Dostoyevsky
and the Problem of God
Elissa Kiskaddon
"Nothing
is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience. But nothing is a
greater cause of suffering.” The Brothers Karamazov, 1880.
In
contemplating the creation of the novel The Idiot, Dostoyevsky wrote in a
letter to A.N. Maikov that he hoped to focus the work
around a question "with which I have been tormented, consciously or
unconsciously all my life--that is, the existence of God."1 Dostoyevsky's
personal struggle with the question of faith, and also his own experience with
trying doubts as a believer, are manifested in the
characters he writes. A large number of Dostoyevsky's books are written within
the framework of a Christian doctrine, juxtaposing characterizations of
believers and non-believers, enforcing the ultimate good and reason that follow
from possessing a faith. Dostoyevsky also describes however, the mental
suffering and questioning inherent in the step of realizing the
"truth" of Jesus Christ. Berdyaev, in a discussion on Dostoyevsky's
mission, states that "he did not have to solve the divine problem as does
the pagan, but the problem of mankind,which
is the problem of the spiritual man, the Christian."2
Indeed,
Dostoyevsky was raised in a religious home, "I descended from a pious
Russian family . . . We, in our family, have known the gospel almost ever since
our earliest childhood . . . Every visit to the Kremlin and the Moscow
cathedral was, to me, something solemn." 3 He was certainly well
acquainted with the contents of the Bible, as his devoted mother used only the
Old and New Testament to teach her children to read and write. Dostoyevsky also
recalled his favorite nurse in the context of the
prayer she taught him, "I place all my hope in Thee, Mother of God
preserve me under Thy protection." 4 Such a strong female association in
his early childhood perhaps influenced Dostoyevsky's later writing, enabling
him to write only females into roles that were true and wholly pious, evidenced
by Sonya from Crime and Punishment. Moreover, these childhood associations seem
to have strongly imprinted upon his mind, "This book [the book of Job]
Anna [his wife], it's strange -- is one of the first
which made an impression on me in life, I was just then only a little
boy."5
While a
large portion of Dostoyevsky's nurturing seems to have occurred in a Christian
nest, he was also exposed to the harsh qualities possessed by man. His father
was, though reverent, a drunk, and was later murdered by serfs on account of
his inhumane treatment.6
This rougher
sphere of his upbringing manifested itself in Dostoyevsky's early adulthood. He
became involved in a group known as the "Russian Utopian Socialists,"
influenced by Belinsky, a well known literary critic.
The partnership formed by the two presumably shook Dostoyevsky's faith, as his
revered mentor found that "as a socialist, he had to destroy Christianity
in the first place. He knew that the revolution must necessarily begin with
atheism."7 Later, though, Dostoyevsky broke off from the specific branch
of the movement, forming the Durov circle. He was
arrested for "the circulation of a private letter full of insolent
expressions against the Orthodox Church."8 Evidently, he had forgotten his
mother's teachings.
While in
prison (where the only book allowed was The Bible) it appears Dostoyevsky began
to reemerge as a believer, writing in a letter to
Mrs. N.D. Fonvizin: I believe that there is nothing
lovelier, deeper, more sympathetic, more rational, more manly and more perfect
than the Savior;...If anyone could prove to me that
Christ is outside the truth, and if the truth really did exclude Christ, I
should prefer to stay with Christ and not the truth.9
Yet, the
Dostoyevsky scholar Mochulsky, pounces on this
declaration, For him Christ was only the most
beautiful 'sympathetic' and perfect of men. He even allowed that the One who said of himself: 'I am the Truth,' can be found to
exist outside the truth; this premise is blasphemous to every believer. Here is
the direction in which Dostoyevsky's convictions were regenerated,10
What is
important however, is the actual regeneration of the
faith which is evident and steadfast in novels such as The Brothers Karamazov,
Devils, The Idiot, and Crime and Punishment. Another important consideration is
that this spiritual rebirth took place within the confines of a Siberian
prison, where Dostoyevsky was amassing a large storage of information on the
capacity for evil in men. That Dostoyevsky was able to cultivate a belief
within such a hostile environment demonstrates the strength of his conviction.
For
Dostoyevsky then, the problem of God became not the recognition of the truth,
but the elimination of associated doubt. The primary source of doubt which
plagued Dostoyevsky was his struggle to reconcile the suffering evident in the
world and the notion of a loving God.
