of the text by readers and critics), interpretative (comparison of different interpretations of the text based on the author's invariant - historical-genetic and historical-functional approaches), intertextual (comparison of different works of the studied author or different authors, between which it is possible to establish typological connections), overtext (comparison of works of different arts). The movement of leitmotifs, the stages of spiritual elevations and crises, the "movement of ideals" are connected by a single chain and make up the history of the development of literature as the history of the spiritual experience of generations reflected in the word. The originality and unique power of literature derives from its material. This material is language, and the basic element of the language of artistic creativity is the word, the verbal sign. The word in the context of world culture is associated with Creation and the Creator. For it is said in Scripture: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Everything came into being through him, and without him nothing came into being that came into being” (St. John).

Let us turn to the poem in prose by I.S. Turgenev "STOP!".

Stop! How I see you now - stay forever in my memory!

The last inspired sound escaped from the lips - the eyes do not shine and do not sparkle - they fade, burdened with happiness, the blissful consciousness of that beauty that you managed to express, that beauty, after which you seem to stretch out your triumphant, your exhausted hands!

What light, thinner and purer than sunlight, has spilled over all your limbs, over the smallest folds of your clothes?

What god, with his gentle breath, threw back your scattered curls?

His kiss burns on your body like marble on a pale brow!

Here it is - an open secret, the secret of poetry, life, love! Here it is, here it is, immortality! There is no other immortality - and there is no need. At this moment you are immortal.

It will pass - and you are again a pinch of ashes, a woman, a child ... But what do you care!

At this moment - you have become higher, you have become outside of everything transient, temporary. This moment of yours will never end.

Stop! And let me be a participant in your immortality, levels into my soul a reflection of your eternity!

If we single out the supporting words of this poem in the prose of I.S. Turgenev, then they will be: sound... beauty... God... mystery... poetry... immortality... soul... eternity...

It turns out that happiness is the very moment that the poet seeks to stop, E.I. Dvornikov to capture in a word is possible only if all these concepts are united.

Inspirational sound, sacred light, divine touch create animated beauty. And only such beauty has the right to immortality. This means that the secret of beauty, immortality, is not in the perfection of lines, not in external impression, but in understanding, in the consonance of souls, in triumph, which can only give the happiness of inspiration.

The word, therefore, has a high creative, constructive meaning and is an undeniable value.

The word Divine and Human, the word of Pushkin and Dostoevsky, Gogol and Lermontov, Turgenev and Tolstoy, Chekhov and Tyutchev, etc. If the Universe is a big world, and a person is a small one, then a book, a word, literary creativity is an intermediate beginning between the worlds. “Author's worlds of artists are communicating worlds. Their secret roll calls, their "dialogue" creates a living picture of our literature. Russian literature "became the Russian Bible, the creator of moral and historical meanings for its people."

After all, it is she who "carries in herself, affects people, conveys to people exactly the strongest thing in the regulation of activity - meaning" . And since the "universals of meaning" - universal values ​​- "crystallize in typical situations", then the comparison of such situations reflected in art will enhance its suggestive impact and may contribute to the discovery of "the laws of human mental life"

Russian classical literature of the 19th century is the sum of "incarnated" ideas expressed in a system of aesthetic conflicts: man and nature, man and society, man and history, man and power, man and destiny, man and people, man and God, man and circumstances ( which are increasingly differentiated in works of art, including national, psychological, social and other factors). An important aspect of the system of conflicts is the deepening into the contradictions of a person with another person, as well as into the world of contradictions within one person. At the same time, according to T.K. Chernaya, “the world of the individual and the world around the individual acquires equal importance. In this system of thinking there is a heightened, sometimes even painful, feeling of rejection of everything that hinders the affirmation of goodness, and here the generalizing power of the Russian artistic word reaches a powerful effect. But Russian literature does not simply deny those phenomena that do not arouse the approval of writers, but analyzes and studies them with its aesthetic methods of cognition, trying to determine their “own norm”. .

Literature gives an inexperienced, little lived person an opportunity that reality does not give:

the existence of a person who thinks and feels differently, perceives the world in a different way, on the one hand, to experience many other lives, try himself in different circumstances, experience still unexperienced states of love and hate, mercy and temptation, victory and defeat, and thereby receive a mediated life experience. Russian classical literature gives every person the opportunity to understand the meaning of human existence, its multidimensionality, to make the experience of E.I. Dvornikov of the Other is not just interesting, but essentially significant. It is literature that can help a person determine his life positions, his ideas about moral and immoral, warn the reader about the consequences of choosing one or another way of life, one or another value orientations, actions and their motives.

Classical literature “educates tolerance not only because, like religion, it is filled with moral truths. Not a direct preaching of ethics or a religious prohibition today can stop aggression, but admiration for the beauty of the world and the possible perfection of man, the responsiveness of the soul, capable of feeling someone else's grief or someone else's joy as their own, personal shock. The main unique feature of Russian classical literature is in humanization, in humanization, in the “dressing” of people. (Dostoevsky F.M.) Russian literature is not only an important part of the culture of the Russian state, but also the bonding structure of our spiritual life: it contains culture, history, and the focus of our spiritual shrines. The words of Stefan Zweig, who compared the characteristic positions of writers from different national cultural spheres, are well-known: “For Dickens, the goal of all aspirations will be a pretty cottage in the bosom of nature with a cheerful crowd of children, for Balzac - a castle with a peerage title and millions .... Which of the heroes of Dostoevsky strives for this?

No one .... They demand everything - the fullness of feeling, the whole depth of the world - a single life. A very expressive characteristic, especially since any other name of the Russian classic can be put in place of the name of Dostoevsky. As we can see, in Russian literature there is a completely different system of values ​​- the inner spiritual and moral freedom of the individual, responsibility to the people, the Motherland and oneself; freedom of self-development of the individual; the ability to constantly search for truth, ideals that inspire a person; creative artistic and aesthetic perception of the world; protest against any form of violence; devotion to the ideals of people's life, condemnation of the spirit of gain and selfishness.

In the images, he received a surprisingly multifaceted display of “a phenomenon that no one can escape” (Dostoevsky) - a process of difficult, contradictory, thorny formation, spiritual birth “in a person of a person” (Dostoevsky), personality - with its eternal two-pronged problem:

historically inevitable isolation and the same historically determined and morally necessary inseparability - from society, the people, humanity. For Russian writers, “a person should not be “small” and not “superfluous”, not an official, not a non-commissioned officer, not a jumper, not a darling, not Ionych, but a Man” (A.P. Chekhov). Russian classical literature is "inalienable as a force that spiritually structures and creates a person" .

Each work of the classics, belonging to enduring values, conveys the spirit of its time. At all times, philosophers, writers and poets have turned their attention to the consideration of the phenomenon of freedom. B. Spinoza believed that freedom is “a recognized necessity”, I. Kant - “self-legislation”, N.A. Berdyaev

E.I. Dvornikova

"creation". I.A. Ilyin rightly writes: “While a person enjoys freedom, he thinks little about it. He breathes, lives and enjoys it. Freedom is like air

a person breathes air without thinking about it. We usually remember it only when it is not enough, when it becomes heavy or stinking - when a person begins to suffocate. Then we remember that we cannot live without air, that we have forgotten about it and do not value it, that it is certainly necessary, that death will begin.

And further: "Freedom is the spiritual air for man." The ideal of freedom in the work of Russian writers evolves from traditional enlightenment ideas about a just social order through a romantic rejection of any form of lack of freedom and enslavement to a philosophical understanding of higher, spiritual freedom, which no tyrant alone can take away from a person.

For Pushkin, it is important to remember that God “gave man freedom and made him responsible for choosing between good and evil; This means that when deprived of freedom, a person loses the ability to distinguish between these moral poles, loses the meaning of his being, the ability to build relationships with people, his creative power.

