5Juneиюня · 5-е июня
Весь внешний мир, каким мы его видим, таков только для нас. Сказать, что этот мир действительно такой, каким мы его видим, это всё равно что сказать, что не может быть существ с иными, чем мы, внешними чувствами.
The whole outer world, as we see it, is so only for us. To say that this world really is such as we see it is the same as saying that there can be no beings with outer senses other than ours.
1. Людям кажется странной мысль о том, что всё вещественное — только наше представление. «Все-таки стол есть, и всегда... И уйду из комнаты, он есть, и для всех он есть такой же, какой и для меня», — говорят обыкновенно. Ну, а когда закрутишь два пальца и катаешь один шарик, чувствуешь несомненно два? Ведь точно так же всякий раз, как я так возьму шарик, будет два, и для всякого, кто возьмет такой шарик, будет два, а между тем двух шариков нет. Точно так же и стол только для закрученных пальцев моих чувств — стол, а он, может быть, полстола, одна сотая стола, может быть совсем даже не стол, а что-нибудь совсем другое.
1. The thought that everything material is only our representation seems strange to people. “All the same, the table is there, and always… I leave the room, and it is there, and for everyone it is the same as it is for me,” they usually say. Well, and when you cross two fingers and roll one little ball, you unmistakably feel two, don’t you? Surely in just the same way, every time I take hold of the ball like that there will be two, and for anyone who takes hold of such a ball there will be two, and yet there are not two balls. In just the same way the table, too, is a table only for the crossed fingers of my senses, while it may be half a table, a hundredth of a table, may even be no table at all, but something else entirely.
2. Я смотрю и видимые линии пригоняю к форме, живущей в моем представлении. Вижу белое на горизонте и невольно даю этому белому форму церкви. Не так ли и всё то, что мы видим в этом мире, получает ту форму, которая уже живет в нашем представлении, вынесенном из прежней жизни?
2. I look, and I fit the visible lines to a form that lives in my mind. I see something white on the horizon and unintentionally give this white the form of a church. Does not everything we see in this world take, in the same way, the form that already lives in our minds, carried over from a former life?
3. Я думаю, что вопрос, имеют ли предметы вне нас самостоятельное существование, поистине лишен разумного смысла. Мы по нашей природе вынуждены об известных предметах нашего восприятия говорить: они находятся вне нас; мы не можем иначе. Вопрос о том, действительно ли существует то, что мы признаем существующим, так же нелеп, как такой, например: действительно ли синяя краска синяя. Мы выйти из этого вопроса не можем. Я говорю, что вещи суть вне меня, так как я вынужден их так рассматривать; впрочем, это вне меня сущее может иметь какое угодно устройство; об этом судить мы не в состоянии.
3. I think that the question whether objects outside us have an independent existence is truly devoid of rational meaning. By our nature we are compelled to say of certain objects of our perception: they are outside us; we cannot do otherwise. The question whether what we recognize as existing really does exist is as absurd as this one, for example: whether blue paint is really blue. We cannot step outside this question. I say that things are outside me because I am compelled to regard them so; however, this thing existing outside me may have any structure whatever; of that we are in no position to judge.
From Vermischte Schriften, vol. II · close to the original .
Original · GermanIch glaube doch nun auch wirklich, daß die Frage, ob die Gegenſtaͤnde außer uns objective Realitaͤt haben, keinen ver— nuͤnftigen Sinn hat.
Wir find unſerer Natur nach genoͤthigt, von gewiſſen Gegenſtaͤnden unſerer Empfindung zu ſa— gen, ſie befinden ſich außer uns; …
Die Frage iſt faft fo thoͤricht, als die: ob die blaue Farbe wirklich blau ſey.
Ich ſage, die Dinge ſind außer mir, weil ich ſie ſo anſehen muß, es mag uͤbrigens mit jenem außer mir ſeyn eine Beſchaffenheit haben welche es will; daruͤber koͤnnen wir nicht richten.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Vermischte Schriften, vol. II (1801), Bemerkungen vermischten Inhalts, 1: Philosophische Bemerkungen, Vermischte Schriften II (Göttingen, 1801), pp. 88–89.
Lichtenberg's remark, closely: I now really believe that the question whether objects outside us have objective reality has no rational sense; by our nature we are compelled to say of certain objects of our sensation that they are outside us; we cannot do otherwise; the question is almost as foolish as whether the color blue is really blue; we cannot possibly get beyond the question; I say things are outside me because I must regard them so, whatever constitution that “outside me” may otherwise have; on that we cannot judge. Tolstoy writes «самостоятельное существование» (independent existence) for “objective Realität” (objective reality); restates the question as «действительно ли существует то, что мы признаем существующим» (whether what we recognize as existing really exists); and makes “almost as foolish” (fast so thöricht) «так же нелеп» (just as absurd). He italicizes «синяя» and «вне меня сущее» (that being outside me). The OCR reads the long s as f (“find” for “sind”, “faft fo” for “fast so”). Tolstoy's listed source, Lichtenberg's Ausgewählte Schriften (Leipzig, 1879), was not found online, so the first edition stands in for it, as in earlier months. No public-domain English was found.
4. Закон жизни в том, что невидимое производит видимое. Причина скрыта, последствия видны. Причина бесконечна, последствия конечны. Верить в невидимое — значит верить в причину всякой силы; признавать только видимое — значит быть бесполезным, неплодотворным, преходящим, смертным.