Dostoyevsky
expressed this conflict in Ivan Karamazov, "It's not God I don't accept,
understand this, I do not accept the world, that He created, this world of
God's, and cannot agree with it."11 The Brothers
Karamazov, the novel in which Dostoyevsky deals most explicitly with the
questioning of God, was planned in a manner which "pitted faith versus
atheism."12 Faith was primarily identified in the "active love" Alyosha displayed towards his brothers, but fundamentally Zosima served as a prototype, through which Dostoyevsky
felt he could "compel people to admit that a pure ideal Christianity is
not an abstraction, but a vivid reality, possibly near at hand, and that
Christianity is the sole refuge of the Russian land from all its evils."13
Both Alyosha and Zosima
were imminently more successful in serving as an example of the ideal goodness
found in religious men than Dostoyevsky's prior attempts. For instance, Prince Myshkin in The Idiot, ended up being primarily that, an
idiot characterized more by ignorant simplicity than a base goodness founded in
a strong Christian faith.
The faith
displayed chiefly in Alyosha is countered by Ivan's
intellectual denouncement of God. Yet, as Mochulsky
explains, Ivan's approach and defense of atheism
"lies in that he renounces God out of love for mankind, comes forward
against the Creator in the role of the advocate of all suffering
creation."14 The clash in opinion of these two Karamazov brothers is
representative of the struggle found in the human soul, "The awful thing
is that beauty is mysterious as well as terrible. God and the devil are
fighting there and the battlefield is the heart of men."15 Ivan attempts
to snare Alyosha on two points, the suffering of innocents
and the conception of freedom, essentially free will.
The
suffering of children is most irrational and unjust to Ivan, and also to Alyosha's mind. Ivan delivers a monologue in which he
relates horrid examples of the torture of children, probing Alyosha
to reconcile such abuse with his loving God. Ivan refocuses the argument in an
effort to appeal to Alyosha's immense kindness:
Imagine that you are creating a fabric of human destiny with the object of
making men happy in the end, giving them peace and rest at last, but that it
was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature...and
to found that edifice on its unavenged tears, would
you consent to be the architect on this condition?16
Alyosha counters, defending his beliefs with the example of Christ-who suffered
a excruciating crucifixion for the sake of man.
Extrapolating on this idea, Alyosha explains that
'each is responsible for all.' Any guilt, and
consequently any suffering should be common to every believer, as we are all
guilty of Adam and Eve's original sin. Gibson extends Alyosha's
comments with further interpretation, "and if we felt that responsibility
keenly enough we could abolish suffering -- for the future."17
In response
to Alyosha's justification Dostoyevsky writes what
has been heralded as his most profound piece of writing, Ivan's
"poem" concerning The Grand Inquisitor. Within this discussion of
free will the reader hits on another problem of God, one of the major tenets of
scholarly atheism. Ivan blames Christ for man's downfall and disbelief in an astonishing
path of reasoning:
For the
secret of man's being is not only to live but to have something to live for . .
. Instead of taking men's freedom from them, Thou didst make it greater than
ever! Didst Thou forget that man prefers peace, and even death, to the freedom
of choice in the knowledge of good and evil? . . . So that, in truth, thou
didst Thyself lay the foundation for the destruction
of Thy kingdom, and no one is more to blame for it.18
Berdyaev, in
an explanation of Dostoyevsky's intense focus on freedom points out that,
"for him the justification both of God and of man must be looked for in
freedom..."19 This freedom is further defined:
The lesser
freedom was the beginning, freedom to choose the good, which supports the
possibility of sin; the greater freedom was the ending, freedom in God, in the
bosom of God...The dignity of man and the dignity of faith require the
recognition of two freedoms, freedom to choose the truth and freedom in the truth...But
free goodness, which alone is true, entails the liberty of evil. That is the
tragedy of that Dostoyevsky saw and studied, and it contains the mystery of
Christianity.20
And
consequently it revokes Ivan's argument, for if evil necessitates freedom, than
it is through humans that evil and suffering occurs,
and therefore God can not be blamed. Freedom is also required however, so that
we are allowed to fully appreciate God's love by choosing it. You can not have
a world, both free and good, human imperfection will not allow for it. As
Berdyaev finishes, "The world is full of wickedness and miserly precisely
because it is based on freedom -- yet that freedom constitutes the whole dignity
of man and his world."21
However,
within the frame of the text Dostoyevsky answers the great paradox of free-will
not with debate, but with the actions of Alyosha.
Gibson agrees, explaining, "The answer is to go forward from theory to
practice: and Dostoyevsky distinguished in the end between the yearning love
which does nothing and submits, and the active love which has the power to
save."22 The success of Alyosha's working love
is seen in his interactions with Kolya, a boy of
about fourteen years, and with his classmates. Before the young and fiercely
loyal Ilyusha dies, Alyosha
enables a reconciliation between the failing boy and
his school "hero" Kolya. While this act in
itself displays great love, Dostoyevsky examines the situation more deeply,
showing a fundamental change in Kolya's perspective
as a direct result of Alyosha's influence. Upon first
meeting the "monk of the world" Kolya
challenges, "You must admit that the Christian religion , for instance,
has only been of use to the rich and the powerful to keep the lower classes in
slavery..."23 And yet, at Ilyusha's funeral he
exclaims, "Oh, if I, too, could sacrifice myself some day for the
truth!"24 echoing Christ's action and demonstrating clearly that Alyosha's active love has saved him, and that this love does answer God's call for Christians to be responsible and
consequently guilty for the sins of the world.
