1Augustавгуста · 1-е августа
Освобождает человека только разум, — чем неразумнее жизнь человека, тем она несвободнее.
Only reason sets us free — the less reasonable our life, the less free it is.
1. Ты спросишь, каким путем достигнуть свободы? Для этого надо научиться различать добро и зло самому, а не по указанию толпы.
1. You will ask: by what path is freedom to be reached? For this you must learn to distinguish good from evil yourself, and not at the bidding of the crowd.
From Epistulae morales ad Lucilium · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedThe freedman who might come to be “the only free man amid a throng of gentlemen” drops out, and his “How?” becomes the general question “by what path is freedom to be reached?”; Tolstoy adds that one must “learn” to distinguish good from evil “yourself.”
Original · LatinPuta itaque te non equitem Romanum esse sed libertinum: potes hoc consequi, ut solus sis liber inter ingenuos.
'Quomodo?' inquis. Si mala bonaque non populo auctore distineris.
Source text: thelatinlibrary.comIn English · Richard M. Gummere (Loeb), 1917Suppose, then, that you were not a Roman knight, but a freedman, you might nevertheless by your own efforts come to be the only free man amid a throng of gentlemen.
“How?” you ask. Simply by distinguishing between good and bad things without patterning your opinion from the populace.
Source text: en.wikisource.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Epistulae morales ad Lucilium, 44.6.
Seneca to Lucilius, on true nobility: even a freedman "might nevertheless by your own efforts come to be the only free man amid a throng of gentlemen. 'How?' you ask. Simply by distinguishing between good and bad things without patterning your opinion from the populace" (si mala bonaque non populo auctore distinxeris; the Latin Library prints «distineris»). Tolstoy drops the freedman and the free-born and makes the question general: «Ты спросишь, каким путем достигнуть свободы?» (you will ask by what way freedom is reached) for "'Quomodo?' inquis" ("How?" you ask), which asks how to be the one free man among the free-born. He adds «научиться» (learn) and «самому» (oneself), and renders "non populo auctore" (not on the people's authority) «не по указанию толпы» (not at the crowd's direction). The line is not in Ramage's Latin Authors (searched: populo auctore, bonaque); Tolstoy's intermediary was not found.
2. Если нет в тебе желания делать зло честолюбия, то нет и добродетельного поступка, на который ты бы не был способен.
2. If there is in you no desire to do evil, no ambition, then there is no virtuous act of which you would not be capable.
From The Analects · close to the original .
What Tolstoy read · G. Pauthier, Confucius et Mencius: Les quatre livres de philosophie morale et politique …Sans envie de nuire et sans désirs ambitieux, …
A quelle action simple et vertueuse n'est-on pas propre …
_Tseu-lou_ (_Yeou_) avait sans cesse la maxime précédente à la bouche.
Paroles du _Livre des Vers_.
Source text: gutenberg.orgIn English · James Legge, 1861He dislikes none, he covets nothing;-- what can he do but what is good!
Tsze-lu kept continually repeating these words of the ode, when the Master said, 'Those things are by no means sufficient to constitute (perfect) excellence.'
Source text: gutenberg.orgTolstoy’s own version · Мысли мудрых людей на каждый деньБез желания делать зло и без честолюбия нет простого и добродетельного поступка, на который человек не был бы способен.
Source text: tolstoy.ruDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. The Analects (Lunyu), IX.26 (Legge's numbering; Pauthier ch. IX, § 26), quoting the ode 'Xiong zhi' of the Book of Odes (Bei feng).