That is why the lofty ideal of freedom spiritualizes Pushkin's poetry throughout his life. Freedom for Pushkin is the freedom to have one's own opinion about society, about the historical past of one's people, the ability to critically evaluate "high-profile rights, from which more than one head is spinning." With personal independence, the poet also associated the inviolability of the "penates", that is, the family, home, creative work. Pushkin created his own manifesto of personal freedom. Firstly, “do not give anyone / Report, only yourself / Serve and please”, and secondly, “for power, for livery / Do not bend either conscience, or thoughts, or neck.” Finally, the most important and cherished is the whole program of life: Wander here and there according to your whim. Marveling at the divine beauty of nature. And before the creations of art and inspiration Trembling joyfully in the raptures of tenderness. - That's happiness! That's right... This is Pushkin's true understanding of the true value of freedom. "Pushkin's muse - ... the muse of his thought and spiritual life is the real Russian muse: its true spiritual depth, its great and serious wisdom of life is imbued with that simplicity, artlessness, immediacy that forms the inexpressible originality of the Russian spirit." Spirit, according to M.M. Bakhtin, is the basis of the consciousness and experience of mankind, the main thing in its culture. The literature of the 19th century is “the most powerful mechanism of the organic, non-violent formation of a person through its holistic spiritual self-determination, developed over the centuries of the cultural life of mankind.”

All our literature of the 19th century is permeated with spirituality. From the perspective of the Russian philosopher I.A. Ilyin, spirituality is “a creatively creative, life-affirming beginning, it is an ideal to which a person must ascend, rise in his self-improvement” . Spirituality is the ability of a disinterested, self-valuable striving for absolute Truth, Goodness and Beauty, the realization of this striving in life and its realization as a distinctive feature of a truly human E.I. Dvornikova in man. The spirituality of Russian classical literature gave rise to its main values ​​- "this is the fullness of the relationship to Truth, a state that merges together the mind, faith, humility, gentleness, love, good deeds, catholicity, peacefulness, mercy and chastity, simple-heartedness, repentance and obedience" .

The spirituality of Russian literature lies in its catholicity. Sobornost is “a holistic combination of freedom and unity of many people based on their common love for the same absolute values.” Thus, catholicity can be defined as a form of human All-Unity (Vl. Solovyov), characteristic of the Orthodox mentality and based on an event, unity of souls, cooperation, the truth of relationships. Such an understanding of catholicity corresponded to the old Russian understanding of “lad”.

The Russian word "lad" refers to the spiritual-heart hierarchy of values. Lad mood, acquired through spiritual participation. Soul, according to M.M. Bakhtin, is what is inside a person, but at the same time it is formed from what determines it from the outside.

Russian classics in the person of Pushkin and Lermontov, Gogol and Turgenev, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, Leskov and Chekhov, etc. once again reminded that a person has a soul, which is often out of order, which can hurt, suffer, suffer, and which needs in love, pity, compassion. It is the soul that is one of the main characters in Russian literature. V.A. Zhukovsky "opened the human soul to Russian poetry" - wrote G.A. Gukovsky. This is the inner world of a person, the sphere of his heartfelt feelings, his soul. The poet penetrates deeply into the spiritual organization of the depicted person and reproduces the world of his own soul. “The soul is that common thing that is given to people, that brings them together, and does not separate them.”

Spiritual and spiritual features make up the "aesthetics of the soul" of positive characters in the works of Pushkin and Gogol, Turgenev and Nekrasov, Goncharov, Leskov, Ostrovsky, Dostoevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Tolstoy and Chekhov: freedom, righteousness, love of truth, tolerance, kindness, mercy, conscience , suffering, compassion, repentance, love, humility, pity, mind, sublimity, honor, nobility, justice, honesty, true self-worth, selflessness, a sense of duty and responsibility, gullibility, tolerance, openness, sincerity, simplicity, modesty, the ability to forgive , organicity and integrity of the worldview, worldview - these properties, psychologically conditioned by the lack of self-love and extinguishing its aggressively predatory manifestations, constitute the "solid core" of people, which is characterized by their organic disposition to goodness. Indeed, according to the deep conviction of A.P. Chekhov, "... the world is not dying from robbers and not from thieves, but from hidden hatred, from enmity between good people, from all these petty squabbles that people do not see ...". . Their absence in a pure and kind heart of selfish motives and mercantile attitudes allows them to more fully understand and love other people more cordially. All this does not exacerbate, but, on the contrary, softens the pride and selfishness of others, narrows the border of their self, contributes to E.I. Dvornikov to the discovery of the good sides of their souls (B.N. Tarasov). Such is the influence of Prince Myshkin on General Yepanchin in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "The Idiot": "The prince's gaze was so tender at that moment, and his smile before that without any hint of at least some hidden hostile feeling," that Yepanchin immediately abandoned his wariness. Angry and ready to destroy the prince, Rogozhin, when meeting with him, lost all his anger, and he became "still in love" with him. The beneficial effect of a heartfelt understanding attitude towards people is also manifested in the love-pity of Prince Myshkin, which, in contrast to love-passion, does not make its subject an object of subordination and domination. In his craving for Nastasya Filippovna, one felt “as if attracted to some miserable and sick child, who is difficult and even impossible to leave to one’s will,” and he “loves her not with love, but with pity.”

His choice between Aglaya and Nastasya Filippovna was predetermined as follows: "After all, she is so unhappy." Humanity and unselfishness, still unknown to her, contribute to a moral shift in a hardened soul: “And the prince for me is that I believed in him for the first time in my whole life, as a truly devoted person. He believed in me at one glance, and I believe him.” The transforming effect of Prince Myshkin's concretely good behavior was repeatedly emphasized by Dostoevsky.

In the novel "The Brothers Karamazov" for the "meek" Alyosha Karamazov, the ability to compassion, generated by spiritual responsiveness, is a vital matter.

This is a spiritual calling for him, tireless mental work. Even in his incorrigible father, something good stirred when communicating with a good-natured, open and trusting son. “Alyosha’s arrival, as it were, had an effect on him even from the moral side, as if something had woken up in this untimely old man from what had long died out in his soul.” Seeing in his youngest son a “complete lack of contempt” for himself, Fyodor Pavlovich admits: “I’m only not afraid of you ... With you, I only had good moments, otherwise I’m an evil person.” The healing power in his brother is also seen by Ivan Karamazov, who always smiled maliciously, and when meeting with him suddenly opened up with a “joyful”, “childish” side. “... You are my brother, it’s not you I want to corrupt and move from your foundation, I, perhaps, would like to heal myself with you,” Ivan suddenly smiled, just like a small, meek boy. Alyosha had never seen such a smile on him before.

"Unexplored" (Dostoevsky) line in people's souls is drawn by Alyosha Karamazov. The "onion" he gave turned Grusha's heart upside down, expanding the zone of goodness in it. He saw in her not just a woman, an object of passion, but also a person, a tortured person in need of help, understanding and sincere sympathy.

“He took pity on me first, the only one, that’s what!”

“...Pity is our treasure and it is scary to eradicate it from society. When society stops pitying the weak and the oppressed, then it will feel bad for itself:

it will harden and wither, it will become depraved and fruitless,” wrote F.M. Dostoevsky. It was Dostoevsky who called for the cultivation of E.I. Dvornikov's sincerity, kindness, openness, patience. In "Crime and Punishment"

Sonya Marmeladova in the conditions of a poor, difficult, rough life (discord in the relationship between father and stepmother and, as a result, father's drunkenness, the family's plight, Katerina Ivanovna's illness, forced fall and mental suffering after it, the murder of Lizaveta, death, father, Luzhin's accusation of theft, the death of her stepmother, the experiences associated with Raskolnikov (recognition, trial, hard labor.)) managed to preserve a pure soul, love for people, faith in goodness. Sonya has an amazing moral instinct for kindness and truth, a rare ability to see in people, first of all, their best qualities, be it the landlords Kapernaumovs (“The hosts are very good, very affectionate.

And very kind...”) or convicts. The grief, loss, suffering she endured taught Sonya to "pray, believe, hope, endure, forgive ... and love." In the episode when Marmeladov asks his daughter for money for a hangover, she “brought out thirty kopecks, with her own hands, the last, everything that happened, I saw myself ... She didn’t say anything, she just looked at me silently ... So not on earth, and there ... they yearn for people, cry, but they don’t reproach, they don’t reproach! .. And it hurts more, sir, it hurts more when they don’t reproach! .. ”Marmeladov felt great patience and love in Sonya’s eyes. In him, miserable and lost, she saw a man who was kind and tormented by the fact that Katerina Ivanovna did not love him (“Oh, if only she had pity on me!”), A man who “has come to hell.” And most importantly - do not judge. Compassion and love, instead of condemnation, awaken in the hero a feeling of guilt, pangs of conscience, from which repentance is born before death (Pavel Florensky also explained the power of the sacrament of repentance (repentance) - this is not a forgiven sin, but the extermination of the past, when the sinful past is crossed out, scraped out of the soul, is destroyed in it, and in the context of the Orthodox worldview of F. Dostoevsky, the revival of the soul of Marmeladov takes place.

