The confrontation between good and evil in the works of Russian literature. Reflections on good and beauty based on the works of Russian classics Knowledge of good and evil in Russian literature

Are you here: Health

1. Features of the interaction of good and evil in folk tales.
2. Changing the approach to the relationship of antagonist characters.
3. Differences in the relationship of positive and negative characters.
4. Blurring of boundaries between concepts.

Despite the apparent diversity of artistic images and characters, fundamental categories have always existed and will continue to exist in world literature, the opposition of which, on the one hand, is the main reason for the development of the storyline, and on the other hand, encourages the development of moral criteria in the individual. The vast majority of the heroes of world literature can easily be classified into one of two camps: the defenders of Good and the adherents of Evil. These abstract concepts can be embodied in visible, living images.

The significance of the categories of Good and Evil in culture and human life is undeniable. A clear definition of these concepts allows a person to assert himself in life, evaluating his own and other people's actions from the point of view of proper and improper. Many philosophical and religious systems are based on the concept of opposition between two principles. So is it any wonder that the characters of fairy tales and legends embody opposite traits? However, it should be noted that if the idea of the behavior of heroes embodying the evil inclination changed little over time, then the idea of what the representatives of Good should respond to their actions did not remain unchanged. Let us first consider how victorious heroes acted in fairy tales with their evil opponents.

For example, the fairy tale "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs." The evil stepmother, with the help of witchcraft, tries to destroy her stepdaughter, envying her beauty, but all the intrigues of the witch are in vain. Good triumphs. Snow White not only stays alive, but also marries Prince Charming. However, how does the victorious Good deal with the defeated Evil? The ending of the tale seems to be taken from the story of the activities of the Inquisition: “But iron shoes were already placed for her on burning coals, they were brought, holding them with tongs, and placed in front of her. And she had to put her feet in red-hot shoes and dance in them until, at last, she fell dead to the ground.

Such an attitude towards the defeated enemy is characteristic of many fairy tales. But it should be noted right away that the point here is not the increased aggressiveness and cruelty of the Good, but the peculiarities of the understanding of justice in antiquity, because the plots of most fairy tales were formed a very long time ago. “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” is the ancient formula of retribution. Moreover, the heroes, embodying the traits of Good, not only have the right to brutally deal with the defeated enemy, but must do it, because revenge is a duty entrusted to man by the gods.

However, the concept gradually changed under the influence of Christianity. A. S. Pushkin in "The Tale of the Dead Princess and the Seven Bogatyrs" used a plot almost identical to "Snow White". And in Pushkin's text, the evil stepmother did not escape punishment - but how is it done?

Here longing took her
And the queen died.

The inevitable retribution does not take place as the arbitrariness of mortal conquerors: it is the judgment of God. In Pushkin's fairy tale there is no medieval fanaticism, from the description of which the reader involuntarily trembles; the humanism of the author and the positive characters only emphasizes the greatness of God (even if He is not mentioned directly), supreme justice.

The "anguish" that "took" the queen - isn't it conscience, which the ancient sages called the "Eye of God in man"?

So, in the ancient, pagan understanding, the representatives of Good differ from the representatives of Evil in the way they achieve their goals and the undoubted right to something that their enemies are trying to take away - but not at all in a kinder, more humane attitude towards the defeated enemy.

In the work of writers who have absorbed Christian traditions, the unconditional right of positive heroes to carry out merciless reprisals against those who could not stand the temptation and took the side of Evil is questioned: “And count those who should live, but they are dead. Can you resurrect them? If not, don't rush to condemn anyone to death. For even the wisest are not given to foresee everything ”(D. Tolkien“ The Lord of the Rings ”). “Now he is fallen, but it’s not for us to judge him: who knows, maybe he will still be exalted,” says Frodo, the protagonist of Tolkien’s epic. This work raises the problem of the ambiguity of the Good. So, representatives of the light side can share distrust and even fear, moreover, no matter how wise, brave and kind you are, there is always the possibility that you can lose these virtues and join the camp of villains (perhaps without wanting to do so consciously). ). A similar transformation occurs with the magician Saruman, whose initial mission was to fight Evil, embodied in the face of Sauron. It threatens anyone who wishes to possess the Ring of Omnipotence. However, Tolkien does not even hint at a possible redemption of Sauron. Although Evil is also not monolithic and ambiguous, however, it is to a greater extent an irreversible state.