Two lines of the Book of Odes as Pauthier gives them in the Analects (IX.26): «Sans envie de nuire et sans désirs ambitieux, A quelle action simple et vertueuse n'est-on pas propre?» (without the wish to harm and without ambitious desires, for what simple and virtuous action is one not fit?). Tolstoy's 1903 version (Thoughts of Wise Men, 2 October, signed «Китайская мудрость («Ле-Лун-Ю»)», the Lun-yu) follows Pauthier closely. The Circle turns it to the second person, «Если нет в тебе желания делать зло честолюбия, то нет и добродетельного поступка, на который ты бы не был способен» (if there is in you no wish to do evil [and] ambition, there is no virtuous act of which you would not be capable), and drops «простого» (simple); the Circle's text lacks the «и» (and) that 1903 has before «без честолюбия», probably a word lost in printing. Faithful to Pauthier. The Chinese says 'not envious (忮), not covetous (求): how could he not be good?'; Pauthier's 'for what action is one not fit' widens 'he will do only good' into 'he is capable of every good act'. In the Analects these are words of an ode, which Zilu (Tseu-lou) kept repeating, and Confucius answered that they are 'by no means sufficient' for excellence (是道也，何足以臧); Pauthier's note 42 says they are words of the Book of Odes. Tolstoy gives as wisdom the lines whose sufficiency Confucius denied. The signature «Китайская мудрость» stands; the words are not Confucius's.
Translation note. The Russian runs «желания делать зло честолюбия» with no comma; it is read here as two things, the desire to do evil and ambition.
3. Победить самого себя — это лучшее средство для того, чтобы не быть побежденным. Обуздать самого себя — это лучшее средство для того, чтобы не иметь над собой господина.
3. To conquer yourself is the best means of not being conquered. To bridle yourself is the best means of having no master over you.
Source not found yet .
Not found yet.
«Победить самого себя — это лучшее средство для того, чтобы не быть побежденным. Обуздать самого себя — это лучшее средство для того, чтобы не иметь над собой господина» (to conquer oneself is the best means of not being conquered; to curb oneself is the best means of having no master over oneself). No source in these words was found. The thought of self-conquest is common to the Dhammapada (vv. 103-104, which the Circle gives elsewhere in another form), Lao-Tzu (ch. 33), and Proverbs 16:32, but none of them has the two-part turn of this saying, 'so as not to be conquered' and 'so as to have no master'.
Searched: Thoughts of Wise Men (1903), its commentary and source list, and the Jubilee vols. 39-43 and 45 (Path of Life); Conway's Sacred Anthology (1874); Pauthier's Four Books; Julien's Lao-Tzu; Gerasimov's and Max Müller's Dhammapada; Southgate (1862), Tileston, Coit, Arnold's and Wilkins's Hitopadesa, Gladwin's Gulistan, Boiste, and Moralistes anciens (saved texts); web searches in English for the saying ('conquer thyself … not to be conquered', 'have no master').
4. Привязаться к известной идее это почти то же, что привязаться к столбу, врытому в землю. Мера свободы, которой будет пользоваться человек, всецело будет зависить от длины его привязи, и наибольшей свободой будет пользоваться тот, кто привяжется к идее блага для всех.
4. To tie oneself to a certain idea is almost the same as tying oneself to a post set in the ground. The measure of freedom a man will enjoy will depend wholly on the length of his tether, and the greatest freedom will be enjoyed by him who ties himself to the idea of the good of all.
From Key Thoughts, in The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic · close to the original .
Lucy Mallory’s own wordsAttaching one's self to an idea is like attaching one's self to a stake in the ground. The measure of liberty will be limited to the length of the thought-rope. The idea that includes the good of all will give one the largest freedom.
… of endeavor.--Lucy A. Malloby.
Source text: iapsop.comDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Key Thoughts, in The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic (ed. Lucy A. Mallory, Portland, Oregon), vol. XIV, no. 6, May–June 1901, p. 84, the column 'Key Thoughts', signed at its end '--Lucy A. Malloby' (a misprint for Mallory).
Close to Mallory's three sentences, with two words added and one image plainer. Tolstoy adds 'almost' ('is almost the same as tying oneself to a post dug into the ground', почти то же) and 'wholly' (всецело будет зависеть), and Mallory's 'thought-rope' becomes 'his tether' (его привязи), so the rope is no longer made of thought. 'The measure of liberty will be limited to the length of the thought-rope' becomes 'The measure of freedom a man will enjoy will depend wholly on the length of his tether'; 'The idea that includes the good of all will give one the largest freedom' becomes 'and the greatest freedom will be enjoyed by the one who ties himself to the idea of the good of all'. The column, a run of unsigned aphorisms, ends '--Lucy A. Malloby', so Tolstoy's signature stands. No printable, for 'almost' and 'wholly' and the lost 'thought-rope'.