Sonya, after Raskolnikov’s confession of the murder, intuitively immediately realized that a terrible substitution of values ​​had taken place: the true, God’s in Raskolnikov’s soul was replaced by the devilish: a rational, soulless theory, this gloomy catechism became his faith and law: “What have you ... done to yourself! » Sonya perceives Raskolnikov’s confession very sharply, with all her soul, suffering immensely for him, the author notes this in the remarks: “she cried out with suffering”, “she said with suffering”, “thrown herself on his neck, hugged him and squeezed him tightly with her hands, cried sobbing", "shrieked, clasping her hands" ...

She immediately understood the tragedy of the situation:

“No, there is no one more unhappy than you now in the whole world!” It is Sonechka's humble compassion that makes an impact on Raskolnikov's solid "Napoleonic" soul, a good feeling "rushed into his soul like a wave and softened it at once."

Meek Sonya chose a different path than Raskolnikov - not rebellion, but humility before God. But meekness and humility in no way mean lack of will or slavish obedience, as ordinary consciousness often suggests. And Sonya, previously timid, silent, is now passionately amazed at Raskolnikov’s conclusions: “This is a person E.I. Dvornikov's age is a louse! "Kill? Do you have the right to kill? .. ”In her words one can feel a huge moral force. And Raskolnikov "looked ... into those meek blue eyes that could sparkle with such fire, such a harsh energetic feeling, at this small body, still trembling with indignation and anger, and all this seemed to him more and more strange, almost impossible."

Humility as a virtue and “consists in the complete absence of pride, ambition and prickly self-love, in the tendency to simply forget about one’s self and treat all people as beings who are completely equal to themselves and each other; all reasons for hostility towards people due to concern for one’s self disappear, and loving participation in someone else’s life comes to the fore. Raskolnikov "looked at Sonya and felt how much her love was on him!" That highest, brightest love, compassionate, merciful, Christian, seeing in him, stumbled

A person, love that will lead Sonya to hard labor to save him, love is silent, unobtrusive, not requiring an answer. “Insatiable compassion”, “foolishness” of Sonechka turns out to be life-building, soul-saving for Raskolnikov. After all, the main thing for a person is the temple of the soul, which he acquires through suffering, for a person with a temple in his soul has already found the most important bonds in the universe - the bonds of faith, which are built only by love, joy and beauty, the very one that "saves the world."

A.P. Chekhov's story "Student" performs the oldest and, in fact, the main function of literature - orienting. The 22-year-old character Ivan Velikopolsky does not believe in the improvement of life even in a thousand years, and sees the meaning of human existence not at the end of human history, but at its beginning.

Here, as in the Bible, “the beginning is not just a temporary starting point, but a kind of womb of originality, foundation, principle and origin. It not only was, but, as it were, continues to exist and coexist with the present as a special level of being, on which everything is “correct”, therefore a person who wants to act “correctly” is obliged to check with the “beginning” as a model. A.P. Chekhov in his story touches the beginning. Chekhov's student Ivan Velikopolsky manages to "check with the beginning". He learns to live, think, feel, experiencing joy and satisfaction from all this, being not a bastard and not a hero, but an ordinary person. It is these three points of reference in human behavior - meanness, heroism, the norm - that are discussed in a conversation between student Ivan and peasant women Vasilisa and Lukerya.

Chekhov accurately, unobtrusively connects the reader to this conversation: “We talked,” he writes, and puts an end to it: the conversation was disinterested - the student of widows does not “agitate”, and they don’t need anything from him. Just people met.

Representatives of the same culture:

I suppose she was on the twelve gospels?

Was, - answered Vasilisa. .

E.I. Dvornikova

And therefore, Vasilisa has in her worldly asset some reference points, viable symbols. Such a person will not begin to endlessly slide down in worldly despair, for he knows that it is still impossible to fall below Judas (meanness). He will not strive endlessly upwards in vain pride, for he knows that it is still impossible to rise above Christ (heroism in suffering, endless self-sacrifice, the final victory over evil through its redemption). With wisdom and realism he will treat the ups and downs of his difficult life as an ordinary person. The student reminded Vasilisa and Lukerya of only one story from the 22nd chapter of "From Luke of the Holy Gospel" - a magnificent finished work of art - the episode with Peter. It is the Gospel of Luke that is closer, more understandable to modern man than other Christian canonical texts: researcher S.S.

Averintsev not without reason notes the “literary talent and rare ability of psychological empathy” of the author and even points out that in this third Gospel “Jesus is depicted more divinely than in the first two, but at the same time much more humane” . Artistic symbolism is emerging of a type that will become the main one for world art for at least another two millennia: it is not a dead sign of a frozen meaning, but a living image of a living one. And the first such humanized symbol is Christ: God and at the same time - a living person, capable of tormenting, doubting, suffering.

In the story of A.P. Chekhov, we are talking about such universal and ambiguous things as courage and betrayal. There is voluntary betrayal. It cannot be named and explained otherwise than as a direct invasion of evil: “Satan entered into Judas, called Iscariot, one of the twelve, and he went and talked with the chief priests and rulers, how to betray him to them” [Lk., 22 ,3-4].

It is interesting that Luke, unlike other evangelists, does not say anything about the notorious thirty pieces of silver (a considerable amount at that time!), As if indirectly refusing any rational explanation of Judas' act, making it clear that no self-interest can be a true and sufficient motive for the betrayal of a teacher by a student. It is from Satan.

There is an involuntary betrayal. It comes from human weakness.

The average person considers himself strong enough to live honestly and with dignity. “With You I am ready to go to prison and to death,” Peter says to Jesus. - “But He said: I tell you, Peter, the rooster will not crow today until you deny three times that you do not know Me” [Luke 22:33-34].

Precisely, without any changes, quoting this dialogue between Jesus and Peter, the Chekhov student then, as it were, tries to put himself in the place of Peter and thereby, as it were, only continues the process outlined by Luke in relation to Peter (after all, the main image for the evangelist is still Jesus) process " psychological empathy”: “... and Peter, exhausted, tortured by melancholy and anxiety, you know, not getting enough sleep,

E.I. Dvornikova

anticipating that something terrible was about to happen on earth, he followed ... He passionately, without memory, loved Jesus, and now he saw from afar how he was beaten ... ".

The Chekhov student himself did not notice how he got carried away, began to think up the details for the evangelist, how, conveying the entire degree of Peter's despair, he inadvertently switched to the language of a man of his time, longing for a perceptibly close, but also hopelessly lost ideal. It was at this moment that Chekhov for the first time noted a glimmer of attention and understanding of the listeners: “Lukerya left the spoons and fixed her motionless gaze on the student. Chekhov was able to keep our attention on the problem that seemed to him the only important one. And the philosopher S.N. Bulgakov was right when he wrote that “of all the philosophical problems ... Chekhov most often and persistently raises this question not about the strength of a person, but about his impotence ... A universal, and therefore a philosophical question which gives the main content to Chekhov's work, is the question of moral weakness, the impotence of goodness in the soul of the average person ... ”But if this question is solvable, then life is easier for a person. He will not become stronger, but he will know where to direct his strength. “... If she cried,” the student thinks about his interlocutor, a peasant woman, “it means that everything that happened that terrible night with Peter has something to do with her ...”. At this moment, Chekhov again forces his hero to see the light of the "lonely fire" in the widow's gardens, only now for this he needs to look back. The student continues his gloomy journey in the gloomy world, but from now on he knows for sure that “the past ... is connected by the present with an uninterrupted chain of events that followed one from the other. And it seemed to him that he had just seen both ends of this chain: he touched one end, as the other trembled.

And the future is excluded from Chekhov's world as a starting point or an ultimate goal.

