22Decemberдекабря · 22-е декабря
Ничто не препятствует столько улучшению общественного устройства, как предположение о том, что такое улучшение может быть достигнуто изменением внешних форм. Ложное предположение это направляет деятельность людей на то, что не может содействовать, и отвлекает от того, что может содействовать улучшению жизни людей.
Nothing so hinders the improvement of the social order as the supposition that such improvement can be achieved by changing outward forms. This false supposition directs people’s activity toward what cannot further the improvement of their lives, and draws it away from what can.
1. Общественная жизнь опирается на сознание, а не на науку. Цивилизация — прежде всего дело нравственное. Если нет честности, нет уважения к праву, нет уважения к обязанностям, нет любви к ближнему, — словом, если нет добродетели, всё находится в опасности, всё рушится: и ни науки, ни искусства, ни роскошь, ни промышленность, ни риторика, ни полиция, ни таможня не в состоянии задержать висящее на воздухе здание, не имеющее основания. Государство, основанное только на расчете и скрепленное страхом, представляет сооружение и гадкое и непрочное. Только нравственность масс есть прочный фундамент всякой цивилизации; краеугольным камнем его служит долг. Те, которые в тиши исполняют его, подавая этим добрый пример, являются таким образом спасением и поддержкой того блестящего света, который и не знает о них. Девять праведников могли спасти Содом, но нужны тысячи и тысячи добрых людей, чтобы спасти народ от развращения и погибели.
1. Social life rests on consciousness, not on science. Civilization is above all a moral matter. If there is no honesty, no respect for right, no respect for duties, no love of neighbor — in a word, if there is no virtue — everything is in danger, everything collapses: neither the sciences, nor the arts, nor luxury, nor industry, nor rhetoric, nor the police, nor the customs can hold up a building that hangs in the air and has no foundation. A state founded only on calculation and held together by fear is a structure both ugly and unsound. Only the morality of the masses is the firm foundation of any civilization, and its cornerstone is duty. Those who fulfill it in quiet, setting a good example by doing so, are in this way the salvation and support of that glittering world which does not even know of them. Nine righteous men could have saved Sodom, but thousands upon thousands of good people are needed to save a nation from corruption and ruin.
From Fragments d'un journal intime · close to the original .
Original · FrenchLa société repose sur la conscience et non pas sur la science. La civilisation est avant tout une chose morale.
L'État fondé sur le seul intérêt et cimenté par la peur est une construction ignoble et précaire. Le sous-sol de toute civilisation, c'est la moralité moyenne des masses et la pratique suffisante du bien. Le devoir est ce qui supporte tout.
Dix justes eussent fait épargner Sodome, mais il faut des milliers et des milliers de braves gens pour préserver un peuple de la corruption et de l'effondrement.
Source text: archive.orgIn English · Mrs. Humphry Ward, 1885Society rests upon conscience and not upon science. Civilization is first and foremost a moral thing.
Ten righteous men would have saved Sodom, but thousands and thousands of good homely folk are needed to preserve a people from corruption and decay.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Fragments d'un journal intime, Journal, 26 octobre 1870; Ward's translation, October 26, 1870.
A continuous stretch of the 26 October 1870 entry, translated closely. Small changes: «la société» becomes 'social life'; Amiel's list (letters, arts, luxury, industry, rhetoric, the gendarme, the customs officer) gains 'sciences'; «le sous-sol … la moralité moyenne des masses et la pratique suffisante du bien» becomes 'only the morality of the masses is the firm foundation'; 'duty is what upholds everything' becomes 'its cornerstone is duty'. Amiel's ten righteous men (Genesis 18) become nine («Девять праведников»), an error in Tolstoy's text.
Translation note. Nine as printed; in Genesis 18:32 Abraham’s plea ends at ten righteous.
2. Истинное направление мысли состоит не в том, чтобы установить новые законы для светской или духовной власти, а в том, чтобы признать нравственное достоинство каждого человека. Такое направление мысли будет содействовать прогрессу человечества несравненно более, чем все несчастные попытки слепых предводительствовать слепыми, при которых все они падают в яму догматов и авторитетов.
2. The true direction of thought lies not in establishing new laws for temporal or spiritual power, but in recognizing the moral dignity of every man. Such a direction of thought will further the progress of mankind incomparably more than all the wretched attempts of the blind to lead the blind, in which they all fall into the pit of dogmas and authorities.
From "Ethics", by Wallace Yates, The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedThe ditch “of dogma, authority and ethics” loses “ethics,” which was Yates’s point.
Yates’s own wordsETHICS. WALLACE YATES.