While
Dostoyevsky examines his religious doubts, funneling
his struggle into the voices of his characters, it is clear that his final
resolve lies in a strong conviction of the presence of God. By noting the
situation he leaves his characters in at the completion of his works it is
apparent that the "good" or likable characters are aligned with God,
and the "evil" personalities rebel against
the Almighty. The Brothers Karamazov ends with Alyosha,
Mitya, and Kolya all as
believers, all of whom we feel compassion towards, while the sly and sinister Smerdyakov commits suicide, the strongest act of rebellion
against God. Kirillov and Nikolai in Devils also take
their own lives, and are also the most reprehensible characters within the
work. Dostoyevsky distinctly pairs his heroes with a strong faith in God and
his villains with atheism (and socialism), suggesting the conclusion which he
would like to draw.
Also
expressed in his texts are some of the minor snares which trap Dostoyesky's, and consequently his character's,
minds, such as the superman theory, the example of unjust Christians, the
excesses of churches, the triumph of sin and the call for a absolute and genuine
dedication to the "light".
In a letter
to N.L. Ozmidov, in 1878, Dostoyevsky writes: Now
assume there is no God or immortality of the soul. Now tell me, why should I
live righteously and do good deeds if I am to die entirely on earth?...And if that is so, why shouldn't I (as long as I can rely
on my cleverness and agility to avoid being caught by the law) cut another
man's throat , rob, and steal...25
This
superman theory, initially established in Raskolnikov
from Crime and Punishment is a result of doubt expressed in the very existence
of God, combined with immense pride. The theory allows Raskolnikov,
without instigation, to murder two women and potentially an unborn child. As a
higher being, he should be allowed to take the life of those less meaningful
and essential. Using the same justification Kirillov
issues a form of challenge to God, and in preparing to take his life explains,
"If God exists, then everything is His will, and I can do nothing of my
own apart from His will. If there's no God, then everything is my will, and I'm
bound to express my will."26 This amazing arrogance stems from Kirillov's absolute absence of faith in Christ, containing
instead only a faith in himself, "If you shoot yourself, you'll become
God, isn't that right?" "Yes, I'll become God."27
This theory
however, is refuted by Dostoyevsky in his plot development. Raskolnikov
is unable to live with himself after the murder takes place. While his warped
logic may allow some form of reasoning for his heinous act, he is fundamentally
unable to erase his sense of wrong and right. Initially he attempts to continue
life, enjoying his clever trick, and concluding from his experiment that he is
a superman. Yet, humble Sonya takes apart Raskolnikov's
intellect by reducing him to the base level of his soul, and it is here that he
recognizes he is guilty, he has committed and evil act and he needs
forgiveness. Dostoyevsky dissolves the superman theory by condemning the
involved characters to mental suffering until they recognize the truth and
light of Christianity.
Another troublesome
notion suggested in Dostoyevsky's works which has the potential to weaken one's
faith is the example of unjust Christians. Scenarios slip into the texts which
shake the foundation of belief. For instance, Adelaida
Ivanovna,
"left the house and ran away from Fyodor Pavlovich
with a destitute divinity student, leaving Mitya, a
child of three years old, in her husband's hands."28 Immediately we are
called to question -- a divinity student ran away with another's wife, also a
young mother? Dostoyevsky pushes this inconsistency further by developing
characters such Rakitin in The Brothers Karamazov. Rakitin, a monk, works more strongly against God than the
atheists within the novel. In Alyosha's time of great
sorrow, after his elder has died, Rakitin responds by
presenting and encouraging Alyosha to be tempted by
food, drink, and Grushenka. Additionally, Rakitin is known to be continually stirring up trouble and
gossip, a milder Iago. "Evil" and ingenuine Christians presumably cause Dostoyevsky problems,
as he writes them into his novels, in an attempt to consider and silence them.
Moreover,
such obstacles for Dostoyevsky are not confined to religious persons, but
extend to the entity of the church itself (especially the Roman Catholic church) and its excesses. There is a continual critique of
the established monk lifestyle, and its leniency towards treats such as jam.
Fyodor Pavlovich when he barges in on the Father
Superior's meal delivers a long tirade, condemning the entire organization of
the institution, No, saintly monk, you try being virtuous in the world, do good
to society, without shutting yourself up in a monastery at other people's
expense, and without expecting a reward up aloft for it--you'll find that
battle a bit harder . . . Look at the bottles the fathers have brought out . .
. And who has provided it all? The Russian peasant . .