In this world, the thought of the future is possible only as a development of the sense of the present:

either “all these horrors were, are and will be” (as it seems to the hero at the beginning of the story), or “a feeling of youth, health, strength” (“he was only 22 years old”) is directly associated with “an inexpressibly sweet expectation of happiness” (in the final ). And the “idea” of the story is even grammatically related to the past: “the truth and beauty that guided human life there, in the garden and in the courtyard of the high priest, continued uninterruptedly to this day and, apparently, have always been the main thing in human life and in general on earth” (and they don’t, and even more so they won’t). Maybe this is an accident?.. But, according to the correct remark of I.A. Vinogradov, the author’s high opinion about the “Student” “if it does not tell us about the value of the short story, then, at least, allows us to conclude that Chekhov expressed in it something especially essential for him, especially organically “rethinking and re-feeling...” . After all, a real work of fiction is always a bunch of spirituality.

Let the literary text be not truth itself, let it be a reflection of it, but a reflection of an instant

E.I. Dvornikova

venous, bright, memorable, which sometimes "changes lives, tunes the soul"

(I. Ehrenburg). Thus, Russian classical literature radiates “spiritual light, illuminating the soul, enlightening the heart, guiding the mind, prompting it the way of life” (F.M. Dostoevsky).

The works of Russian literature contain a huge number of facts of pedagogical value. They are an artistic reflection of reality, the fruit of fantasy, creative imagination, insight, foresight.

The essence of the story "Hadji Murad" by Leo Tolstoy is not only in the denial of evil, violence and cruelty, not only in the affirmation of all the best in a person, but also in warning to all living today. The peculiarity of Tolstoy's skill, which, with the help of an accurate statement, a vivid image, a key word, determines the problem of the story. And not only defines, but also warns and denies.

What does Tolstoy deny?

“The road to the house was a fallow, freshly plowed black earth field. I was walking along a dusty black earth road. The plowed field was a landowner's field, very large, so that on both sides of the road and forward up the mountain nothing could be seen except black, evenly furrowed, not yet rushed steam. The plowing was good, and not a single plant, not a single grass was visible anywhere in the field - everything was black. “What a destructive, cruel creature, man, only destroyed various living creatures, plants to maintain his life,” I thought, involuntarily looking for something alive among this dead black field.

What makes a person be destructive, cruel?

The struggle for power is the main source of cruelty. What is power for?

“He imagined how he, with the army that Vorontsov would give him, would go to Shamil and capture him, and take revenge on him, and how the Russian Tsar would reward him, and he would again rule not only Avaria, but all of Chechnya, which submit to him."

Power as an end in itself develops into tyranny, despotism, i.e. unlimited power.

Tolstoy finds words to show that Hadji Murad is first and foremost a victim of despotism himself: "I am bound, and Shamil has the end of the rope." The dying Hadji Murad sees the pale face of his enemy Shamil, with a red beard and narrowed eyes.

The essence of Shamil is unequivocal: he is the embodiment of absolute power, which provides him with all the blessings of life. And the fact that this happens at the expense of the life and freedom of others is not important to him. So, the essence of the first problem lies in the denial of cruelty, violence and their highest manifestation - despotic power. But is all power evil? Did Tolstoy himself have power over people? Tolstoy was the ruler of people's souls, he had moral power, he had great authority, i.e.

E.I. Dvornikova

bluish lips, ”and this speaks of the initially good, good in his character.

Tolstoy denies cruelty, despotism. War is death, destruction. And the pages of the story, like a chronicle, tell about the senseless death of people. “The inhabitants were faced with a choice: to remain in their places and restore with terrible efforts everything that had been established with such labor and so easily and senselessly destroyed ... or, contrary to religious law and a feeling of disgust and contempt for the Russians, submit to them”

(ch. XVII). Hadji Murad was forced to take part in the war, and this war became a trap for him, leading to a proud but senseless death. The text contains words that are a requiem for such a bright, outstanding person: “The nightingales, silent during the shooting, again clicked, first one close and then others at the far end” (ch. XXV). Nightingales sing, life triumphs, and against this background, the death of the hero of the story seems even more senseless.

So, Tolstoy denies the senseless massacre and affirms life, glorifies and defends man. Tolstoy solves the problems of creation and destruction with his story. Creation is higher than destruction - the writer convinces us. People of different nationalities are able to find a common language, to agree among themselves. No one can blame anyone for national affiliation, belonging to a particular religion. In the story, Avdeev speaks of the Tatars: “And what are these, my brother, good bare-headed guys ... By God! I talked to them like." The words of Marya Dmitrievna about Hadji Murad: “Courteous, smart, fair ... But why condemn when a person is good. He is a Tatar, but a good one.” So say and think simple, sincere people who do not know self-interest.

A.S. Pushkin dreamed about the same:

“When peoples, having forgotten strife, will unite in a great family...”. People can and should be united in their striving for good. And you should never forget about it.

Otherwise - a senseless death, the death of innocent people. Tolstoy warns about this.

In today's social situation with a powerful flow of negative information about the world and man, it is difficult to resist the onslaught of the cult of power, cynicism, and indifference.

The artistic experience of N. Leskov helps to take a closer look at a person who is still for some reason called “simple”, and to see in the Russian soul that which allowed both the “city” and the “whole earth” to withstand the most severe trials.

The phenomenon of righteousness in Russian classical literature appears as a moral and psychological landmark, as a guarantee of hope for salvation. It was N. Leskov who was one of the first to fully portray the images of the righteous, “to convey the national identity and Orthodox worldview of the Russian person, merging together the mind, faith, will, humility, love, peacefulness, mercy and chastity, simple-heartedness, obedience and audacity in striving to the truth, to the spirituality of life and the ability to repent ... ". The righteous of Leskov are known by the presence of spiritual light in their souls, the well-being of the heart,

E.I. Dvornikova

our moral development and influence. The righteous Leskov returned the true meaning to such concepts and way of life as asceticism, holiness, a righteous life. The basis of the righteousness of Alexander Afanasyevich Ryzhov ("Odnodum") Bible. The Bible became not just a material for his “thinking,” it passed through his heart, through his conscience; the hero himself says that he drew the beliefs he professed "from the Holy Scriptures and my conscience." He consciously builds a life program and defines moral values ​​that have become his original spiritual catechism and meet both the needs of his mind and soul. “He (God - E.D.) is always with me, and besides him, no one is afraid”, “Eat your bread in the sweat of your face”, “God forbids taking bribes”, “I will not accept gifts”, “if you have a great curb , then you can get by with small means”, “dressing for simplicity, I don’t find any use in this panache”, “it’s not about the dress, but about reason and conscience”, “lying is forbidden by the commandment - I won’t lie.” And “the rules he created for himself on biblical soil”, he observed and carried “throughout almost a century-long journey to the grave, never stumbling ...”. “... He honestly served everyone and especially did not please anyone; in his thoughts, he reported to the one in whom he always and firmly believed, calling him the founder and owner of all things”, “pleasure ... consisted in doing his duty”, served “faithfully and truthfully”, was “zealous and serviceable” in his position , after Ryzhov assumed the position of a quarterly “little by little, his kind master’s inspection began to be felt everywhere”, was moderate in everything and with his wife “lived in the strictest moderation, but did not consider it a misfortune”, “was not proud”, “strict and sober mood of his healthy soul, living in a healthy and strong body. Leskov conceived his righteous people to set an example of true high morality, "to remind Russia how to live." Odnodum Ryzhov, in his youth, decided “to become strong himself in order to shame the strongest,” because he was sure that life can only be improved by personal example, always acting in good conscience. Leskov's ideal is always associated with the idea of ​​goodness, with the idea of ​​how it should be. “We have not translated, and the righteous will not be translated,” N. Leskov begins the story “The Cadet Monastery”, in which “people are tall, people of such a mind, heart, honesty and character that it seems there is no need to look for the best”

They appear in their difficult everyday life as educators and mentors of young cadets. Their deeply wise attitude to education contributed to the formation in the pupils of that "spirit of camaraderie, the spirit of mutual help and compassion, which gives warmth and vitality to any environment, with the loss of which people cease to be people and become cold egoists, incapable of any business that requires selflessness and valor. » . Leskovsky "righteous" - people who believe in a good ideal, whole, sincere, striving for "daily valor"

The ability to "live a righteously long life from day to day, without lying, without deceiving, without deceit, without upsetting your neighbor ...". The ideal is always associated with the representation

E.I. Dvornikova

about good, with an idea of ​​what it should be. The "righteous" Leskov, great in their humanity, inspired by a high ideal, testify to the "righteousness of all our smart and kind people." The Leskovsky righteous wisely teach to understand that by living like this, a person not only changes himself internally, but also voluntarily or involuntarily transforms everything around him with the light of his love; realize that the higher a person is spiritually, the greater the moral demands he must make to himself; that the battlefield of Good and Evil is the soul of a person and its outcome depends on the moral choice of the person himself, that this “Eternal Battle” lasts until the last hour of his life; that the sufferings experienced by him serve as lessons of love, goodness and truth and contribute to the improvement of his spiritual nature.