In the work of writers who continued the tradition of Tolkien, various views are presented on what and which of Tolkien's characters should be considered Good and Evil. Currently, one can find works in which Sauron and his teacher Melkor, a kind of Lucifer of Middle-earth, do not act as negative characters at all. Their struggle with other creators of the World is not so much a conflict of two opposite principles, but the result of misunderstanding, rejection of non-standard decisions of Melkor.

In fantasy, which was formed on the basis of fairy tales and legends, the clear boundaries between Good and Evil are gradually blurring. Everything is relative: Good is again not so humane (as it was in the ancient tradition), but Evil is far from black - rather blackened by enemies. The literature reflects the processes of rethinking the old values, the actual implementation of which is often far from ideal, and the tendency towards an ambiguous understanding of the multifaceted phenomena of being. However, it should be remembered that in the worldview of each person, the categories of Good and Evil should still have a fairly clear structure. Moses, Christ and other great teachers have long said about what to consider as real Evil. Evil is the transgression of the great commandments that should govern human behavior.

literature school number 28

Nizhnekamsk, 2012

1. Introduction 3

2. "Life of Boris and Gleb" 4

3. "Eugene Onegin" 5

4. Demon 6

5. The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment 7

6. Thunderstorm 10

7. The White Guard and The Master and Margarita 12

8. Conclusion 14

9. List of used literature 15

1. Introduction

My work is about good and evil. The problem of good and evil is an eternal problem that has worried and will worry humanity. When fairy tales are read to us in childhood, in the end, good almost always wins in them, and the fairy tale ends with the phrase: "And they all lived happily ever after ...". We grow, and over time it becomes clear that this is not always the case. However, it does not happen that a person is absolutely pure in soul, without a single flaw. In each of us there are shortcomings, and there are many of them. But that doesn't mean we're evil. We have a lot of good qualities. So the theme of good and evil arises already in ancient Russian literature. As they say in the “Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh”: “... Think, my children, how merciful and merciful God is to us. We are sinful and mortal people, and yet, if someone harms us, we are ready, it seems, to pin him right there and take revenge; and the Lord to us, the Lord of life (life) and death, bears with us our sins, although they exceed our heads, and throughout our life, like a father who loves his child, and punishes, and again draws us to Himself. He showed us how to get rid of the enemy and defeat him - with three virtues: repentance, tears and alms ... ".

"Instruction" is not only a literary work, but also an important monument of social thought. Vladimir Monomakh, one of the most authoritative princes of Kyiv, is trying to convince his contemporaries of the perniciousness of internecine strife - Russia, weakened by internal enmity, will not be able to actively resist external enemies.

In my work, I want to trace how this problem has changed for different authors at different times. Of course, I will dwell in more detail only on individual works.

2. "The Life of Boris and Gleb"

We meet a pronounced opposition of good and evil in the work of ancient Russian literature "The Life and Destruction of Boris and Gleb", written by Nestor, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. The historical basis of events is as follows. In 1015, the old prince Vladimir dies, who wanted to appoint his son Boris, who was not in Kyiv at that time, as the heir. Boris's brother Svyatopolk, plotting to seize the throne, orders to kill Boris and his younger brother Gleb. Near their bodies, abandoned in the steppe, miracles begin to happen. After the victory of Yaroslav the Wise over Svyatopolk, the bodies were reburied and the brothers were proclaimed saints.

Svyatopolk thinks and acts at the instigation of the devil. The “historiographical” introduction to life corresponds to the idea of the unity of the world historical process: the events that took place in Russia are only a particular case of the eternal struggle between God and the devil – good and evil.

