💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › leo-tolstoy-non-activity.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:15:27. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Non-Activity
Author: Leo Tolstoy
Date: 1893
Language: en
Topics: speech, letter
Source: Original text from http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=10493, 2021. Translated by EarthlyFireFlies and WikiSource.

Leo Tolstoy

Non-Activity

The editor of Paris magazine "Revue des revues", assuming, as he writes

in his letter, that the opinion of two famous writers on the current

state of minds will be of my interest, sent me two clippings from French

newspapers. One of them contains speech of Zola, another - letter of

Dumas to the editor of “Golua.” I am very grateful to Mr. Smith for his

parcel. Both documents – the fame of the authors, their modern, and most

importantly, opposite views make them very interesting to compare, and I

would like to express a few thoughts triggered by them.

It is hard to find on purpose in the current literature a more concise,

strong, and vibrant form of expression of the two the most fundamental

forces that drive humanity: one of them – the dead force of inertia,

striving to keep humanity on the path once chosen, and the other force -

the live power of reason, which leads to light.

Here is the full speech of Zola:

"TO YOUNG PEOPLE.

Ladies and gentlemen!

I am very pleased and happy that you have elected me as a chairman of

this year's meeting. There is no better society, more delightful, and,

most importantly, more appealing audience than the youth, before which

my heart opens widely, full of desire to be loved and listened to.

Alas! I'm already in those years when it comes a regret of past youth

and when people already take care of the younger generation. They will

be our judges and successors.

I feel in them the birth of the future and often anxiously ask myself a

question: that will they reject and what will they preserve, what will

our business become in their hands, because it is only in their hands it

will become the business, only then it will continue, if they will take

it to expand and bring it to its conclusion. That's why I passionately

follow the change of thought in the modern youth, read progressive

newspapers and magazines, try to recognize new spirit that invigorates

schools, to learn, finally, where you all go, you – the mind and will of

the future. It is true, ladies and gentlemen, there is selfishness here,

I don't hide it. I am like a worker, completing the construction of a

house in which he hopes to spend the rest of his days and who worries

what the weather will become. Won’t the rain destroy its walls? Or what

if the north wind will suddenly blow and tear the roof off the house?

And, most importantly, has he built the house firmly, will it can stand

against the storm? Is the material durable, are accidents thought after?

I say this not because I believe that any products of human work can be

everlasting and final. The greatest of them must come to terms with

being only a moment in the continual development of the human mind. It’s

enough to recognize oneself a carrier of the word of one generation,

even for the shortest time. And because you cannot halt the literature,

and everything continuously develops, everything starts over again, you

need to be prepared to see how the younger ones are born and grow, those

who will replace you, those who perhaps will erase even the memory of

us. This is not to say that the old fighter in me doesn’t at times feel

the desire to resist, when he sees an attack on his work. But, in

respect to the upcoming next century, I have more curiosity than

outrage, more hot sympathy than personal anxiety, and let me vanish, and

let all my generation vanish with me if we indeed are only good for

filling up pits, and let’s ease the way of light for those who follow

us.

Gentlemen! I hear constant rumors that positivism ends now in the dying

throes, that naturalism is dead already, that science will go bankrupt

very soon because it didn't bring the moral peace and happiness to

people which it promised. You understand very well that I don’t try to

solve here the great challenges concerning these issues. I am ignorant.

I have no right to talk on behalf of science and philosophy. If you wish

to know, I'm just a novelist, a writer, sometimes making a good guess,

and all my value comes from the fact that I observed and worked a lot.

And only as a witness, I let myself speak to you about that what my

generation was, or at least wanted to be, the people who are now fifty

years old and who your generation will soon name ancient.

I was very surprised the other day, during the opening ceremony of the

exhibition on the Champ de Mars. It was assumed that these were all the

same pictures. It is a confusion – the evolution is slow, but how

astounding it would be if it’d be possible to restore the previous

exhibitions! I personally remember well the exhibitions, academic and

romantic, in the year 1863. Work on the air (in "full light", plein air)

wasn’t in fashion yet, there was an overall tone of Bitum de Judee; it

was some kind of mania, some roasted tones, the twilight of workshops.

Then, fifteen years later, after the victorious and so much disputed the

impact of Mr. Mane, I recall new exhibitions, with the glittering bright

tone of full sun. It was as though the flood of light, care about the

truth, made each frame a window widely open into nature and bathed in

bright glitter. And yesterday, fifteen years later, I could see as

though something like mystical fog rises among this freshness of works.

It is still the same concern for truthful art of painting, but the

reality changes, shapes are elongated somehow, the need for originality

and novelty carry the artist beyond dreams.

I'm talking about three phases of modern art because they, I think,

clearly display the change of ideas of our time. In fact, my generation

after famous predecessors, to whom we were followers, sought to open

window widely on nature: to see everything, to say everything. In it,

even between the most unconscious, a prolonged effort of positive

philosophy and analytical and experimental sciences has ended. We were

overfilled with science, which surrounded us from all sides, we lived

it, by inhaling the air of that time. Now, I can admit, I personally was

even a sectarian, trying to bring the rigorous method of a scientist

into the realm of literature. But where is the man who in his fight does

not go any further that is necessary, and who is satisfied with his

victory without shattering its benefits? However, I have no regrets and

I continue to believe in the passion, which is willing and acting. And

then, what enthusiasm and what hopes we were inspired to! To know

everything, to be able to do everything, to win everybody! By means of

truth to make mankind higher and happier! And here, gentlemen, you,

young people, are coming onto stage. I’m saying, young people -

something indefinite, distant and deep as the sea: because where are

they - the youth? What will they be in reality? Who are called to speak

in the name of them? I should stick to those thoughts, which are

attributed to them. And if these thoughts do not belong to many of you,

I ask you to forgive me in advance. I address those who have deceived us

with dubious information, probably more in line with their desires than

with reality.

So, ladies and gentlemen, we are assured that your generation breaks

with ours, that you don't have hopes in science, that you have

recognized the social and moral danger in having everything built based

on science, and that you have decided to return to the past, and to

create for yourselves a living belief out of the remnants of previous

beliefs. Of course, we are not talking about a complete break with

science - it is assumed that you accept all its last accomplishments and

that you intend to expand them. It is assumed that you acknowledge the

proven truths, and diligently re-fit them to the ancient teachings. In

essence, science is put aside from faith. It’s being sent back to its

original place. Science is a simple exercise of mind and an allowed

research as long as it doesn’t touch the supernatural and beyond. They

say that the experiment has already been done, that science is not

capable of once again conquer the sky that it emptied, unable to return

happiness to souls, that naive world which it used to destroy. Time of

its deceitful celebration is over. Science should stay modest, because

it cannot know everything, cannot enrich everything, or heal everybody.