5. Живет свободно только тот, кто находит радость в исполнении своего долга, кто обдумал тот путь, который он должен пройти в жизни; кто подчиняется нравственному закону не из страха, а уважает и слушается его потому, что считает, что так должно; над кем нет иной власти, кроме собственного желания и суждения.
5. He alone lives freely who finds joy in doing his duty, who has thought out the path he must travel in life; who submits to the moral law not out of fear, but respects and obeys it because he holds that so it ought to be; over whom there is no power but his own desire and judgment.
From Paradoxa Stoicorum · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedThe man who “obeys the laws of his country, not out of dread” (in Ramage, whom Tolstoy follows, “does not submit to the laws from fear”) becomes one who “submits to the moral law not out of fear,” so the laws of the state become the moral law; Cicero’s question, “Who therefore lives as he wishes,” becomes a statement: “He alone lives freely who.”
What Tolstoy read · Beautiful Thoughts from Latin AuthorsWho therefore lives as he wishes, but the man who leads an upright life, who rejoices in the performance of his duty, who has considered well and thoughtfully the path of life he ought to pursue?
… who does not submit to the laws from fear, but pays …
… respect and obedience to them because he considers that this is the most proper course; …
… nor is there anything which has more authority with him than …
Source text: archive.orgOriginal · LatinQuid est enim libertas? Potestas vivendi, ut velis.
Quis igitur vivit, ut volt, nisi qui recte vivit? qui gaudet officio, cui vivendi via considerata atque provisa est, qui ne legibus quidem propter metum paret, sed eas sequitur et colit, quia id salutare esse maxime iudicat, …
… nec est ulla res, quae plus apud eum polleat quam ipsius voluntas atque iudicium; …
Source text: thelatinlibrary.comIn English · Cyrus R. Edmonds, 1860For what is liberty? The power of living as you please.
… the man who obeys the laws of his country, not out of dread, …
… the man who is swayed by nothing so much as by his own inclination and judgment ; …
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Paradoxa Stoicorum, V.34 (Paradox. v. 1 in Ramage).
Tolstoy translates Ramage's English of Paradoxa Stoicorum V.34, shortened: "Who therefore lives as he wishes, but the man who leads an upright life, who rejoices in the performance of his duty, who has considered well and thoughtfully the path of life he ought to pursue? who does not submit to the laws from fear, but pays respect and obedience to them because he considers that this is the most proper course; ... nor is there anything which has more authority with him than his own wishes and judgment." Ramage's words show through: «находит радость в исполнении своего долга» is "rejoices in the performance of his duty", «обдумал тот путь, который он должен пройти в жизни» "considered ... the path of life he ought to pursue", «уважает и слушается его» "pays respect and obedience". Tolstoy makes Cicero's question a statement, «Живет свободно только тот, кто» (only he lives freely who), for "Who therefore lives as he wishes, but"; turns "the laws" (legibus, the laws of the state) into «нравственному закону» (the moral law); gives "because he considers that this is the most proper course" (quia id salutare esse maxime iudicat, because he judges it most salutary) as «потому, что считает, что так должно» (because he thinks it ought to be so); and makes "nor is there anything which has more authority with him than his own wishes and judgment" «над кем нет иной власти, кроме собственного желания и суждения» (over whom there is no power but his own wish and judgment). Left out: "the man who leads an upright life", that he says, does, and thinks nothing but freely, that his plans arise from himself, and fortune yielding to him. Ramage's scan prints a running head inside the sentence and "Ins" for "his", so its excerpts are cut around them.
6. Только про того человека можно сказать, что он свободен, который живет так, как он хочет. Разумный человек всегда живет так, как он хочет, потому что он желает только того, что возможно получить. И потому только разумный человек свободен.
Никто не желает быть виноватым; никто не хочет жить в заблуждениях, неправедно; никто не выбирает себе нарочно такой жизни, от которой он будет печалиться и мучиться; никто не скажет, что ему хочется жить скверно и развратно. Значит все люди, живущие неправедной жизнью, живут так не по своему желанию, а против воли. Они не хотят ни печали, ни страха, а между тем постоянно страдают и боятся. Они делают то, чего не хотят. Стало быть, они не свободны.