Christian missionaries in China have probably experienced something of this.
The true line of thought, which seeks not to impose new codes of authority, secular or religious, but recognizes the individuality of men, and their inherent, latent, power, must eventually accomplish more for man's progress than all the vain attempts of the blind to lead the blind where both fall into the ditch of dogma, authority and ethics.
Source text: iapsop.comDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. "Ethics", by Wallace Yates, The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic (Portland, Oregon, ed. Lucy A. Mallory), vol. XIV, New Series, no. 6, May-June 1901, The closing paragraph of the article, after "Christian missionaries in China have probably experienced something of this".
«Иатс» is Wallace Yates, a regular contributor to Mallory's journal from 1897 on, who lectured in Oregon (the Jubilee index leaves him unidentified). The last paragraph of his article "Ethics", which argues against all moral codes "set up either by gods or priests". Changed: Yates's "recognizes the individuality of men, and their inherent, latent, power" becomes "recognize the moral dignity of every man"; "new codes of authority, secular or religious" becomes "new laws for the secular or spiritual power"; and Yates's ditch "of dogma, authority and ethics" loses "ethics", which was Yates's point.
Translation note. «Иатс» is given as “Yates”: probably Wallace Yates, who wrote for Lucy Mallory’s World’s Advance Thought, which Tolstoy read.
3. Вопрос состоит совсем не в том, что из двух выбирать: христианство или социализм?
Нельзя даже и сравнивать эти два учения между собою, — настолько они различны по существу.
Христианство учит о вечном смысле всего мироздания, о божественности и потому о неуничтожаемости нашей духовной сущности, о назначении человека и, между прочим, о вытекающем отсюда правильном способе удовлетворения материальных нужд его.
Социализм же есть сравнительно с христианством небольшой второстепенный вопрос о материальных нуждах рабочего класса, стоящий вне связи с главным вопросом о смысле человеческой жизни.
Можно задаваться вопросами о совместимости христианства с социализмом, но нельзя задаваться вопросом о том, что из двух выбирать: христианство или социализм?
3. The question is not at all which of the two to choose: Christianity or socialism?
The two teachings cannot even be compared with each other — so different are they in essence.
Christianity teaches of the eternal meaning of the whole universe, of the divinity and therefore the indestructibility of our spiritual essence, of the calling of man, and, among other things, of the right way of satisfying his material needs that follows from this.
Socialism, compared with Christianity, is a small, secondary question of the material needs of the working class, unconnected with the main question of the meaning of human life.
One may ask questions about the compatibility of Christianity with socialism, but one cannot ask which of the two to choose: Christianity or socialism?
Source not found yet .
Not found yet.
Not located; as in October and November, no online text of F. A. Strakhov's writings was found (his collection «Искание истины», Посредник 1911, is the likely home). This is the same Strakhov who read all the proofs of the Circle from February 1905 (Jubilee vol. 42 commentary), so the thought may have come from his manuscripts.
Searched: Web searches for distinctive phrases ('христианство или социализм', 'небольшой второстепенный вопрос о материальных нуждах рабочего класса') and for «Искание истины»; archive.org search for Strakhov; Jubilee vol. 42 commentary.
4. Анархисты правы во всем: и в отрицании существующего и в утверждении того, что при существующих нравах ничего не может быть хуже насилия власти; но они грубо ошибаются, думая, что анархию можно установить революцией. Анархия установится, но установится только тем, что всё больше и больше будет людей, которым будет не нужна защита правительственной власти, и всё больше и больше людей, которые будут стыдиться прилагать эту власть или принимать в ней участие.
4. The anarchists are right in everything: both in their denial of what exists and in their assertion that, with morals as they now are, nothing can be worse than the violence of power; but they are grossly mistaken in thinking that anarchy can be established by revolution. Anarchy will be established, but it will be established only as there come to be more and more people who have no need of the protection of government power, and more and more people who are ashamed to apply that power or to take part in it.
5. Я думаю, что мы прежде всего должны быть людьми, а уже потом подданными. Нежелательно воспитывать в себе уважение к закону такое же, как к добру. Закон никогда не делал людей более справедливыми, а, напротив, вследствие уважения к закону хорошие люди делаются исполнителями несправедливости.
5. I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.
From Resistance to Civil Government · close to the original .
Tolstoy’s version, in EnglishI think that we should be men first of all, and only then subjects. It is not desirable to cultivate in ourselves the same respect for the law as for the good. The law has never made men more just; on the contrary, through their respect for the law good men become the agents of injustice.
Thoreau’s own wordsI think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.
Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Resistance to Civil Government (1849), known as "Civil Disobedience", Early paragraph, after "Why has every man a conscience, then?".
A close translation of three sentences, with two left out between them ("The only obligation which I have a right to assume..." and the corporation with a conscience). "Even" becomes "напротив" (on the contrary), "a whit" and "daily" are dropped, and "the well-disposed" become "good people". Thoreau's own words are printed here.
Translation note. Tolstoy kept the author’s words closely, so the author’s own English is printed here (ruling 1); Tolstoy’s Russian, translated, is in the source panel.
6. Мы, люди, должны понимать, что все мы — дети одного отца, призванные выполнять здесь, на земле, один общий закон; что каждый из нас должен жить не для себя, а для других; что цель жизни не в том, чтобы быть более или менее счастливым, а чтобы самому становиться и другим помогать быть более добродетельными; что бороться против несправедливости и заблуждения всюду, где бы мы их ни встречали, есть не только наше право, но и наша обязанность, — обязанность всей нашей жизни, пренебрегать или нарушать которую мы не можем, не впадая в тяжелый грех.
6. We men must understand that we are all children of one Father, called to fulfill one common law here on earth; that each of us must live not for himself but for others; that the aim of life is not to be more or less happy, but to become more virtuous ourselves and to help others to become so; that to fight against injustice and error wherever we meet them is not only our right but our duty — the duty of our whole life, which we cannot neglect or violate without falling into grievous sin.
From Doveri dell'uomo · close to the original .
Original · ItalianBisogna convincere gli uomini ch'essi, figli tutti d'un solo Dio, hanno ad essere qui in terra esecutori d'una sola Legge — che ognuno d'essi, deve vivere, non per sè, ma per gli altri — che lo scopo della loro vita non è quello d'essere più o meno felici, ma di rendere sè stessi e gli altri migliori — che il combattere l'ingiustizia e l'errore a benefizio dei loro fratelli, e dovunque si trova, è non solamente diritto, ma dovere: dovere da non negligersi senza colpa — dovere di tutta la vita.
Source text: it.wikisource.orgIn English · Emilie Ashurst Venturi, 1862… but to make themselves and others more virtuous …
… is not only a right, but a Duty : — a duty which may not be neglected without sin : — the duty of their whole life.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Doveri dell'uomo (The Duties of Man), chapter I, «Ai Operai Italiani», Chapter I (Doveri dell'uomo, London 1860, p. 12); Venturi's English, chapter I, pp. 19–20.
Faithful to the sentence that defines Duty in chapter I ('Questo principio è il Dovere'). Mazzini's 'we must convince men that they …' becomes 'we must understand that we …'. Two words follow Venturi's English rather than the Italian: 'more virtuous' («более добродетельными»; Mazzini wrote «migliori», better) and 'sin' («грех»; Mazzini «colpa», fault), so Tolstoy's text was probably made from the English.
7. Анархия не значит отсутствие учреждений, а только отсутствие таких учреждений, которым заставляют людей подчиняться насильно. Казалось бы, что иначе как без насилия и не могло и не должно бы быть устроено общество существ, одаренных разумом.
7. Anarchy does not mean the absence of institutions, but only the absence of institutions that people are made to submit to by violence. It would seem that a society of beings endowed with reason neither could nor should be ordered otherwise than without violence.
8. Социальная задача не знает границ.
8. The social problem knows no bounds.
From Letter to M. Daëlli, publisher of the Italian translation of Les Misérables · close to the original .
Original · FrenchLes problèmes sociaux dépassent les frontières. Les plaies du genre humain, ces larges plaies qui couvrent le globe, ne s'arrêtent point aux lignes bleues ou rouges tracées sur la mappemonde.
Source text: fr.wikisource.orgIn English · Isabel F. Hapgood, 1887Social problems overstep frontiers. The sores of the human race, those great sores which cover the globe, do not halt at the red or blue lines traced upon the map.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Letter to M. Daëlli, publisher of the Italian translation of Les Misérables (Hauteville House, 18 October 1862), Printed at the end of Les Misérables (Imprimerie nationale edition, 1909, Cinquième partie, pp. 295–297); Hapgood's translation, 'Letter to M. Daelli'.
Hugo's sentence 'social problems go beyond frontiers', made singular ('the social problem knows no borders'). The letter explains why Les Misérables was written for every nation.
Признавая ложные и насильнические законы и подчиняясь им, нельзя не только установить правду, но и уменьшить неправду.
As long as we recognize false and violent laws and submit to them, we can neither establish justice nor even lessen injustice.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/december/22