And if you still do not dare to say to intelligent young people that

science should throw its books and leave its teachers, there are already

saints and prophets who walk among people, praising the virtue of

ignorance, the clarity of simplicity, and for overly academic and

getting old humanity - the need for refreshment in the depths of a

prehistoric village among the ancestors, who have just separated from

the Earth, up to every society and every knowledge.

I do not deny the crisis that we are experiencing; it is the fatigue and

resentment at the end of this century, after such hectic and enormous

work, the aim of which was to know everything and to say everything. It

seemed that science that had just destroyed the ancient world, was

supposed to recreate the world vividly according to the ideal that we

have in regards to justice and happiness. We waited 20, 50, even 100

years. And then, when saw that justice hadn’t yet reigned, that

happiness hadn’t come, many gave in to the growing intolerance, having

been discouraged and denying even the possibility of achievement of the

blessed will by means of knowledge. It’s a known phenomenon: no actions

without reactions, and we observe the inevitable fatigue, characteristic

of long journeys: people sit on the edge of the road, and, looking at

the boundless plain of the unfolding next century, are despaired ever to

reach the goal; they come even to the state when they doubt even the

passed path, regret that they didn’t lay in a field to sleep in it for

ages. Why to go if the goal will always move away from you? Why to know

if you cannot know everything? It’s better to remain in pure simplicity,

in blissful ignorance of a child. That’s what people think about

science, which was supposed to bring us happiness and went bankrupt

before our eyes.

But did science promise happiness? I don't think so. It promised the

truth, and the question is whether you can make a fortune from the

truth? To be satisfied with it, without a doubt, you need a lot of

stoicism, full renunciation of your own "I", the clarity of satisfied

mind, which can be found only among the select ones. Meanwhile, what

scream we hear from the suffering humanity! How can we live without lies

and illusions! Is there somewhere another world, where justice reigns,

where the rich are punished and the good rewarded? How to live without

resenting this abominable human life? The nature is unfair and cruel,

and science brings us to an ugly law of the strong, so that any morals

are destroyed and every society leans to despotism. And here, in this

ongoing reaction, in this fatigue of the surplus of knowledge I

mentioned, there's also a retreat before the truth, yet poorly explained

and seemingly cruel to our eyes, unable to even understand and penetrate

all laws. No, no, let’s return to the quiet sleep of ignorance! The

reality is a school of perversion, need to kill it, and deny, because

the reality is only an outrage and a crime; and people jump into a

dream, and there is no other salvation as an escape from Earth, trust in

afterlife, and hope that finally we’ll find satisfaction from our need

in fraternity and justice.

This desperate appeal to happiness we hear now. It touches me immensely.

And notice, it is heard from all sides, like a pitiable wail amid the

thunder of the traffic of science, which does not stop their wheels and

machines. Enough of your truth, give us chimeras! We will find peace

only when we will dream about what does not exist, when we’ll be taken

into the infinite: only there those mystical flowers bloom, the smell of

which will lull our suffering. Music has already responded, literature

seeks to satisfy the new craving, and painting is in line with the new

fashion. I told you about the exhibition the Champs de Mars: you’ll see

there the bloom of this flora of ancient painting on windows, liquid and

slim Madonnas, visions in the gloomy shadows, frozen faces with broken

gestures of the primitivists. This is the reaction against naturalism,

which has died and was buried, as they tells us. Anyway, the movement is

undoubted because it has captured all the manifestations of the spirit,

and you have to reckon with it and explore and explain it, if you don't

want to despair in tomorrow.

From my side, gentlemen, I, like an old and hardcore positivist, see in

it only an inevitable stop in forward motion. Actually, there’s no stop,

because our libraries, laboratories, amphitheaters, and schools are not

emptied. What inspires confidence in me is that the social soil has not

changed, it still remains the same democratic soil on which our

contemporaries have grown. In order for other art to flourish, for new

beliefs to change the direction of the movement of mankind, it is

necessary for this belief to have new ground, too, in which it could

grow, because there is no new society without new soil. Faith does not

rises from dead; it’s only possible to get a mythologies out of dead

religions. Therefore, the next century will be only the assertion of

our, in that democratic and scientific impulse that hooked us up and

continues to do so. All I can assume is that in the literature we have

closed horizons too much.

Personally I have already regretted that I was sectarian, wanted in art

to stick with just proven truths. Newcomers have opened horizons,

captured the unknown and the secret, and they've done well. Between

truths established by science, and therefore unshakable truths, and the

truths that it will rip out tomorrow from the realm of the unknown in

order to fix them, in turn, there is an undefined field of doubts and

researches, which, I think, belongs to as much to literature as to

science.

Here we can do our job of best pioneers, explaining the actions of

unknown forces, according to the nature and the strength of mind.

Because ideal is nothing else but the inexplicable, like the forces of

that infinite world in which we bathe without knowing them. And if we

can come up with solutions that explain the unknown, can we afford to

doubt the laws already open, by imagining them to ourselves as being

different and thus by denying them? As science moves, the ideal

undoubtedly retreats, and it seems to me that the only meaning of life,

the only joy that should be in life is this slow conquest, although we

had to admit the sad evidence that we'll never know everything.

At the time of troubles, which we are experiencing, ladies and

gentlemen, in our time, so over profuse and so seeking, pastors of souls

appeared, who are concerned and offer faith to young people. Their offer

is generous, but, unfortunately, this faith is being changed and

perverted according to each prophet who offers it. There are many

different, but none of them seems to me neither pretty nor very

convincing. They beg you to believe without explaining clearly in what.

Maybe it’s can’t be otherwise, or maybe they are indecisive to do so.

You are invited to believe for having a good fortune to believe; mainly

for you to learn to believe. The question is not bad by itself: of

course, it is the great happiness to rely on the veracity of the faith,

whatever it may be; but the trouble is that you can't control the grace:

it blows wherever it wants.