Мудрец Диоген говорил: «Только тот истинно свободен, кто всегда готов умереть». Он писал персидскому царю: «Ты не можешь сделать истинно свободных людей рабами, как не можешь поработить рыбу. Если ты и возьмешь их в плен, они не будут рабствовать тебе. А если они умрут в плену у тебя, то какая тебе прибыль от того, что ты забрал их в плен?»
Вот это — речи человека свободного: такой человек знает, в чем состоит истинная свобода.
6. Only of the man who lives as he wishes can it be said that he is free. The reasonable man always lives as he wishes, because he desires only what it is possible to obtain. And so only the reasonable man is free.
No one wishes to be in the wrong; no one wants to live in error, unrighteously; no one deliberately chooses for himself a life in which he will grieve and suffer; no one will say that he wants to live wickedly and dissolutely. So all people who live an unrighteous life live so not by their own wish but against their will. They want neither sorrow nor fear, and yet they are constantly suffering and afraid. They do what they do not want. It follows that they are not free.
The sage Diogenes used to say: “Only he is truly free who is always ready to die.” He wrote to the Persian king: “You cannot make truly free men slaves, any more than you can enslave a fish. Even if you take them captive, they will not be slaves to you. And if they die in captivity with you, what profit is it to you that you took them captive?”
These are the words of a free man: such a man knows what true freedom consists in.
From Discourses · joined by Tolstoy from several places .
Original · Ancient Greek… ἐλεύθερός ἐστιν ὁ ζῶν ὡς βούλεται, ὃν οὔτʼ ἀναγκάσαι ἔστιν οὔτε κωλῦσαι οὔτε βιάσασθαι, οὗ αἱ ὁρμαὶ ἀνεμπόδιστοι, αἱ ὀρέξεις ἐπιτευκτικαί, αἱ ἐκκλίσεις ἀπερίπτωτοι.
… τίς οὖν θέλει ζῆν ἁμαρτάνων; — οὐδείς. — τίς θέλει ζῆν ἐξαπατώμενος, προπίπτων, ἄδικος ὤν, ἀκόλαστος, μεμψίμοιρος, ταπεινός; — οὐδείς. — οὐδεὶς ἄρα τῶν φαύλων ζῇ ὡς βούλεται· οὐ τοίνυν οὐδʼ ἐλεύθερός ἐστιν.
… οὕτως καὶ Διογένης που λέγει μίαν εἶναι μηχανὴν πρὸς ἐλευθερίαν τὸ εὐκόλως ἀποθνῄσκειν, καὶ τῷ Περσῶν βασιλεῖ γράφει ὅτι τὴν Ἀθηναίων πόλιν καταδουλώσασθαι οὐ δύνασαι· οὐ μᾶλλον, φησίν, ἢ τοὺς ἰχθύας.
… τοῦτʼ ἔστιν ἐλευθέρου ἀνδρὸς φωνὴ σπουδῇ ἐξητακότος τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ ὥσπερ εἰκὸς εὑρηκότος.
Source text: raw.githubusercontent.comIn English · George Long, 1877HE is free who lives as he wishes to live; …
Not one then of the bad lives as he wishes; nor is he then free.
So Diogenes also somewhere says that there is only one way to freedom, and that is to die content: and he writes to the Persian king. You cannot enslave the Athenian state any more than you can enslave fishes.
These are the words of a free man who had carefully examined the thing, and, as was natural, had discovered it.
Source text: raw.githubusercontent.comTolstoy’s own version · Мысли мудрых людей на каждый деньТолько про того человека можно сказать, что он свободен, который живет так, как он хочет. Разумный человек всегда живет так, как он хочет, и никто на свете не может ему в этом помешать, потому что он только того и желает, что возможно получить. И потому разумный человек свободен.
Мудрец Диоген говорил: «Только тот истинно свободен, кто всегда готов умереть». Он писал персидскому царю: «Ты не можешь сделать истинно свободных людей рабами, как не можешь поработить рыбу. Если ты и возьмешь их в плен, они не будут рабствовать тебе. А если они умрут в плену у тебя, то какая тебе прибыль от того, что ты забрал их в плен?» Вот это — речи человека свободного: такой человек знает, в чем состоит истинная свобода.