"The Life of Boris and Gleb" - a story about the martyrdom of the saints. The main theme also determined the artistic structure of such a work, the opposition of good and evil, the martyr and the tormentors, dictated a special tension and "poster" directness of the culminating scene of the murder: it should be long and moralizing.

In his own way he looked at the problem of good and evil in the novel "Eugene Onegin".

3. "Eugene Onegin"

The poet does not divide his characters into positive and negative ones. He gives each of the characters several conflicting assessments, forcing them to look at the characters from several points of view. Pushkin wanted to achieve maximum lifelikeness.

The tragedy of Onegin lies in the fact that he rejected Tatyana's love, fearing to lose his freedom, and could not break with the world, realizing its insignificance. In a depressed state of mind, Onegin left the village and "began wandering." The hero, who returned from a journey, does not look like the former Onegin. He will no longer be able, as before, to go through life, completely ignoring the feelings and experiences of the people he encountered, and think only about himself. He has become much more serious, more attentive to others, now he is capable of strong feelings that completely capture him and shake his soul. And then fate again brings him to Tatyana. But Tatyana refuses him, because she was able to see that selfishness, that selfishness that lay at the basis of his feelings for her .. Injured feelings speak in Tatyana: it was her turn to reprimand Onegin for not being able to see all the depth in her in time her soul.

In Onegin's soul, there is a struggle between good and evil, but, in the end, good wins. We do not know about the further fate of the hero. But perhaps he would have become the Decembrists, to which the whole logic of the development of character, which had changed under the influence of a new circle of life impressions, led.

4. "Demon"

The theme runs through all the work of the poet, but I want to dwell only on this work, because in it the problem of good and evil is considered very sharply. The demon, the personification of evil, loves the earthly woman Tamara and is ready to be reborn for good for her sake, but Tamara, by her nature, is not able to return his love. The earthly world and the world of spirits cannot converge, the girl dies from one kiss of the Demon, and his passion remains unquenched.

At the beginning of the poem, the Demon is evil, but by the end it becomes clear that this evil can be eradicated. Tamara initially represents good, but she causes suffering to the Demon, since she cannot answer his love, which means that for him she becomes evil.

5. The Brothers Karamazov

The history of the Karamazovs is not just a family chronicle, but a typified and generalized image of contemporary intellectual Russia. This is an epic work about the past, present and future of Russia. In terms of genre, this is a complex work. It is a fusion of "life" and "novel", philosophical "poems" and "teachings", confessions, ideological disputes and judicial speeches. The main problem is the philosophy and psychology of "crime and punishment", the struggle between "God" and "devil" in the souls of people.

Dostoevsky formulated the main idea of the novel "The Brothers Karamazov" in the epigraph "Truly, truly, I say to you: if a grain of wheat, falling into the ground, does not die, it will bear much fruit" (Gospel of John). This is the thought of the renewal that inevitably takes place in nature and in life, which is invariably accompanied by the dying of the old. The breadth, tragedy, and irresistibility of the process of renewing life are explored by Dostoevsky in all their depth and complexity. The thirst for overcoming the ugly and ugly in consciousness and actions, the hope for a moral rebirth and familiarization with a pure, righteous life overwhelm all the heroes of the novel. Hence the "anguish", the fall, the frenzy of the heroes, their despair.

At the center of this novel is the figure of a young commoner, Rodion Raskolnikov, who succumbed to new ideas, new theories, circulating in society. Raskolnikov is a thinking man. He creates a theory in which he tries not only to explain the world, but also to develop his own morality. He is convinced that humanity is divided into two categories: one - "they have the right", and others - "trembling creatures" that serve as "material" for history. The schismatics came to this theory as a result of observations of contemporary life, in which everything is allowed to the minority, and nothing to the majority. The division of people into two categories inevitably raises in Raskolnikov the question of what type he himself belongs to. And to clarify this, he decides on a terrible experiment, he plans to sacrifice an old woman - a pawnbroker who, in his opinion, brings only harm, and therefore deserves death. The action of the novel is built as a refutation of Raskolnikov's theory and his subsequent recovery. By killing the old woman, Raskolnikov placed himself outside society, including even his beloved mother and sister. The feeling of cut off, loneliness becomes a terrible punishment for the criminal. Raskolnikov is convinced that he was mistaken in his hypothesis. He experiences the anguish and doubts of the "ordinary" criminal. At the end of the novel, Raskolnikov takes the Gospel in his hands - this symbolizes the hero's spiritual turning point, the victory of the good in the hero's soul over his pride, which gives rise to evil.