So, I’ll finish by offering you, from my side, also a faith, and by

begging you to have the faith in work. Work, young people! I know this

advice may seem banal. There is no public event where this wasn’t

repeated in the midst of universal indifference of the listeners. But I

ask you to think about it; and I’ll let myself, all-time worker, to tell

you about the blessing that I have extracted from the prolonged labor

that has filled my entire life. My entry in this life was difficult: I

knew poverty and despair, then I lived in struggle, I still live in it,

being re-assembled, denied, covered with insults. And what? I had only

one faith, one force - work. I was only supported by the enormous work

that I set for myself, there was always a goal in front of me, in the

distance, to which I was moving, and it was enough to lift me up, to

give me courage when the bad life overwhelmed me. Labor that I'm telling

you about is truthful, daily work, a lesson, a responsibility that I

have set for myself – to move at least one step forward in my field

every day. How many times in the morning I would sit behind my desk with

lost mind, bitterness in the mouth, tormented by some great pain,

physical or mental! And every time, regardless of the outrage of my

misery, my lesson for me was relief and reinforcement. I always left my

daily activities comforted, consoled, sometimes with a broken heart, but

not yet collapsing and able to live until tomorrow.

Work! Gentlemen, just contemplate about it, it is the only law in the

world, that regulator which pulls the organic matter to its certain

goal! Life has no other meaning; there’s no other reason to be; we all

show up just to make our share of labor and to disappear.

Life is nothing but a coordinated movement that it receives and

transfers to the next, and that, in essence, is nothing else but work,

just like the work of great deed committed in all ages. And therefore

how can we not be modest and not to accept that lesson which is assigned

to every one of us, without resentment, and not to yield to the pride of

our own "I", which considers itself the center and does not want to set

foot in the ranks?

Once this lesson is learned, it seems to me that peace must settle in

any man, even in the most troubled. I know that there are minds troubled

by infinity who suffer from mystery; to them I appeal brotherly, advise

them to indulge in some labor of great difficulty, which they wouldn’t

be able to see the end of. This is the pendulum that will give them a

chance to go straight, it is this hourly scattering, it is a grain,

thrown to mind so that the mind would grind it and make bread of it with

the satisfied consciousness of completed duty. Of course, this does not

allow any metaphysical task, this is only empirical means to honestly or

nearly peacefully live ones’ lives; but is it too little benefit - to

acquire the moral and physical health, to avoid the risk of dreams by

resolving through work the hard question of acquiring the greatest

possible happiness on this earth?

I confess I never trusted chimeras. There is nothing less healthy for

both the individual and for the nations than a superstition: it destroys

the effort, it dazzles, it is vanity for the weak. To continue to hold

on to a legend, to hide reality from yourself, to believe that it’s

enough to dream of the strength in order to be strong, - we've seen

where it leads, to what terrible disasters. Peoples are told that they

need to look up, to believe in a higher authority, to be exalted to an

ideal.

No, no! Such speeches at times seem to me ungodly. Strong nation only

the one that works, and only work gives courage and faith. To win, you

need to have your arsenals full, armament - the most robust and

advanced, army - trained and trusting to their superiors and into

itself. All this is acquired: you just need to have a good desire and an

approach. In the next century, the unlimited future belongs to labor.

Let anybody not doubt this. And don’t we already see in the rising

socialism the future embryo of the social law of the future, the law of

labor for all, labor – which is the liberator and conciliator?

So, young people, take up the work. Let each of you take his own lesson

which must fill the whole his life. No matter how modest the case is, it

will nevertheless be useful; whatever it is, it only must uplift you.

When you organize it, without fatigue, having given the amount of

efforts that you are able to put every day, it will give you the

opportunity to live healthy and with fun, and it will save you the agony

of infinity. What healthy great human society would be a society in

which each and every member of it has put his logical share of work! A

person who works is always good. And because I am convinced that the

only faith that can save us is the faith in the committed effort. It’s

great to dream of eternity, but for an honest man it is enough to go

through this life by completing his job".

Mr. Zola does not approve the fact that new teachers persuade the youth

to believe in something undefined and unclear, and he is absolutely

right on this, but, unfortunately, from his side he offers them faith,

too, and the faith in something even more obscure and undefined: faith

in science and in work.

Mr. Zola considers it completely settled and unquestionable that the

science in which we must not cease to believe does exist. To work in the

name of science! But the thing is that the word "science" has a very

broad and little defined meaning, so that something that some people

consider science, i.e. a very important matter, is considered by the

greatest number of people, all working people, to be unnecessary folly.

And we cannot say that this is only because of the lack of education

among working people unable understand the whole deep meaning of

science; scientists themselves constantly deny each other. Some

scientists consider philosophy, theology, jurisprudence, political

economy to be the science of sciences; others - experimental

scientists - consider all of that the most empty, unscientific, and,

vice versa, what positivists consider important, spiritualists,

philosophers and theologians - useless exercises, if not even harmful.

In addition, even in the same field, among priests themselves, every

system has its own hottest defenders and opponents, equally competent,

claiming something diametrically opposite. Moreover, in each field, many

scientific findings appear, exist sometimes for a year, sometimes for

decades, and then suddenly get classified as misconceptions and quickly

forgotten by very those who promoted them.

We all know that what was considered to be entirely scientific and of

great importance with the Romans, what they were proud of, without which

a person considered barbarian, was rhetoric, i.e. such an exercise,

which we now laugh at, and consider to be not only not a science but

trivia. We also know that what was considered a science and the most

important thing in the Middle Ages was scholasticism, which we now also

laugh at. And I think, having recalled the descriptions of the

seriousness with which we were engaged in our rhetoric and scholastics,

one doesn’t need special courage of thought to be able, from the vast

amount of knowledge which is considered an important matter in our world

and which is called science, to anticipate those subjects which are

recognized as science in our time, over which our descendants will

shrug, too.

Nowadays people, having freed themselves from some superstitions,

without having noticed this yet, fell under others, equally groundless

and harmful superstitions than those from which they have just freed

themselves. After getting rid of the superstitions of outdated

religions, humans fall under the superstition of science. At first it

seems that there can be nothing in common between the beliefs of the

ancient Jew that the world was created in 6 days, that the sins of the

fathers will be blamed on children, that some diseases are cured by

contemplating on snakes, and beliefs of the people of our time that the

world has appeared out of the rotation of matter and the fight of

creatures, that affinity for crime is inherited and that there are some

microorganisms which look like commas, from which such and such diseases

appear, etc. It seems that there is nothing in common between these

beliefs, but it only seems so.