4. The law of life is that the invisible produces the visible. The cause is hidden, the effects are seen. The cause is infinite, the effects are finite. To believe in the invisible is to believe in the cause of every force; to acknowledge only the visible is to be useless, unfruitful, transient, mortal.
From The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changed“The law of life is from the invisible to the visible” becomes “the invisible produces the visible,” the “Source” becomes “the cause,” and being “one with the Source of all power” becomes believing “in the cause of every force.”
Lucy Mallory’s own wordsThe law of life is from the invisible to the visible.
The Source is hidden, the effect is seen; the Source is Infinite, the effect is finite.
To have Faith in the invisible is to be one with the Source of all power; to acknowledge only the visible is to be unprofitable, unfruitful, transient, mortal.
Source text: iapsop.comThe World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic, vol. VThe Source is hidden, the effect is seen; the Source is Infinite, the effect is finite.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. The World's Advance-Thought and the Universal Republic (Lucy A. Mallory's journal, Portland, Oregon), vol. XVI, no. 9, November 1904, p. 132, 'Key Thoughts', an unsigned paragraph, on a page that ends 'All articles not signed are by Lucy A. Mallory'.
Reworded in two places. 'The law of life is from the invisible to the visible' becomes 'the invisible produces the visible' (невидимое производит видимое), and Mallory's capitalized 'Source' becomes 'the cause' (причина) throughout. 'To have Faith in the invisible is to be one with the Source of all power' becomes 'To believe in the invisible means to believe in the cause of every power' (Верить в невидимое — значит верить в причину всякой силы): union with the Source becomes belief in a cause. The rest is close; 'unprofitable, unfruitful, transient, mortal' is kept (бесполезным, неплодотворным, преходящим, смертным). Tolstoy stops before 'The mind is barren that is closed to all save the physical sense.' The paragraph is unsigned; the page says 'All articles not signed are by Lucy A. Mallory'. She had printed the same paragraph in vol. V, 1890–91 (Edition, archive.org's scan, saved). No printable.
5. Двумя способами представляем мы себе предметы действительно существующими: или поскольку мы их наблюдаем в их соотношении с известным местом и временем, или поскольку мы думаем, что они содержатся в боге и вытекают из необходимости божественной природы. Такими предметами мы признаем всё духовное.
5. We conceive of things as actually existing in two ways: either insofar as we observe them in their relation to a certain place and time, or insofar as we think that they are contained in God and follow from the necessity of the divine nature. Everything spiritual we recognize as things of this kind.
From Ethica · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedSpinoza’s second sentence, that what we conceive in the second way we conceive “under the form of eternity,” gives way to one with no counterpart in the scholium: “Everything spiritual we recognize as things of this kind.”
Original · LatinRes duobus modis a nobis ut actuales concipiuntur : vel quatenus easdem cum relatione ad certum tempus et locum existere, vel quatenus ipsas in Deo contineri, et ex naturæ divinæ necessitate consequi concipimus.
Quæ autem hoc secundo modo ut veræ seu reales concipiuntur, eas sub æternitatis specie concipimus, et earum ideæ æternam et infinitam Dei essentiam involvunt, ut Propositione 45 Partis II ostendimus, cujus etiam Scholium vide.
Source text: la.wikisource.orgIn English · R. H. M. Elwes, 1883Things are conceived by us as actual in two ways; either as existing in relation to a given time and place, or as contained in God and following from the necessity of the divine nature.
Whatsoever we conceive in this second way as true or real, we conceive under the form of eternity, and their ideas involve the eternal and infinite essence of God, as we showed in II. xlv. and note, which see.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Ethica (1677), Part V, Proposition 29, Scholium, Ethics V, prop. 29, schol. (Latin Wikisource, from Appuhn's edition of 1913); Elwes, Part V, Prop. XXIX, Note.
Spinoza's first sentence, closely, and his second replaced. Kept: things are conceived by us as actual in two ways, either as existing in relation to a certain time and place, or as contained in God and following from the necessity of the divine nature; Tolstoy writes «наблюдаем» (observe) and «думаем» (think) where Spinoza has “concipimus” (we conceive) for both. Replaced: Spinoza goes on that what we conceive in the second way as true or real we conceive under the form of eternity (sub æternitatis specie), and that their ideas involve the eternal and infinite essence of God; Tolstoy's second sentence is «Такими предметами мы признаем всё духовное» (as such things we recognize all that is spiritual), which has no counterpart in the scholium. Hence the signature «По Спинозе» (after Spinoza). The scholium closes Spinoza's argument that the mind conceives things under the form of eternity only by conceiving the body's essence so. How Tolstoy read Spinoza was not found.
Внешний мир в действительности, сам по себе, не такой, каким мы его познаем. И потому всё, что вещественно в этом мире, неважно. Что же важно? То, что наверное такое же везде, всегда и одно и то же для всех существ: духовное начало нашей жизни.
The outer world in reality, in itself, is not such as we know it. And so everything that is material in this world is unimportant. What, then, is important? That which is for certain the same everywhere, always, and one and the same for all beings: the spiritual principle of our life.
Translation note. The Russian italic is broken only at punctuation, apart from a stray break that leaves «мире», “world”, upright; it is set here as one span. «Наверное» has its older sense, “for certain”.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/june/5