Raskolnikov, it seems to me, is generally a very controversial person. In many episodes, it is difficult for a modern person to understand him: many of his statements are refuted by each other. Raskolnikov's mistake is that he did not see in his idea the crime itself, the evil that he committed.

Raskolnikov's condition is characterized by the author with such words as "gloomy", "depressed", "indecisive". I think this shows the incompatibility of Raskolnikov's theory with life. Although he is convinced that he is right, this conviction is something not very sure. If Raskolnikov was right, then Dostoevsky would describe the events and his feelings not in gloomy yellow tones, but in bright ones, but they appear only in the epilogue. He was wrong in taking on the role of God, having the courage to decide for Him who should live and who should die.

Raskolnikov constantly oscillates between faith and unbelief, good and evil, and Dostoevsky fails to convince the reader even in the epilogue that the gospel truth has become Raskolnikov's truth.

Thus, Raskolnikov’s own doubts, internal struggles, disputes with himself, which Dostoevsky constantly leads, were reflected in Raskolnikov’s searches, mental anguish and dreams.

6. Thunderstorm

in his work "Thunderstorm" also touches on the theme of good and evil.

In The Thunderstorm, according to the critic, “the mutual relations of tyranny and voicelessness are brought to the most tragic consequences. Dobrolyubov considers Katerina a force that can resist the bone old world, a new force brought up by this kingdom and its amazing foundation.

The play Thunderstorm contrasts two strong and solid characters of Katerina Kabanova, a merchant's wife, and her mother-in-law Marfa Kabanova, who has long been nicknamed Kabanikha.

The main difference between Katerina and Kabanikha, the difference that separates them into different poles, is that following the traditions of antiquity for Katerina is a spiritual need, and for Kabanikha it is an attempt to find the necessary and only support in anticipation of the collapse of the patriarchal world. She does not think about the essence of the order that she protects, she emasculated from it the meaning, content, leaving only the form, thereby turning it into a dogma. She turned the beautiful essence of ancient traditions and customs into a meaningless ritual, which made them unnatural. It can be said that the Kabanikha in The Thunderstorm (as well as the Wild One) personifies a phenomenon inherent in the crisis state of the patriarchal way of life, and not inherent in it initially. The deadening influence of wild boars and wild ones on living life is especially evident precisely when life forms are deprived of their former content and are already preserved as museum relics. Katerina, on the other hand, represents the best qualities of patriarchal life in their primordial purity.

Thus, Katerina belongs to the patriarchal world - all other characters belong to it. The artistic purpose of the latter is to describe the reasons for the doomedness of the patriarchal world as fully and multi-structured as possible. Thus, Varvara learned to deceive and seize the opportunity; she, like Kabanikha, follows the principle: “do whatever you want, if only it was sewn and covered.” It turns out that Katerina in this drama is good, and the rest of the characters are representatives of evil.

7. "White Guard"

The novel tells about the events of the years when Kyiv was abandoned by the German troops, who surrendered the city to the Petliurists. The officers of the former tsarist army were betrayed at the mercy of the enemy.

In the center of the story is the fate of one such officer's family. For the Turbins, a sister and two brothers, the fundamental concept is honor, which they understand as service to the fatherland. But in the ups and downs of the Civil War, the fatherland ceased to exist, and the usual landmarks disappeared. Turbines are trying to find a place for themselves in the world that is changing before our eyes, to preserve their humanity, the goodness of the soul, not to become embittered. And the heroes succeed.

In the novel, there is an appeal to the Higher Forces, which must save people in a period of timelessness. Alexei Turbin has a dream in which both the Whites and the Reds go to heaven (Paradise), because both are loved by God. So, in the end, good must win.