It’s enough to transfer to the mental state of the ancient Jew, at the

time his beliefs were first offered to him by his priests, to realize

that the grounds on which he adopted the assertions about the origin of

the world, and those based on which people of our time accept the

assertions of science, not only similar, but totally identical.

Just as a Jew believed not exactly in the six-day creation and in the

healing snake, but he believed that there are people who without a doubt

know the highest truth available to man, and that therefore it is good

to believe in them, in the same way people of our time believe not in

Darwin's theory of heredity and commas but in all of that which the

priests of science give them out as the truth, although the grounds for

their work remain just as mysterious for the believers in science, as

the grounds for knowledge of their preachers remained for the Jews.

I’ll even allow myself to say that I have repeatedly noticed, that, just

as ancient priests, having not been attested by anybody but the priests

themselves, boldly lied and presented as truth whatever came into their

mind, exactly the same so called people of science often happen to do

so.

The entire speech of Mr. Zola is directed against the teachers of youth

who persuade them to return to old beliefs, and Mr. Zola considers

himself to be their opponent. In fact, those, against whom he is arming,

i.e. the believers or rather wanting to believe in the outdated

religion, and those for whom Mr. Zola fights, i.e. the representatives

of science, are people of the same camp, and if they thoroughly think

over their aspirations, they have nothing to argue about: querelles

d'amoureux [quarrels of lovers], as Dumas says. Both are looking for the

bases of life, engines not in themselves, not in their minds, but in the

external forms of human life: one - in what they call a religion, and

others – what is called science. Those who seek salvation in religion,

take it out of the ancient knowledge of others and want to believe in

that someone else's ancient knowledge; others, those who seek salvation

in what they call science, take it not from their own knowledge but from

the knowledge of others and believe in that someone else's knowledge.

Some see the salvation of mankind in amended, renewed, or cleansed

semi-Jewish Christianity; others see it in an aggregate of the most

random, disparate, and unnecessary knowledge which they call science and

consider it being something original, beneficent, and therefore

inevitably necessarily, able to fix all the flaws of life and give

humanity the highest possible benefit. Some, as on purpose, don't want

to see that the thing they want to recover and call religion is only an

empty cocoon from which the butterfly flew away long ago and which now

puts her eggs in another place, and that the restoration of such a

religion not only cannot help with the troubles of our time, but can

only worsen them, by moving the eyes of people away from the truly

important matter. Others do not want to see that the thing they call

science, which is a random collection of some knowledge that currently

attracts interest a few idle people, may be either an innocent time

spending for the rich or, at best, only a tool for evil or good,

depending on in whose hands it will get, but, by itself it can fix

nothing. In essence, deep down in their souls, neither of them believe

in the power of that remedy they offer, but both equally want only to

avert their eyes away from the abyss before which the humanity now

stands and if the humanity will continue to go down that path, it must

inevitably crash. Some see this lulling remedy in mysticism, religion;

others, the representative of whom became Zola, in the stupefying effect

of the work for science.

The difference between people who believe in religion and science is

only that some believe in the old wisdom, the lie of which was already

exposed, and others - in a new, which lie is not yet exposed and which

therefore still inspires awe in some naive people. Meanwhile, the

superstition called science is hardly less than what is called religion.

The only difference is that the first one is the superstition of the

past, the other – the superstition of the present.

And therefore, wouldn't it be just as dangerous to follow the advice of

Mr. Zola and to dedicate your life to serving that what in our time, in

our world, is called science? What if I will devote my life to the study

of the phenomena such as the inheritance according to the teachings of

Lombroso, or some liquid, or fertilizing of soil by means of activities

of worms, etc., and all of a sudden I’ll find out just before my death

that what I have devoted my entire life for was silly, and perhaps even

harmful, trivia, and I had only one life.

There is a little known Chinese philosopher Laozi (the first and the

best translation of his "The Book of the Way and Virtue" by Stanislas

Julien). The essence of the teaching of Laozi is that the highest

well-being of individuals in particular, as well as of the collection of

peoples, can be acquired through knowledge "Tao" - a word, which

translates to "by way, by virtue, by truth"; and the cognition of "Tao"

can be acquired only through inaction, "le non agir", as Julien

translates it. All the disasters of people, according to the teaching of

Laozi, come not so much from what they have not done out of what was

needed, as much as what they do out of what they shouldn’t. And

therefore people would have got rid of all the disasters, personal and

especially public which the Chinese philosopher mostly referred to, if

they have maintained the inaction (s'il pratiquaient le non agir).

And I think he is absolutely right. Let everyone work hard. But what?

Punter, the banker returns from the exchange where he worked hard;

colonel - from training people to murder, manufacturer - from his

enterprise where thousands of people ruin their lives over producing

mirrors, tobacco, vodka. All these people work, but is it possible to

approve their work?

But maybe we should only talk about people working for science?

I keep receiving numerous notebooks from different authors, often -

books with works, artistic and scientific. One of the authors has

resolved in its final form the question of Christian epistemology,

another - printed a book on the space ether, third – resolved a social

question, fourth – political, fifth – Eastern question, sixths publishes

a magazine dedicated to the research of the mysterious forces of spirit

and nature, seventh solved a problem of a horse.

All these people work tirelessly and diligently for science, but I think

that the time and work of not only all these writers, but also many

others, is not only wasted, but even harmful. Harmful, firstly, because

to prepare these writings thousands of other people made the paper, font

templates, typed, printed and, more importantly, fed and dressed all

this workers of science, and also because of the fact that all these

writers, instead of feeling guilty before society, just as they would

feel if they’d gamble, play cards, continue with a calm conscience to do

their good for nobody business.

Who doesn't know those hopeless for truth and often cruel people who are

so busy that they never have time, especially – they have no time to see

if anybody at all needs the cause they are working so hard on and to

make sure it is not harmful. You tell them: "Your work is useless or

harmful because of so and so, hey, wait, let’s discuss this case"; they

don't listen to you and even sarcastically object: "Well, it’s easy for

you to talk, when there’s nothing to do, but I'm working on a study of

how many times this word has been used by this ancient writer, or to

identify the shape of atoms, or on telepathy", etc.

Besides, I've always been shocked by the astonishing, dominating

especially in Western Europe, opinion that work is something like

virtue; I was often surprised at this strange value attributed to work,

even before reading the speech of Mr. Zola, who clearly expressed this

opinion.