At one time, F.M. Dostoevsky argued: “Society is created by moral principles,” and these moral principles are laid in the family.

Description of the home in the novels of S.T. Aksakov (“The Childhood of Bagrov the Grandson”), L.N.

Tolstoy ("Childhood", "Boyhood", "Youth"), I.A. Goncharov ("Cliff") abound with poetry, beauty, inspiration. We understand that the house is a form for the embodiment of human love, and this is the place where love should by no means cease its aesthetic existence.

The fading hearth testifies to global changes in people's relations, since the history of the House is not the history of architecture, furniture or wardrobe, because the house is not only a dwelling, but also the soul of a person, his family. The idea of ​​the family as a shrine that gives moral strength to a person is reflected in A. Pushkin's "The Captain's Daughter", the idea of ​​the family is highly placed by Lermontov in his brilliant "Song about Tsar Ivan Vasilievich ...". I.S. defended her. Turgenev in "Fathers and Sons", in "Cliff" by I.A. Goncharov; N.S. fought for it against the violent nihilists. Leskov ("Nowhere", "On Knives"), F.M. Dostoevsky ("Demons"), L.N.

Tolstoy ("War and Peace", "Anna Karenina").

But as the same Dostoevsky believed, "the modern Russian family is becoming more and more random family." The accident of the modern Russian family consists in the loss of its common idea, “which binds them together, in which they themselves would believe and would teach their children to believe in this way, would pass on to them this faith in life” . The novel by M.E. tells about the formation of personality in a “random family”. Saltykov-Shchedrin "Lord Golovlev". The tragedy of the “random family” is that it releases “random” people into the world. A deadly fossil is characteristic of the world of the Golovlev family: Arina Petrovna, “numb in apathy of authority” and “numbing” all household members with her “icy gaze”;

Judas, stricken with moral paralysis, moral "ossification" and paralyzing others; The dunce, who "as if turned to stone", having returned to the estate, does not even die, but "stuns". Anna Petrovna Golovleva, imperious and despotic, does not have any feelings for the family, nothing connects her with her

E.I. Dvornikova

a family in which there are no good, human relations. Everything is saturated with indifference, cruelty, heartlessness. The husband is “not her friend”, he is “a windmill”, “stringless balalaika” for her; "the children did not touch a single string of her inner being." For her, they are a burden. Demanding unconditional obedience from the children, she killed in them every germ of independence and initiative. Frequent punishments developed the habit of not feeling shame, easily enduring a humiliating situation. “... Constant humiliation,” explains Shchedrin himself, “on meeting soft, easily forgetting soil ... formed a slavish character, accommodating to the point of buffoonery, not knowing a sense of proportion and devoid of any foresight. Such individuals readily succumb to any influence and can become anything: drunkards, beggars, jesters, and even criminals ... ".

The Golovlevs, who have forgotten the meaning of human existence, seem to be infected with a common spiritual disease, which mercilessly, one by one, takes them to the grave. Golovlevog is a grave crypt, a family morgue: “All deaths, all poisons, all ulcers - everything comes from here. Here the feeding of rotten corned beef took place, here for the first time words were heard in the ears: hateful, beggars, parasites, insatiable wombs, etc. cause, weak-willed in the face of difficulties, unable to resist the temptations of an idle life. It doomed them to deprivation, loneliness, suffering of self-love, torn soul, bitterness, isolation, cold and hunger.

Beloved son of Arina Petrovna - “During the long empty life of the womb, Judas never even in his thoughts admitted that right there, side by side with his existence, the process of mortification was taking place. He lived quietly and little by little, without haste and praying to God, and did not at all imagine that it was precisely from this that a more or less severe injury would result. And consequently, the less he could admit that he himself was the culprit of these injuries. “And suddenly the terrible truth illuminated his conscience...”.

Conscience is a binder in a person, holding and being held, without it, the process of irrepressible decay begins. In the "unscrupulous world" the Goal is lost, goals appear: the meaning is lost, the "calculation to live" appears. Conscience "returns" to a person, but he is already a "destroyed temple", "an old man", an empty, trampled place, "undead", "entrance house", an uninhabited person; he let himself be filled with the evil of the world and its "drunken breaths". What does a person realize at the moment when the awakened Conscience speaks in him? “- You must forgive me! he continued. - For everyone... and for those who no longer exist... What is it! What has happened?! he exclaimed almost bewilderedly, looking around. “Where is...everyone...?” Porfiry Vladimirovich’s words are perceived as a symbol of Shchedrin’s call to people, to readers to feel their own existence as life (“forgive ... for oneself” the feeling of guilt for forgetting oneself) and to feel someone else’s life as one’s own.

E.I. Dvornikova

own (forgive ... for everyone ... "- a feeling of guilt for forgetting other people's lives). The meaning of life on earth is in the fulfillment of these covenants of Conscience. A person must fulfill these covenants and fulfill them. Shchedrin puts humanity before a choice: either humanity, having expelled Conscience, cooled down and fallen, will become numb in "disgust", wallow in vile self-destruction, or it will nurture that growing little child in which conscience also grows. “And the little child will be a great man, and there will be a great conscience in him. And then all untruths, deceit and violence will disappear, because the conscience will not be timid” (“Conscience Lost”). In fact, this is how Shchedrin understood that "case" into which all Russian literature was so eagerly waiting. It meant for the artist an attempt to ignite all of humanity with a single idea, to unite, centralize it in an effort to bring this “general idea” to life. Shchedrin considered the “work” to be the work of incarnating the word of Conscience in man and humanity. Saltykov Shchedrin's novel warns: where there is unlimited power, there is a cruel attitude towards a person; where there is no urge to work, there is corruption of the personality; where there is labor in the name of hoarding, there is spiritual devastation; where spirituality has died, there are no relatives, no sincerity, no joy of human existence. To find the true meaning of life, true happiness, active human activity, illuminated by the light of conscience and goodness, is necessary.

Russian writers have never believed that evil, cruelty, selfish willfulness are normal human manifestations. And the Napoleonic theme, associated with the cult of a strong personality, to whom everything is permitted, it was not by chance that Pushkin with his Hermann, who has the profile of Napoleon, Lermontov with his “highest judge” over people Arbenin, Gogol, who compares the swindler Chichikov with Napoleon, was in the center of attention. For them, "life is a business deal"; (Dostoevsky F.M.

"Humiliated and Insulted"). The only law of their human existence

Cynical selfish willfulness, permissiveness. The spiritual and psychological tragedy "Mozart and Salieri" is A. Pushkin's study of a strong human passion, whose name is envy. Envy is a passion that dries up and disfigures the soul of Salieri. It is the reason for his intolerance of other people's opinion, misunderstanding of the true destiny of man, conviction in his absolute infallibility, in self-permission to judge everyone and everything, to express indisputable truths, to pass judgment on the Mozarts. Blind and ruthless envy pushes Salieri to fulfill his "heavy duty" - to destroy Mozart. A. Pushkin addresses the theme of a hero without a heart, who puts himself above everyone else, can commit a crime, justifying this with a lofty goal. A. Pushkin was one of the first to touch upon the topic of crime, that is, crime through the gospel commandments. Self-realization of the personality, which occurs due to the destruction of one's own kind, leads to the justification of evil and violence, cowardice and meanness, lies and betrayal, cynicism, soullessness and immorality. Russian literature represented by its best representatives - A. Pushkin, M. Lermontov, N. Gogol,

E.I. Dvornikova

L. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky, A. Chekhov and others - with amazing vigilance saw how much inhumanity is in a person, and strove to find a person in a person.