Source text: tolstoy.ruDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Discourses, IV.1.1–5, 30–32.
Two entries of Thoughts of Wise Men (1903), 4 November and 27 March, joined; the Circle drops «и никто на свете не может ему в этом помешать» (and no one in the world can hinder him in this), reorders «он только того и желает» as «он желает только того», and adds «только» (only) to «И потому разумный человек свободен». The 1903 Epictetus came from V. G. Chertkov's «Римский мудрец Эпиктет. Его жизнь и учение» (Посредник, first ed. 1889; Jubilee vol. 40 commentary), not seen. The first is Discourses IV.1.1–5: "He is free who lives as he wishes to live; who is neither subject to compulsion nor to hindrance, nor to force; whose movements to action are not impeded, whose desires attain their purpose". Tolstoy's «Разумный человек всегда живет так, как он хочет, потому что он желает только того, что возможно получить» (the rational man always lives as he wishes, because he desires only what can be had) recasts the definition as a teaching: Epictetus says that none of the bad (τῶν φαύλων) is free; the Russian, that the rational man (разумный человек) is. The questions follow closely: who wishes to live in error, deceived, unjust, in sorrow and fear? "Not one then of the bad lives as he wishes; nor is he then free". The second is IV.1.30–32: Diogenes "says that there is only one way to freedom, and that is to die content" (τὸ εὐκόλως ἀποθνῄσκειν), which becomes «Только тот истинно свободен, кто всегда готов умереть» (only he is truly free who is always ready to die); "You cannot enslave the Athenian state any more than you can enslave fishes" becomes «Ты не можешь сделать истинно свободных людей рабами, как не можешь поработить рыбу» (you cannot make truly free men slaves, as you cannot enslave a fish), the Athenians made "truly free men"; and "These are the words of a free man who had carefully examined the thing, and ... had discovered it" becomes «Вот это — речи человека свободного: такой человек знает, в чем состоит истинная свобода» (such a man knows what true freedom is).
7. Мы устроили себе жизнь, противную и нравственной и физической природе человека, и, живя такой жизнью, хотим быть свободны.
7. We have made for ourselves a life contrary to both the moral and the physical nature of human beings, and, living such a life, we want to be free.
8. Послушание хорошо и необходимо, если это — послушание добру и истине; но если это послушание тому, что дурно и ложно, то это, напротив, высшая степень человеческой подлости и унижения.
8. Obedience is good and necessary if it is obedience to goodness and truth; but if it is obedience to what is bad and false, then it is, on the contrary, the highest degree of human baseness and degradation.
Source not found yet .
Not found yet.
Not found. The thought, that obedience is good and needful when it is obedience to the good and true, and the lowest human baseness when it is obedience to the bad and false, is in Carlyle's manner (Chartism, ch. VI: 'Obedience ... is the primary duty of man'; Heroes, Lecture V: 'only small mean souls are otherwise' than loyally submissive), but no sentence of his matching it was found. Tolstoy's list of sources (Jubilee vol. 42) names L. P. Nikiforov's Russian selection from Carlyle, «Загадка сфинкса» (1900), which is not online; the thought may have come through it.
Searched: Sentences with 'obey', 'obedience', 'loyal' or 'submit' near false, wrong, base, mean or degradation in Sartor Resartus, Heroes, Past and Present, Latter-Day Pamphlets, The French Revolution, Life of John Sterling, Life of Schiller, On the Choice of Books, Shooting Niagara (1867), Critical and Miscellaneous Essays (vols. I–IV of the 1881 and 1888 printings, vol. V of 1872, and vol. VI of 1864, with Chartism), and Froude's Thomas Carlyle, vol. II; the headings 'Obedience' in Southgate's two anthologies, Klopsch, Coit, and Tileston; web searches for the English wording.
9. Кто охвачен пламенем страстных влечений, кто жаждет наслаждений, тот всё растит свои похоти и сам заковывает себя в цепи.
Кто помышляет только о радостях успокоения, кто, углубленный в свои думы, счастлив тем, в чем люди не видят счастия, тот разорвет эти цепи смерти, тот навсегда сбросит их.