29
Once
Dostoyevsky has established a knowledge of the truth
within his characters, the next problem of God arises -- maintaining that
truth, and not falling away.
Absolute
conviction is called for, as seen in Tikhon's
confession from Devils. Nikolai, presented as a horrific character who has
sexually abused a young girl is not an atheist. That would be preferable.
Instead, "just as before both feelings [good and evil] are always too
trivial and never very powerful."30 By being indifferent to good and evil
Nikolai is dismissing the importance of the question of God. Atheists are
preferable in the sense that the existence of God is enough of a question for
them to consider and determine their belief.
Additionally,
an inaccurate faith, based on the wrong premises is clearly problematic. As the
Almighty has presented his people with such a large quantity of miracles, these
displays, Dostoyevsky shows, can found people's belief and turn their creed
into a form of entertainment. In The Brothers Karamazov the tenet that God only
exists if you believe in him is established in Father Zosima's
healings, "aroused by the expectation of the miracle of healing and the
implicit belief that it would come to pass; and it did come to pass."31
Furthermore, because the elder's body begins to decay following his death,
(instead of remaining pure) heavy criticism falls on the monastery, and many
people lose faith, because they were dependent on the presence of a miracle.
Finally, the
last problem of God suggested by Dostoyevsky is the continual urge to and
consequent act of sin. Mitya confesses, "Though
I may be following the devil, I am thy son, O Lord."32 Here, the danger
lies only in maintaining the perspective that God is the Father, whom we should
be subservient to, though we may blunder at times.
While
Dostoyevsky's works clearly and thoroughly deal with the struggle of
recognizing the existence of God and maintaining that belief, his ultimate
conclusion is unquestionable -- though as humans we may try to rationalize God,
stirring up supposed inconsistencies, as believers we will be recieved in our trifling ignorance with grace. The
resurrection of Ilyusha in the hope of his schoolmates
closes The Brothers Karamazov and is an appropriate profession of the faith
Dostoyevsky has in Christ's resurrection. At points, the brilliant logical
debates Dostoyevsky writes seem to suggest the author is losing his conviction.
However, the actions and power of active love dismiss any doubt concerning the
foundation of Dostoyevsky's faith. We, as readers of Dostoyevsky, and witnesses
of his debates, are placed in the position of approaching faith with logic and
reasoning, as does The Grand Inquisitor. However, to truly realize
Dostoyevsky's intent, we must remember and respond to his portrayal of Christ,
He [the Grand Inquisitor] saw that the Prisoner [Christ] had listened intently
and quietly all the time, looking gently in his face and evidently not wishing
to reply. The old man longed for Him to say something, however bitter and
terrible. But He suddenly approached the old man in silence and softly kissed
him on his bloodless aged lips. That was all his answer.33
Footnotes:
1 Dirscherl, Denis S.J. Dostoevsky and the Catholic
Church.
2 Berdyaev, Nicholas. Dostoievsky. Translated by Donald Attwater.
3 Dirscherl, 43.
4 Dirscherl, 43.
5 Dirscherl, 43.
6 Dirscherl, 44.
7 Dirscherl, 47.
8 Dirscherl, 48.
9 Dirscherl, 52.
10 Dirscherl, 53.
11
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. V, 3.
12 Dirscherl, 112.
13 Gibson,
Alexander Boyce. The Religion of Dostoevsky.
14 Mochulsky, Konstantin, "The Brothers
Karamazov." In: Dostoyevky, Fyodor. The
Brothers Karamazov. Translated by Constance Garnett.
Edited and revised by Ralph E. Matlaw.
15
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. III, 3.
16
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. III, 4.
17 Gibson, 179.
18
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. III, 5.
19 Berdyaev, 67.
20 Berdyaev,
68-69.
21 Berdyaev, 85.
22 Gibson, 176.
23
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. X, 6.
24
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov,. Epilogue, 3.
25 Dostoyevsky, Selected Letters of Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Ed.
Frank and Goldstein.
26 Dostoyevsky, Devils. III, 6.
27 Dostoyevsky, Devils. III, 6.
28
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. I, 1.
29
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. II, 8.
30 Dostoyevsky, Devils. III, 8.
31
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. II, 3.
32
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. III, 3.
33
Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. V. 5.
Bibliography
Dostoyevky, Fyodor. The Brothers
Karamazov. Translated by Constance Garnett.
Edited and revised by Ralph E. Matlaw.
Dostoyevsky,
Fyodor. Devils. Translated by
Michael R. Katz.
Dostoyevsky,
Fyodor. Selected Letters of Fyodor Dostoyevsky.
Edited by Frank and Goldstein.
Berdyaev,
Nicholas. Dostoievsky. Translated by Donald Attwater.
Dirscherl, Denis, S.J. Dostoevsky
and the Catholic Church.
Gibson,
Alexander Boyce. The Religion of Dostoevsky.