Because only an ant in a fable, as a creature deprived of reason and

desire to do good, could think that work is a virtue, and could be proud

of it.

Mr. Zola says that work makes a person good; but I always noticed the

opposite: determined work, ant-like pride of one’s own work makes not

only an ant, but a human cruel. The greatest villains of mankind, such

as Nero and Peter the First, have always been particularly busy and

preoccupied, not leaving a moment to stay with themselves without

occupation or amusements.

But even if the love of work is not an obvious vice, it can under no

circumstances called a virtue. Work can be just as little virtue as

food. Work is a need, denial of which causes suffering, but it is not a

noble cause. Exalting work to a virtue just as ugly, as exalting of food

taking to goodness and virtue. The value attributed to work in our

society could only occur as a reaction against idleness, exalted to a

sign of nobility and is still considered to be a sign of dignity among

the wealthy and little educated classes. Work, an exercise for our body

parts, is always a need for a human, just as it is demonstrated by

calves, galloping around the stake to which they are tied, and by people

of wealthy classes, martyrs of gymnastics, - all kinds of games: chess,

cards, lawn tennis, etc., as they’re unable to find a more sensible

exercise for their body parts.

Work is not only not a virtue, but in our wrongly organized society is

primarily a morally anesthetic means, just like smoking or drinking

alcohol, for hiding the wrongness and depravity of your life from

yourself.

"When do I have time to talk to you about philosophy, morality and

religion? I have to publish a daily newspaper with half million

subscribers, I need to organize an army, I need to build the Eiffel

Tower, to organize an exhibition in Chicago, to dig the Panama Channel,

to write the twenty-eighth volume of my writings, my picture, opera." If

people of our time didn’t have excuses for constant, all-absorbing them

work, they might not be able to live the way they do. Only because they

use empty and for the most part harmful work to hide from themselves

those contradictions with which they live, only because of that people

can live the way they do.

Mr. Zola presents work as that exact kind of means to his audience. He

says: “It is only an empirical means to honestly and almost peacefully

live ones’ lives. But is it too little - to obtain the moral and

physical health, to avoid the risk of dreaming by resolving through work

the hard question of acquiring the greatest happiness available to a

human?”

This is the advice given to young people of our time by Mr. Zola!

Dumas says quite the opposite. Here is his letter written to the

editor of "Golua."

"Dear Sir!

You ask my opinion in regards to aspirations that seem to show among

school students in regards to the disputes that preceded and accompanied

the incident at the Sorbonne. I would have preferred not to give my

opinion on anything whatsoever, having known very well that it will lead

to nothing. People who were already of the same opinion with us will

keep it for some time; those who were of the opposite opinion, will

persist in it even more. It would be better not to argue at all.

“Opinions are like nails:” - one of my moralist buddies said, - “the

more you bang on them, the deeper they go.”

It's not that I don’t have my own opinion on what is called the great

global issues and on the various forms with which human mind instantly

dresses those things of which he speaks. The opinion is so firm and

unconditional that I would prefer to save it for my personal guidance,

as I have no desire neither to create anything, nor to destroy. I would

need to return to those great political, social, philosophical,

religious issues, and this would take us too far if I followed you in

the study of the minor external phenomena caused by these issues in

every new generation. In fact, each new generation comes with thoughts

and passions that are old as the world, although it thinks that no one

before had these thoughts, because this generation is under their

influence for their first time, and it is convinced that it is about to

transform everything existing.

While mankind in the continuation of the millennia tries to resolve this

great task of cause and effect, which can hardly be solved even

thousands of centuries later, even if we admit, which I don't admit, the

possibility for solving it, twenty-year-old children declare that they

have the undeniable solution of it in their utterly young brains. And as

the first argument in the first dispute, they start pounding on those

who disagree with them. Does it mean we have to conclude from this that

this is a sign of the return of the whole of society to a religious

ideal, which was obscured and abandoned for a while? Or these young

apostles are driven by a pure physiological matter, the fever of blood,

the strength of muscle, and ardor which moved young people twenty years

ago in the opposite direction? I'm leaning toward the latter hypothesis.

The one who wants to see in the expression of young age, full of energy,

a proof of final development or at least a sustainable one, would be

very wrong. This is just an outburst of the fever of growth. Whatever

type of ideas there were, for the sake of which young people bang each

other, you can bet that they will become the opponents of these ideas as

soon they will see them in their children. Age and experience will make

it.

Many, many of the warmongers and enemies of the present hour will sooner

or later meet at country roads of life, partly tired, partly

disillusioned by their battle with reality, and will, hand in hand,

return back to the high road, recognizing with sadness that, despite

their former beliefs, the Earth stays round and it turns into the same

direction, and that the same horizons spread under the same endless

closed sky.

After having argued and fought, some - in the name of faith, others - in

the name of science, to prove that God exists as much as to prove that

He doesn’t, - two assertions, about which people can fight forever if

they decide not to disarm until they prove the point, – they’ll finally

agree that one group does not know any more about it than the other, but

they firmly know that in the end a person needs to hope for, just as

much as, if not more than, to know, and that he suffers terribly from

the obscurity in which he lives about things more interesting for him,

that he is constantly looking for a better condition than in which he is

now, and that he has to be given full freedom to search in the field of

philosophy the means to become more happy.

There was a world in front of him, which existed before him and will

remain after him, and he knows that this world is eternal and that he

wishes to participate in this eternity. As he was called to life, he

demands his share in the eternal life that surrounds him, stimulates

him, makes fun of him, and destroys him. Because he knows that he has

began, he doesn't want to end. He loudly calls, he softly prays for the

confirmation, which constantly eludes him for the sake of his own

happiness, because the confirmed knowledge would make him immobile and

dead. Because the strongest engine of human energy is unknown, because

it cannot be established with veracity, he runs with vague ideals, and

no matter how far he would deviate in skepticism and denial as a result

of pride, anger, curiosity, fashion, he always returns to hope, without

which he cannot live. It's like a quarrel between lovers: doesn’t last

for long.

So sometimes the darkening comes, but it is never a complete

disappearance of the human ideal. Philosophical fogs pass through it

like clouds in front the Moon, but the white luminary continues its

procession and suddenly appears from behind them, pristine and shiny.