Rodion Raskolnikov in the novel "Crime and Punishment" by F. Dostoevsky came to the idea that any development was and is being carried out at the expense of someone, on someone's suffering, sacrifice and blood. He is attracted by the idea of ​​a "superman" to whom "everything is allowed", who does not neglect victims and violence. He conducts a tragic experiment, wishing to assert himself, to satisfy his unquenched lust for power, his superiority over the millionth human "herd", which must be kept in obedience "for his own good." Raskolnikov is not yet aware of the dead end of his theory, which rejects the unshakable moral law, the essence of which is, according to M. Tugan-Baranovsky, that “every human personality is the supreme shrine, completely regardless of what the moral merits of this person are, no one can be means in the hands of another, and each constitutes an end in itself ... ". Dostoevsky shows that a crime conceived as a demand for unlimited freedom turns out to be, in the final analysis, perfect unfreedom. “In the current image of the world, freedom is believed to be in unbridledness, while real freedom is only in overcoming oneself and one’s will, so that in the end one reaches such a moral state that one should always be one’s own true master at any moment. And unbridled desires only lead to your slavery. The murder introduced Raskolnikov to the world of evil, which led him to a feeling of "openness and isolation from humanity." Raskolnikov's crime is "being in arbitrariness". That is why the heroine of Russian classical prose, the timid, meek Sonya, leads Raskolnikov, imperceptibly, by the aspiration of her pure soul and life to the realization of important eternal truths. And Raskolnikov saw the most important thing in Sonya's soul - filled with Christian light - understanding, mercy, faith, the ability to suffer. Thanks to suffering, pride, selfish self-satisfaction, envy and malice are eradicated in the human soul. And suffering, according to Yu.N. Sokhryakov, was understood by Russian classics as one of the forms of introducing a person to a spiritual state, as a means of becoming a person. It is no coincidence that in Russian the concepts of suffering and compassion are closely related. Suffering is suffering together with others, sympathy for another in his troubles and misfortunes. To be compassionate means to take on some of the suffering of others. Compassion brings the perception of life to the universal level; "...

Compassion is the most important and, perhaps, the only law of the existence of all mankind. This is the "law of being" of everyone who considers himself a man. That is why "raising the level of education in our dear homeland always means raising the level of compassion ... at least, hitherto it has always been so."

(Dostoevsky F.M.) t It is precisely “Russian literature that is characterized by compassion and humanity, which amazed the whole world.” The heroes of Tolstoy

E.I. Dvornikova

Dostoevsky, Chekhov and other Russian writers, suffering was never awakened by faith in one's own exclusivity, in superiority over others; it was generated by deep inner work, the search for meaningful forms of life and the need for spiritual and moral perfection.

V. A. Zhukovsky saw the meaning of life in "the dissemination of ideas that are beneficial for mankind ... perfecting the soul." In the elegy "Rural Cemetery" (1802), a merciful attitude towards a simple worker allowed the epic hero to formulate his life credo, a program of self-improvement, permeated with high humanistic pathos: always follow the voice of conscience and honor, do not grovel before the powers that be, do not be seduced by flattery and not serve their pride, not to be cruel and indifferent to those who suffer, to value in life not success, fame, pleasure, but kindness, responsiveness, the ability to feel someone else's pain, readiness to help those in need.

Every hero L.H. Tolstoy in his own way is looking for harmony, in his own way he goes the way of searching for truth, in which the process is no less important than the result. “In order to live honestly, one must tear, get confused, fight, make mistakes, start and quit again, and always fight and lose. And peace is spiritual meanness. Together with the characters, the author is also looking for answers to eternal questions. "The artist, in order to act on others, must be a seeker, so that his work is a search."

The moral quest of each of the characters is individual. But there is something that unites them: life forces each of them to constantly revise their views, beliefs developed earlier, at new stages of moral development are questioned and replaced by others. A new life experience destroys the belief in what seemed to be an unshakable truth not so long ago. The moral path of the heroes of the novel is a change of opposite cycles of spiritual life: faith is replaced by disappointment, followed by the acquisition of a new faith, the return of the lost meaning of life.

Russian writers believed that "perfection, work with oneself ...

victory over oneself, and not over the enemy, is the main goal ... for it is believed that "he who overcomes himself becomes invincible." . Russian classical literature strove to create the image of a “positively beautiful person”

(Dostoevsky), experiencing a reverent attitude to life, the inextricable connection of human life with the past - the centuries-old history of ancestors, customs, way of life, possessing a sense of the Motherland, without which the existence of a person "becomes unnatural, unthinkable, unbearable" (Dostoevsky F.M.) More V.A. Zhukovsky turned to the process of "returning" the national past, its rethinking, active revival and "preservation of the past, the process of discovering the new in the old, the accumulation of cultural values." Zhukovsky's work is a movement towards the creation of "original original national literature, imbued with the spirit, outlook, thinking of its people". Zhukovsky, referring to the past, found in

E.I. Dvornikova

him new sources of inspiration. They are heroic and ethical works of folklore, reflecting the dramatic Russian Middle Ages, national life and customs in their moral, historical and ethnographic coverage;

Russian character in its historical originality. Zhukovsky... opened the way for the creation of characters focused on the original images of the past, "illumined"

the idea of ​​the national liberation struggle, the defense of the Fatherland, the ideas of comradeship, the spiritual unity of the people. It was Zhukovsky who keenly felt the need for knowledge of the universal in the sphere of the national and the ability to see the universal in the national.

When the Russian emigration was looking for a center that could unite everyone, a spiritual center that would contain the highest meaning of Russia's purpose on earth, express a sense of national dignity, honor and be able to give a chance for equality with rich cultural Europe, this center became a Russian European A.S. Pushkin. And not the West, but the Russians needed him, for the Russians he was the justification of their hopes for a worthy future. And today one cannot but agree with D.S. Likhachev that “Pushkin is a genius who managed to create the ideal of a nation. Not just to "display", not just to "depict" the national features of the Russian character, but to create the ideal of Russian nationality, the ideal of culture.

But even F.M. Dostoevsky in the essay “Pushkin”, speaking of the “worldwide responsiveness” and “all-humanity” of the poet, wrote:

“Future future Russian people will already understand everything to the last, what to become a real Russian will mean exactly: to strive to bring reconciliation into European contradictions already completely, to indicate the outcome of European longing in their Russian soul, all-human and all-connecting ...” (F.M. Dostoevsky). In this regard, the article by O.S. Soina "The Fate of Pushkin and the Fate of Russia", in which she gives an interpretation of the "all-humanity" of Russian national identity. A person who possesses it "represents a truly unique ability ... to contain in his self-consciousness the main cultural-historical and national-artistic types of Europe in their creative simultaneity, without in any way losing the choosing independence of the creative will, incorruptibility of thought and spirit »

He, possessing not only the gift of empathy, but also the need to empathize and sympathize, acts as a "harmonizing balance of seemingly polarized elements, like a kind of complexly organized cosmos.,. unites them (cultural-historical types) without dissolving in each other; reconciles them without humiliating or suppressing them.

And just as every person lives not someone else's, but his own life, so each national integrity lives its own, and not someone else's history, inherent in itself. Some kind of “calling, (pre)appointment, fate are felt: a pull (in front) and a push (from behind) to self-realization of one’s essence ... This is a spring-source from which fountains-geysers of national myths - images-symbols are knocked out onto the light surface of phenomena and words

E.I. Dvornikova

catch, parables, in which the country and the people of Socrates work "know thyself" is carried out. A certain self-representation about oneself, one's essence, purpose and meaning of existence. And just like a person without self-consciousness and pride, dignity, so a national organism without such self-consciousness (“national pride”) is lifeless, worthless, dull - and falls off. The feeling of the Motherland is one of the manifestations of spirituality, which makes a person an individual, and a nation a people. Russia ^ is “the national vessel of the Spirit of God, it is our native altar, and the temple, and the blood of the grandfather’s hearth consecrated by it. And that is why “Motherland” for us is not an object of everyday addiction, but a genuine shrine ... It is impossible to extinguish this shrine in oneself. She needs to live. It is worth fighting for and dying for." To love the Motherland means “to perceive Russia with the heart, to see with love its precious originality ...”, “to believe in Russia as all Russian great people, all its geniuses and its builders believed in it”. The words "motherland", "people", "nature" are related, one-root words denoting a single cathedral organism. A.S. Pushkin, in his last letter to Chaadaev dated October 19, 1836, wrote “For no reason in the world would I want to change my fatherland or have a different history than our ancestors, such as God gave it to us”

M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote: "I love Russia to the point of heartache, and I can't even imagine myself anywhere but Russia...". These words are the center of all the writer's work, whose anger and contempt were born out of a harsh and demanding love for the Motherland, from a hard-won faith in its creative forces. In the work of M.