9. He who is seized by the flame of passionate cravings, who thirsts for pleasures, keeps making his lusts grow and fetters himself in chains.
He who thinks only of the joys of tranquility, who, absorbed in his meditations, is happy in that in which people see no happiness, will break these chains of death; he will throw them off forever.
From Dhammapada · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedThe flame of passions and “the chains of death” are already in Gerasimov’s Russian, which Tolstoy’s 1903 version copies; for the Circle, yearning “for what is delightful” becomes thirsting “for pleasures,” and the 1903 text’s man who will chain himself “forever” becomes one who “fetters himself in chains.”
What Tolstoy read · Путь к истине… кто жаждеть того, что восхитительно, тотъ все растить только свои похоти …
Кто помышляеть только о радостяхъ успокоеня, кто, углубленный въ свои думы, …
… люди не понимаютъ счастья, …
… тотъ навсегда сбросить ихъ.
Source text: archive.orgOriginal · PaliVitakkamathitassa jantuno, …
Tibbarāgassa subhānupassino; …
Asubhaṁ bhāvayate sadā sato; …
Esa checchati mārabandhanaṁ.
Source text: raw.githubusercontent.comIn English · F. Max Müller, 1881349. If a man is tossed about by doubts, full of strong passions, and yearning only for what is delightful, his thirst will grow more and more, and he will indeed make his fetters strong.
350. If a man delights in quieting doubts, and, always reflecting, dwells on what is not delightful (the impurity of the body, &c.), he certainly will remove, nay, he will cut the fetter of Mara.
Source text: gutenberg.orgTolstoy’s own version · Мысли мудрых людей на каждый деньКто охвачен пламенем страстных влечений, кто жаждет того, что восхитительно, тот всё растит только свои похоти и сам себя навсегда крепко закует в цепи.
Кто помышляет только о радостях успокоения, кто, углубленный в свои думы, счастлив тем, в чем люди не видят счастия, тот разорвет эти цепи смерти, тот навсегда сбросит их.
Source text: tolstoy.ruDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Dhammapada, vv. 349-350 (Taṇhāvagga).
Dhammapada 349-350 in N. Gerasimov's Russian (1898), which Tolstoy printed in Thoughts of Wise Men (1903), 16 June, and shortened for the Circle. The Jubilee vol. 40 commentary names Gerasimov as Tolstoy's Dhammapada; earlier months did not find it online, and it is on archive.org (a scan uploaded in 2023, its OCR saved here; the OCR misreads many pre-reform letters). Against the Pali the changes are Gerasimov's: 'crushed by thoughts' (vitakkamathita; Müller 'tossed about by doubts') and 'of strong passion' become one image, «охвачен пламенем страстных влечений» (seized by the flame of passionate desires); 'he cultivates [the contemplation of] the unlovely' (asubhaṁ bhāvayate; Müller 'dwells on what is not delightful (the impurity of the body)') becomes «счастлив тем, в чем люди не понимают счастья» (happy in what people do not understand as happiness); 'Mara's bond' becomes «цепи смерти» (the chains of death). The 1903 text is Gerasimov's except «не видят счастия» (do not see happiness) for «не понимают счастья». For the Circle Tolstoy rewords the first verse: «кто жаждет того, что восхитительно» (who thirsts for what is delightful; Müller 'yearning only for what is delightful') becomes «кто жаждет наслаждений» (who thirsts for pleasures), and «тот всё растит только свои похоти и сам себя навсегда крепко закует в цепи» (he keeps feeding only his lusts and will chain himself fast forever) becomes «тот всё растит свои похоти и сам заковывает себя в цепи» (he keeps feeding his lusts and chains himself). The second verse is the 1903 text unchanged.
10. Свобода достигается не исканием свободы, а исканием истины. Свобода не должна быть целью, а может быть только последствием.
10. Freedom is reached not by seeking freedom, but by seeking truth. Freedom must not be an aim, but can only be a consequence.
Translation note. The Russian italic is broken only at the comma; it is set here as one span.
Свобода не может быть дана человеку человеком. Каждый человек только сам может освободить себя.
Freedom cannot be given to one person by another. Each of us can be freed by no one but ourselves.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/august/1