This unstoppable human need for an ideal explains the reason why human

jumped with such trust, such enthusiasm, without reasoned control, in

various religious formulas that promised him the infinite and offered it

to him according to his nature, and put him in the known limits, always

necessary even for the ideal.

But on each station of the movement of mankind, already for a long time,

new people appear from the darkness in greater and greater numbers,

especially for the last 100 years, and these people in the name of

reason, science, and observation deny truths, declare them relative, and

want to destroy those formulas that contain them.

Who is right in this dispute? Everybody, as long as everyone is

searching, and nobody, once they start to threaten. Between the truth,

which is the purpose, and a free study, which everyone has right to do,

there’s no place for power, regardless of the notorious examples of the

opposite. Power only distances the goal, that's all. It is not only

cruel, it is useless, which makes it the biggest limitation in the

matter of civilization. No punch of the fist, no matter how strong it

may be, can prove neither the existence nor nonexistence of God. And,

finally, that force, whatever it may be, which has created the world, as

it seems to me that the world couldn’t still create itself, having made

us its own tools, reserved the right to know why it made us and where it

leads us. This force, despite of all those intentions which people

attributed to it, and of all the requirements that people made to it,

this force, as it seems, wants to keep it a secret, and therefore (I’ll

tell here everything I think) it seems to me that mankind starts to

abandon the desire to penetrate it. Humanity was drawn to religions

which proved nothing because they were all different; refer to

philosophies that explained not more than that because they were

inconsistent with each other; humanity will now try to handle its own

simple instinct and common sense, and because it lives on the Earth, not

knowing why and how, it will try to be as happy as possible by those

means which our planet provides it with.

Recently Zola in his remarkable speech to the students, recommend them

work as a medicine, even a panacea, against all difficulties in life.

Labor improbus omnia vincit (Tireless work wins everything.) This

medicine is known and it doesn’t become any worse because of that, but

it has always been and continues to be insufficient. Let a man work with

his muscles or mind, yet his concerns can never be limited to the

purchase of food, the acquisition of property, or the attainment of

fame. All those who limit themselves to these goals, feel, even when

they have reached them, that they still lack something: the fact is,

whatever a human produces, whatever he is saying, whatever he is told,

he does not only consist of a body which he must feed and mind which

needs to be educated and developed; he undoubtedly has a soul which

claims its own demands. This soul is in unceasing work, in constant

development, and in the pursuit toward light and truth. Until it

receives all the light and wins the entire truth, it will torment man.

And here it is – it has never occupied that much, never imposed with

such vigor its power on man as in our time. It is, so to speak, poured

into the air that the world breathes. Those few individual souls, who

separately from each other wished for the social rebirth, gradually

found and called each other, got closer, connected, understood

themselves, and formed a group, a center of attraction, to which other

souls now lean from four sides of the world, like larks flying on

mirror: they have composed such shared, collective soul, to help people

ahead to fulfill together, deliberately, the unstoppably imminent

unification, and to do the right progress of the nations who were just

recently hostile to each other. This new soul I see and recognize in the

events that seem to be denying it.

The arming of all nations, the threats that their representatives make

to each other, the persecutions of the people of certain nations, the

hostility among countrymen, and even the childishness of Sorbonne are

all the phenomena of bad nature but not of bad omens. They are the last

convulsions of what must pass. The disease in this case is just an

energetic effort of the body to free itself from the deadly source.

Those who used the misconceptions of the past, and hoped to continue

using them for much longer time and forever, are now getting together to

prevent any change. As a result – these armings, these threats, these

persecutions; but, if you look closer, you will see that all this is

only superficial. All of this is colossal, but it is hollow.

In all of this, there’s no soul anymore: it has moved to another place.

All those millions of armed men, who every day practice to prepare for

an all-destroying war, already don't hate those with whom they must

fight, and none of their superiors dare declare a war. In regards to the

contagious reproaches that are heard from the bottom, from the top a

great and sincere compassion starts to respond, which recognizes the

fairness of the reproaches.

Mutual understanding will inevitably come at a certain time, and sooner

than we think. I don't know whether it's because I will soon leave this

world, and that the light, which is coming from beneath the horizon and

is shining at me, is already obscuring my sight, but I think that our

world is entering the era of implementation of the words: "Love one

another", without arguing about who said these words: God or man.

The spiritualistic movement, evident from all sides, and which so many

proud and naive people think to control, will be humane, without a

doubt. People, who can do nothing with moderation, will be caught by the

insanity, madness of love to each other. At first, this obviously will

be not accomplished by itself. There will be misunderstandings, possibly

even the bloody ones: that’s how we are brought up and conditioned to

hate each other, often by the very people who are supposed to teach us

to love. But because it is obvious that this great law of fraternity

must be implemented at some time, I am confident that time comes when we

will irresistibly wish for it to happen.

A. Dumas

June 1, 1893"

The main difference between the Dumas’ letter and Zola’s speech, not to

mention the outward difference - the fact that speech of Zola is turned

to youth and is flattering it (which became common unpleasant phenomenon

of our time, just as flattering women by writers), while Dumas’s writing

is not drawn to youth and is not telling it compliments, but, on the

contrary, points out to its common error of arrogance, and consequently,

rather than influencing young people that they are very important and

that they have all the power in them, which they should never think in

order to be able to do something worthwhile, Duma teaches a great deal

not just youth but also adults and the old, - but the sound difference

is that Zola’s speech lulls people, detains them on the path they stay,

by assuring them that they already know what they need to know; while

Dumas’ letter awakes people by pointing to them that their life isn't

going the way it should, and that they do not know what is the most

important they need to know. Dumas just as little believes in the

superstition of the past as in the superstition of the present. But

precisely because he believes in the superstition of neither past nor

present, he observes by himself, thinks for himself, and therefore

clearly sees not only the present but also the future, just as those who

were called prophets in ancient times have always seen. Strange as it

may seem to those who while reading the essays of writers see only the

outer side of the writing and not the soul of the writer, that same

Alexandre Dumas, fils, who wrote "La Dame aux camélias", "L'Affaire

Clemenceau" ("Lady with the camellias", "Case of Clemenceau") and

others, the same Dumas now sees the future and prophecies about it.