Lermontov's Motherland is a reflection on a strange love, the main thing in this feeling is not what is considered to be the basis of patriotism (pride in the country's history, consciousness of its strength, which ensures the peace of a great power ...). M.

Lermontov found new sounds and colors, found new words, so simple and ordinary, to express that "strange love" that tied him to his native land...:

But I love - for what - I do not know myself, Her steppes cold silence, Her boundless forests swaying, Spills of her rivers, like seas ...

The feeling of pride and admiration that inspires these paintings somehow imperceptibly absorbs compassion (“The Trembling Lights of Sad Villages”), but this is sympathy for something very close, beloved, forever included in the life of the poet.

Love for Russia of boundless forests, country roads, for peasant Russia - that was the main thing in M. Lermontov's "strange love". The image of the native land, Russia, is one of the main ones in the works of JI. Tolstoy. That is why the landscape descriptions and pictures of what is usually called "everyday life" are so spacious and beautiful - in its everyday life and holidays, such as a birthday dinner, Christmas fortune-telling. L. Tolstoy dreamed of teaching his

E.I. Dvornikova

readers to "love life". According to L. Tolstoy, to love one's Motherland, one's people does not mean rejection of everything else. The world, the universe must obey the brotherhood of all people. It is the Russian national spirit and Russian people that are characterized by inclusiveness, benevolence, breadth, openness, sociability.

The feeling of the Motherland in the works of Russian classics is formed by the way of life, conscious life-creation, moral deed, active empathy, responsible attitude towards one’s vocation, “saving dissatisfaction with oneself” (A. Ukhtomsky), “constant effort to become a person” (M.

Mamardashvili). The works of Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Nekrasov, Leskov, Tolstoy and others are filled with a sense of national pride in the history of their ancestors.

Writers see in the history of Russia the greatness of the spirit of the Russian people, glorify his patriotism, heroism, citizenship, love for the Fatherland.

Russian classical literature poses fundamental questions of being, explores the original moral foundations of human life, seeks initial spiritual guidelines, forms value-semantic attitudes (Aizerman L.S.).

“The greatness of Russian literature is in the height of its gaze ... Russian thought then said so much in matters of human existence that it could be considered a catechism of modern times.” The all-penetrating ethical pathos of Russian literature was the result of the indestructible striving of its creators towards the ideal. "The aesthetic ideal

Part of the general cultural ideal, social, moral and cognitive.

Truth, goodness, beauty are the three hypostases of the ideal. From time immemorial, these words embodied the idea of ​​higher spiritual values. Dostoevsky argued that human life is unthinkable without ideals. “It is necessary, on the contrary, to give more movement to the idea and not to be afraid of the ideal... After all, the ideal is also a reality just as complete as the current reality... good reality. One can even positively say that nothing will happen, except for even greater abomination. Speaking about ideals, Russian writers had in mind the qualities that have been developed for centuries in the people's environment that are not subject to revision: conscientiousness, freedom, diligence, honesty, compassion, kindness.

They are the essence of enduring universal human values. Even the negative characters of the works of genuine artists inspire hope and faith in a person. “Let the reader not think, however, that we require the writer to depict ideal people, combining all possible virtues;

no, we demand from him not ideal people at all, but we demand an ideal. In The Inspector General, for example, no one will attempt to look for ideal people, nevertheless, however, no one will deny the presence of the ideal in this comedy. The spectator leaves the theater not at all in the calm state in which he came there; his thinking power is aroused; side by side with the living images imprinted in his mind arises

E.I. Dvornikova

a whole series of questions that ... serve as a starting point for mental work that is completely special and independent. Russian writers were convinced that real art should awaken in a person aspiration for life, as it should be. The modernity of Russian classics, its topicality - in its experience, which acquires a special meaning today. “We can argue with Tolstoy about his solution of many other problems of human life. But no matter how much we argue with him, no matter how sharply we reject his “answers” ​​to the “questions” he posed, Tolstoy’s very attitude to these questions, i.e. searching for answers to them, cannot but resonate in our soul with a life-giving catharsis of its moral renewal.

And we do not find ready-made answers among the classics - but the experience of looking for answers: “This is where you learn to live. You see different views on life, on love, with which you can disagree with one, but your own becomes smarter and clearer. These words spoken by Leo Tolstoy have a universal meaning. At the methodological, ideological level, the most important prerequisite (condition) for overcoming the spiritual crisis and the formation of cultural identity and tolerance is the re-creation in today's cultural life of those spiritual values ​​that form the core of Russian classical literature.

Russian literature of the 19th century continues “to carry out its liberating function, reviving in ... in the minds of such eternal concepts as good and evil, the ideas of sin, repentance, fate, God and freedom. After all, today the works of art of the classics are the interpenetration of the value worlds of the author and the reader, the integration of knowledge and self-education: “A wave of consciousness should be able to detect another person, find its boundary in him, and then, enriched with the experience of conversation, empathy, compassion, images, knowledge, cultural artifacts , to return to its owner as a resource for its development as a Human"

In Russian literature as a whole, the value-normative core of Russian culture is reflected, which, along with the national one, determines the presence in the literary works of Russian writers of a deep spiritual, moral, universal potential, expressed in a special understanding of such value, ethical categories as good and evil, freedom, conscience, compassion, catholicity, social responsibility, love for the Motherland, patriotism, etc.

–  –  –

1. Troitsky, V.Yu. In search of the righteous path. Literature at school: a book for teachers of Russian philology / V.Yu. Trinity. - M.: Humanit ed. center Vlados, 2000.-432 p.

–  –  –

2. Lossky, H. Value and Being. God and the Kingdom of God as the basis of values ​​/ N.

Lossky. - Paris, 1931. - P.27.

3. Fedorov, V. On the nature of poetic reality: monograph / V. Fedorov. - M.:

Owls. writer, 1984. - 184c.-C.74.

4. Bakhtin, M.M. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. - Ed. 3rd / M.M. Bakhtin. - M.:

Art literature, 1972.-470s.

5. Dostoevsky, F.M. Collected Op. at 15t. T.9. - M., 1891. - S.287.

6. Ilyin, I.A. About darkness and enlightenment: A book of art criticism. Bunin.

Remizov. Shmelev / I.A. Ilyin. - M.: "Scythians", 1991. - S. 187.

7. Kondakov, I.V. Introduction to the history of Russian literature / I.V. Kondakov. - M., 1997. - S. 17.

8. Kondakov, I. "Where the angels are flying" / I. Kondakov. - Questions of Literature - 2000. - September - October.

9. Kiselev, A.K. Comparison as a technique for activating the emotional perception and intellectual activity of high school students in literary education:

10. Bocharov, S.G. On the artistic worlds: Cervantes, Pushkin, Baratynsky, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Platonov / S.G. Bocharov. - M.: Sov. Ros., 1985. - 296s. - C.4.

11. Kantor, V. Russian classics or Being of Russia / V. Kantor. - M.: ROSSPEN, 2005.

767s. - S. 180.

12. Leontiev, A.N. Some problems of the psychology of art: Fav. psychological works, in 2 vols. T.2./ A.N. Leontiev. - M., 1983. - S.239.

13. Frankl V. Man in search of meaning. - M., 1990. - p. 295.

14. Chernaya, T.K. Russian literature of the 19th century (part 1.). Poetics of artistic-individual systems in the literary process / Т.К. Black. - Stavropol: SGU Publishing House 2004. - 624 p.

15. Marantsman, V.G. Goals and structure of the literature course / V.G. Marantsman // Literature at school. - 2003. - No. 4.

16. Zweig, S. Three masters. Balzac. Dickens. Dostoevsky. Collected Op. in volume XII / S. Zweig.

L .: Time, 1923. - S.121-122.

17. Udodov, B.T. Subjective-objective foundations of interpretation. Russian classical literature and modernity / B.T. Udodov. - Voronezh, 1985. -131s.