Strange as it seems to us, who is used to imagine a prophet in an animal

skin and in the desert, prophecy remains the prophecy, regardless of the

fact that it is pronounced not on the banks of the Jordan, but is

printed on the banks of the Seine in typography "Golua", and the words

of Dumas are the actual prophecy and carry all the essential signs of

prophecy: firstly, these words are absolutely opposite to the popular

opinion of the people among whom they are said; secondly, despite of

this, people who hear these words, without knowing why, find themselves

agreeing with them, and, thirdly, the important thing is that prophecy

assists the achievement of what it predicts.

The more people will believe that they can be brought by something

external, which acts by itself, regardless of their will, e.g. by

religion or science, to a change and improvement of their lives, the

harder it is for this change and improvement to come true. And this the

major drawback of the Zola’s speech. But, on the contrary, the more they

will believe in what Dumas predicts - that inevitably, and soon, time

will come when people will become passionate about loving each other,

and by giving themselves to this love, they’ll inadvertently change the

whole present life, - the sooner this time will come. And this is the

main advantage of Dumas’s letter. Zola advises people not to change

their lives, but only to increase the activity in the direction once

adopted, and by saying this he influences them not to change their

lives. But Dumas, by predicting internal change of the feelings of

people, inspires them with this change.

Dumas predicts that people, having tried everything, finally will - and

very soon - take the application to life of the law "love each other"

seriously, and will, as he said, be caught by "insanity, madness" of

love. He says that he already sees in events seeming very threatening

the signs of this new emerging loving mood of people; he sees that fully

armed peoples do not hate each other anymore; he sees that in the fight

of the wealthy classes with the poor there’s no longer the triumph of

winners but a sincere compassion of the winners for the losers, and

dissatisfaction of and shame for their victory; he sees, most

importantly, as he says, that the centers of loving attraction will form

and grow like a snowball, and they must inevitably attract to themselves

everything that lives that is not yet connected to them, and, by means

of changing of the mood, the evil, from which people suffer, will

disappear.

I think that even if the proximity of the transformation that Dumas

predicts can be questioned, as well as the possibility itself of such

enthusiasm among people toward each other, but no one would argue that

if that happens, then humanity would rid itself from the most of the

distresses that pressure and threaten it. It can’t be denied that if

people did what they were prescribed to do thousands years ago, not only

by Christ, but by all the sages of the world, i.e. if not loved others

like themselves, but at least did not do to others what they don't want

to be done to them, that if people instead of selfishness would buy into

altruism, if their life habits would change from individualistic to

collectivistic, as people of science in their bad lingo express the same

idea, then people's lives would become happy instead of being

distressed. Moreover, everybody also recognizes that life, having

carried on these pagan bases of fight as it does now, will inevitably

lead mankind to the greatest disasters, and that time is already near.

All people see that the more and more vigorously they will take each

other's land and products of work, the more angry they’ll become, and

the more unavoidably, sooner or later, those people from whom the most

was taken will take from the robbers everything that they have been

deprived from for so long, and will brutally repay for all the

deprivation they have suffered. Everybody, already for long time, sees

this ridiculously obvious absurdity of mutual arming of the people,

which inevitably must end with either horrible killings or with already

ongoing worldwide bankruptcy and the extinction of all people involved

in this circle of arming. Besides, all people of our world recognize as

mandatory for themselves either the religious Christian law of love or

the secular law, based on the same Christianity, of respect for other's

life, for identity, and for human rights.

People know all this, and yet they build their lives contrary to their

own benefits, and security, and the law that they profess.

Obviously, there's some sort of hidden but important reason that

prevents people from performing what is profitable for them, which would

save them from the obvious danger, and which they recognize as mandatory

for themselves, religious or moral law. Isn’t it not to deceive each

other that the love for each other was praised for so many centuries,

and is now preached from thousands of different religious and secular

high places. Because it's time for people to decide that the love for

each other is advantageous, useful, and kind, and to arrange their lives

based on it, or, having recognized that love is an impossible dream,

stop talking about it. But people are not doing either of that: they

continue to live contrary to love and continue to praise it. Obviously,

they believe that love is possible, desirable and natural to them, but

cannot fulfill it. Why is this happening?

All еру great changes in life of one person or the whole mankind begin

and are committed only in a thought. Regardless of the external changes

that will take place in people's lives, no matter how much people would

preach on the need of change of feelings and actions, people's lives

will not change until they change their thoughts. But once a change in

thoughts happens, sooner or later, depending on the importance of the

change, it will echo in feelings, and actions, and lives of people just

as inevitably as a ship turns after the turn of the steering wheel.

From the first words of his sermon, Christ did not tell people: do this

or that, have such and such feelings, but he told them: think again,

change your understanding of life. He did not tell people: love one

another (these words he spoke to his disciples, people who understood

his teaching); but he told all people the same what his predecessor John

the Baptist told: "Repent, that is, think, change your understanding of

life, think again, otherwise you’ll all perish,” he said. “The meaning

of your life cannot reside in each of you looking for the individual

benefits of your own personality or the benefits of a known collection

of people,“ he said, “because the benefit that is purchased at the

expense of other individuals, families, peoples, who are looking for the

same by the same means, obviously not only can’t be achieved, but

inevitably must lead you to perdition. Understand that the meaning of

your lives can only be in fulfilling the will of the One Who sent you to

this life and requires you to serve not your personal goals but His

goal, which is in the establishment of unity and love among all

creatures, in the establishment of the Kingdom of heaven, when the

swords will be melted into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks, and

when the lion will lie with the lamb, as prophets expressed that. Change

your understanding of life, otherwise you’ll all perish, he said. But

people did not listen to Christ and have not changed their understanding

of life back then, and still hold to it. And this false understanding of

life held by people, despite the increasing complexity of life forms and

the development of consciousness of people of our time, is the exact

reason why people, being aware of the blessings of love and the dangers

of the life that opposes love, and having recognized love being the law

of their God or the law of life, still cannot follow it.

And, what possibility there is for a person of our world, - the one who

assumes the purpose of his life in his own personal, or family, or the

nation’s benefits achieved only by an intense fight with other people

who also strive for the same, in the midst of the institutions of the

world which legitimize every fight and violence, - to really love those

who are always on his way, and who he must inevitably ruin, in order to

achieve the goals he set for himself?

In order for the change of feelings and actions to happen, change in

thoughts must happen first. And in order to the change in thoughts to

happen, a person must stop, and pay attention to what he needs to

understand. In order for people, who with a shout and roar of wheels

rush to abyss, to be able to hear what those, who want to save them,

shout to them, they must stop, first of all. Otherwise how can a man

change his thoughts, his understanding of life, when he - relentlessly,

with passion, also hurried by the people who assure him that this is all

he needs – works based on that same false understanding of life that he

needs to change?

Human sufferings, which arise from the false understanding of life, are

fully-grown; blessing given by the true understanding of life became so

clear and obvious to all; so that for people to change their lives, in

accordance with their conscience, they don't need to undertake anything

nowadays, to do anything, but they only need to stop, to stop doing what

they're doing, to focus and reflect.

People of our Christian world are in the same condition as people who

are struggling over moving a fairly light weight just because they, in a

rush, can’t come to an agreement with each other, and are relentlessly

pulling the weight in different directions.

If at previous times, when people still haven’t realized the calamity of

pagan life and the blessing promised by love, they could unconsciously

continue to support slavery, oppression, executions, wars, and could by

use of reasoned arguments defend their status, now it has become

completely impossible: the people of our time can live the pagan life,

but can't justify it anymore. It’s enough for the people of our

Christian world only to pause in their activities for a moment, to

reflect on their situation, to apply the requirement of their reason and

heart to the surrounding conditions of life, to see that their entire

life, all their actions is a constant glaring contradiction with their

conscience, mind, and heart.

Ask each person of our time separately about what he is guided by, and

what he considers necessary to be guided by in his life, and almost

everyone will tell you that he is guided if not by love, then by

justice, - he will tell you that he personally, having recognized either

the necessity of the Christian teaching or the moral secular principles

based on the same Christianity, needs neither violence, nor the courts,

nor executions, nor war, and he obeys these conditions of life only

because they are needed for other people; ask another person, the third,

and almost all of them will say the same. And they all are sincere. By

the nature of their consciousness, most people of our time for long time

already must have lived among each other as Christians. Look how they

live in reality: they live like beasts.

So, most people of the Christian world our time live pagan lives not so

much because they want to, but because this order of life, which was

some time ago useful for people with totally different consciousness,

has remained the same, and is kept this way by means of constant hustle

of people, which leaves no time for them to come to their senses and to

change their order of life according to their conscience.

It is enough for people to stop, even only for a while, doing that what

is advised to them by Zola and his imaginary opponents - all those who,

under the pretext of a slow and gradual progress wish to retain the

existing order - enough to stop stupefying themselves with false

religions or science, and, mainly, with the incessant self-exhaling work

on cases that are not approved by their conscience, and they would

immediately see that the meaning of their lives cannot be in this

obviously deceptive quest for a single, built on the fight with others,

benefit for their own person, family, nation or state; they would see

that the only possible reasonable meaning of life is the one that was

already 1800 years ago open to humanity by Christianity.

Feast was ready for a long time, and everybody was long time ago called

to attend it; but one has bought land, another – married, third – tests

his bulls, fourth - builds a railway, factory, busy with missionary in

India or Japan, reads sermons, pushes a military law or fails it, takes

an exam, writes an academic essay, a poem, a novel. All are busy, have

no time to wake up, come to their senses, look at themselves and the

world and ask themselves: what do I do? What for? Because it can’t be

that the force which has produced me into the world with my reasoning

and loving properties, would produce me with them only to cheat, so that

I, - having imagined to myself, that in order to achieve the greatest

good for my own dying personality I can manage my own and others’ lives

as I wish, - would have finally convinced myself, that the more I try to

do all this, the worse it is for me, and for my family, and for my

nation, the farther I digress from the demands of love and reason, which

are instilled in me and which don’t stop for a moment asserting their

demands, and from the true blessing. It can’t be that these higher

properties my soul were assigned to me just in order for them to be like

shackles on the legs of a prisoner, just to hinder me in achieving my

goals. Isn’t it more likely that the force, which have produced me to

the world, have produced me with my mind and love not for my random

instantaneous goals, always opposing to the goals of other creatures

(which it couldn’t do, because I didn’t exist neither did my goals

before it has produced me), but for the achievement of its purpose, and

to assist me with that purpose it has given me those essential

properties of my soul. And therefore isn’t it better to me, instead of

persisting in following my own will and the will of other people, which

are opposite to these supreme properties and leading me to disasters, to

recognize once and for all that the goal of my life is the fulfillment

of the will of the One Who sent me, in everything and always, in spite

of any other considerations, and to follow only those instructions of

reason and love that He put into me for the fulfillment of His will?

This is the Christian understanding of life, which is asking to sink in

the soul of every man of our time. In order for the Kingdom of God to

come true, it’s necessary for all the people to begin to love each other

without making distinctions between individuals, families, peoples. For

people to be able to love each other that way, it’s necessary for them

to change their understanding of life. In order to change their

understanding of life, it’s necessary for them to come to their senses;

and in order for them to come to their senses, they need first of all to

stop for a while in that burning activity in the name of the affairs

required by the pagan understanding of life, to which they give

themselves; they need at least for a while to break free from that which

Indians call "sansara", from the hustle and bustle of life, which more

than anything else prevents people from understanding the meaning of

their existence.

The deficiency of the pagan life, and the clarity and the prevalence of

Christian consciousness in our time have reached such an extent that

it’s enough for people only to pause in their fuss, and they’ll

immediately see the futility of their activities; and, just as water

inevitably freezes in the cold as soon they stop stirring it, the

Christian understanding by itself will inevitably settle in their minds.

And as soon as people assimilate this concept, their love for each

other, for all people, for all living things, having been currently in a

hidden state, will, too, inevitably manifest itself in their activities,

and will become an engine for all their deeds, just as now, with the

pagan understanding of life, the love is manifested for oneself, for

one’s exclusive family, for an exclusive nation.

But as soon as the Christian love will show itself in people, and

immediately, by themselves, without the slightest effort, old forms will

disintegrate and those new forms of the good life will form, the lack of

which seems to people the main obstacle to implementing of what their

minds and heart have been demanding for long time.

If only people reserved one hundredth of the energy which they now

expend on the commitment of various unwarranted carnal and therefore

dimming their consciousness matters, and used it on the understanding of

the consciousness itself and on the execution of what it requires from

them, then much sooner and easier than we can even imagine, the Kingdom

of God would establish, which He demands from people, and people would

have found that well-being that was promised to them.

Look for the Kingdom of God and its righteousness, and the rest will

follow you.

9 August, 1893.