18. Ilyin, I.A. Collected Op. in 10 t. T.Z. / I.A. Ilyin, - M.: Russian book. - 1994. - S.508.

19. Ilyin, I. A. Collected works. in 10 tons. T.1. / I.A. Ilyin. - M.: Russian book. - 1994. -S.

20. Krasovsky, V.E. A.S. Pushkin History of Russian Literature / V.E. Krasovsky. - M.:

Moscow State University, 2003. - P.28.

21. Frank, S.L. On the tasks of cognition of Pushkin. Pushkin in Russian philosophical criticism. The end of XIX - XX century / S. Frank. - M., 1999. - S. 468.

22. Tyupa, V.I. Let it be “fun to conduct your poems” / V.I. Tyupa // Discourse. Novosibirsk, 1996. - No. 2. -S.73.

23. Ilyin, I.A. Crisis of godlessness: coll. op. in 10 tons. T.1. / I.A. Ilyin - M.: Russian book, 1996. S. 333-358.

E.I. Dvornikova

24. Platonov, O.A. Russian civilization: textbook for the formation of Russian consciousness / O.A. Platonov. - M.: Roman-newspaper, 1995. -223p.

25. Kolesnikova, I.A. Ideas of spiritual apprenticeship of a teacher in the system of education for work with a person Theoretical and methodological problems of modern education / I.A. Kolesnikov. - Volgograd, 2004.-p.32.

26. Gukovsky, G.A. Pushkin and Russian romantics / G.A. Gukovsky, entry. article G.

Makogonenko. - M.: Fiction, 1965. - 355p.

27. Semenko I.M. Zhukovsky V.A. Ballads. Nal and Damayanti. Rustem and Zorab.

Diaries. Letters. Memoirs of contemporaries. - M., 1987. - S. 459.

28. Chekhov at school: a book for teachers / ed. I.Yu. Burdin. - M.: Bustard, 2001. - p.

29. Dostoevsky, F.M. Full coll. op. in 30 vols. T. 22. - L .: Nauka, 1988. -408s. - p.71

30. Prayer of the Optina Elders. Prayer book. - Sevastopol, 1996. - 384s. - S.202.

31. Florensky, P.A. Pillar and ground of truth. - T.1./P.A. Florensky. - M.:

True, 1990 a. -490s.

32. Sokhryakov, Yu.N. Creativity of F.M. Dostoevsky and Russian prose of the XX century (70-80s) / Yu.N. Sokhryakov. - M.: IMLI RAN, 2002. - 240s.

33. Lossky, H.O. Favorites. God and world evil / H.O. Lossky. - M.: Pravda, 1991.

622s. - S.551-552. - From the history of the father. philosopher, thoughts.

34. Averintsev S.S. Hebrew literature // History of world literature: in 9 volumes / S.S. Overintsev. -M.: Nauka, 1983.-T.1.-S. 278.

35. Chekhov A.P. Student / Ext. op. / A.P. Chekhov // Editorial board: Belenky and others - M .:

Artistic literature., 1988.-639s.

36. Origins and development of early Christian literature // History of World Literature. - T.1. - S. 510,511.

37. Bulgakov S.I. Chekhov as a thinker. / S.I. Bulgakov. - Kyiv., 1905.

38. Vinogradov I.A. Issues of Marxist poetics / I.A. Vinogradov. - M.: Nauka, 1972. - S.240-311.

39. Leskov, H.C. Cadet Monastery. Collected Op. In 12 t. M .: 1989. - V.2. - p.47

40. Dostoevsky, F.M. Full sob. op. in 30 volumes. T. 25. - L .: Nauka, Leningrad branch, 1972-1991. - 470s.-S. 173.

41. Dostoevsky, F.M. Full sob. op. in 30 volumes. T. 14. - L .: Nauka, 1972-1991. - 512s.

42. Gorelov, P. Loss and return of conscience / P. Gorelov. - M., 1989., - 145 p.

43. Tugan-Baranovsky, M. Moral outlook of Dostoevsky / M TuganBaranovsky. - Odessa, 1920.-S. 127.

44. Berdyaev, H.A. Collected Works / H.A. Berdyaev. - M., 1994. - S. 390.

45. History of Russian literature of the 19th century: 1800-1830s: Proc. for stud. higher textbook

institutions in 24. / Ed. V.N. Anoshkina, L.D. Gromova. -M.: Humanit. ed. center, Vlados, 2001. -41.-288s. - S. 94.

46. ​​Tolstoy, L.N. Collected works: in 22 volumes. Vol. 22: Diaries, 1895-1910. / L.N. Tolstoy. - M.:

Fiction, 1985. - 559s. - S. 128.

47. Samokhvalova, V.I. Beauty against entropy / V.I. Samokhvalova. - M., 1990. S.59.

E.I. Dvornikova

48. The history of romanticism in Russian literature. The emergence and establishment of romanticism in Russian literature (1780-1825). - M.: Nauka, 1979. -312s. - S. 310.

49. Likhachev, D.S. Pushkin is our everything. The book of worries / Likhachev D.S. - M., 1991.

50. Soina, O.S. The fate of Pushkin and the fate of Russia / O.S. Soina // Man - 2002. Gachev, G.D. Myth in culture: a person is a non-human / G.D. Gachev. - M., 2000., - S. 123 Ilyin, I.A. On resistance to evil by force / I.A. Ilyin // New World. - 1911. - No. 10.S. 213.

53. Ilyin, I.A. About Russian nationalism: what promises the world the dismemberment of Russia / I.A.

Ilyin. - Novosibirsk, 1991. - S. 11.

54. Tertz, Abram (Andrey Sinyavsky). Walks with Pushkin: collected works. in 2 volumes. T.1. / Abram Terts (Andrey Sinyavsky). - M., 1992. - S. 341.

55. Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E. collected works in 10 tons. T.10. / M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. - M., 1988. - P.87.

56. Rasputin, V. “From the depths to the depths” / V. Rasputin // Position. literary controversy. Issue. 2. - M.: Sov. Russia, 1990. - 559s. - P.8-9.

II. Theosophy: Eksmo-Press; 2006 ISBN 5-04-005589-7, 5-04-003966-2, 5-04-00, 558..."

“Creation of reserves for doubtful debts in tax accounting Author Ekaterina Annenkova, an expert in accounting and taxation at Clerk.Ru IA. © IA Clerk.Ru, Analytical Department of the Accounting Department of organizations that use the accrual method and pay income tax, regularly worries about the issue of expenses accepted for the purposes of ... "

“Explanatory note to the curriculum of the 2nd and 3rd stage of education MKOU SOSH p. Malyshevo for the 2016 2017 academic year. The curriculum is based on: * 7,8,9, 10,11 grades - the Basic curriculum of general educational institutions of Russia ... "

“VFD-E Series Frequency Inverters Operation Manual ASIA DELTA ELECTRONICS, INC. TAOYUAN Plant/ 31-1, SHIEN PAN ROAD, KUEI SAN INDUSTRIAL ZONE TAOYUAN 333, TAIWAN TEL: 886-3-362-6301 FAX: 886-3-362-7267 http://www.delta.com.tw/ INTRODUCTION Thank you for choosing a Delta Electronics product. Pre...” for a long period of study, the characteristics of German cinema of the 1910s and 20s, including film expressionism, ...” Health of the Republic of Tatarstan Office of the Civil Registry Office of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic ...” since they reduce the distance of moving cargo by rail for 600 km, i.e. the shipper cuts costs by using cheaper shipping...» http://www.litres.ru/pages/biblio_book/?art=7362889 Ekaterina Lesina. Moonstone Madame Lenormand: Eksmo; Moscow; 2014 ISBN 978-...» CODIFICATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE (on pr...»

“Automated copy 586_312572 THE HIGHEST ARBITRATION COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION RESOLUTION of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 7917/11 Moscow December 6, 2011 The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation composed of: presiding...”

“Tsvetkov V.A., Zoidov K.Kh., Medkov A.A. Formation of a new evolutionary model of transport and communication interaction between Russia and China. - M.: CEMI RAN, 2013. - 231 p. CONCLUSION. MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 1. Analysis of alternative and complementary routes for the transportation of goods in the direction of China - Russia - E ... "

2017 www.site - "Free electronic library - various documents"

The materials of this site are posted for review, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.