The devil, Woland, comes to Moscow with a revision. He watches the Moscow philistines and passes sentence on them. The culmination of the novel is Woland's ball, after which he learns the history of the Master. Woland takes the Master under his protection.

After reading a novel about himself, Yeshua (in the novel he is a representative of the forces of Light) decides that the Master, the creator of the novel, is worthy of Peace. The master and his beloved are dying, and Woland accompanies them to the place where they now have to live. This is a pleasing house, the very embodiment of an idyll. So a person who is tired of the battles of life gets what he aspired to with his soul. Bulgakov hints that in addition to the posthumous state, defined as "Peace", there is another higher state - "Light", but the Master is not worthy of Light. Researchers are still arguing why the Master is denied the Light. In this sense, the statement of I. Zolotussky is interesting: “It is the Master himself who punishes himself for the fact that love has left his soul. The one who leaves the house or whom love leaves does not deserve the Light ... Even Woland is lost in front of this tragedy of fatigue, the tragedy of the desire to leave the world, leave life ”

Bulgakov's novel about the eternal struggle between good and evil. This work is not dedicated to the fate of a certain person, family or even a group of people somehow connected with each other - he considers the fate of all mankind in its historical development. The time interval of almost two millennia, separating the action of the novel about Jesus and Pilate and the novel about the Master, only emphasizes that the problems of good and evil, the freedom of the human spirit, its relationship with society are eternal, enduring problems that are relevant for a person of any era.

Bulgakov's Pilate is not at all shown as a classic villain. The procurator does not want the evil of Yeshua, his cowardice led to cruelty and social injustice. It is fear that makes good, intelligent and brave people a blind weapon of evil will. Cowardice is an extreme expression of inner subordination, lack of freedom of spirit, dependence of a person. It is especially dangerous also because, once reconciled to it, a person is no longer able to get rid of it. Thus, the powerful procurator turns into a miserable, weak-willed creature. On the other hand, the vagabond philosopher is strong in his naive faith in the good, which neither the fear of punishment nor the spectacle of general injustice can take away from him. In the image of Yeshua, Bulgakov embodied the idea of goodness and unchanging faith. Despite everything, Yeshua continues to believe that there are no evil, bad people in the world. He dies on the cross with this faith.

The clash of opposing forces is most vividly presented at the end of the novel The Master and Margarita, when Woland and his retinue leave Moscow. What do we see? "Light" and "darkness" are on the same level. Woland does not rule the world, but Yeshua does not rule the world either.

8.Conclusion

What is good and what is evil on earth? As you know, two opposing forces cannot but enter into a struggle with each other, therefore the struggle between them is eternal. As long as man exists on earth, there will be good and evil. Through evil we understand what good is. And good, in turn, reveals evil, illuminating the path to truth for a person. There will always be a struggle between good and evil.

Thus, I came to the conclusion that the forces of good and evil in the world of literature are equal in rights. They exist in the world side by side, constantly opposing, arguing with each other. And their struggle is eternal, because there is no person on Earth who has never committed a sin in his life, and there is no such person who has completely lost the ability to do good.

9. List of used literature

1. "Introduction to the temple of the word." Ed. 3rd, 2006

2. Big school encyclopedia, vol.

3., plays, novels. Comp., intro. and note. . True, 1991

4. "Crime and Punishment": Roman - M .: Olympus; TKO AST, 1996

The eternal theme for every person, the most relevant in our time - "good and evil" - is very clearly expressed in Gogol's work "Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka". We already meet this topic on the first pages of the story “May Night, or the Drowned Woman” - the most beautiful and poetic. The action in the story takes place in the evening, at dusk, between sleep and reality, on the verge of the real and the fantastic. The nature surrounding the heroes is amazing, the feelings experienced by them are beautiful and reverent. However, there is something in a beautiful landscape that disturbs

This harmony, disturbs Galya, who feels the presence of evil forces very close by, what is it? A wild evil has happened here, an evil from which even the house has changed outwardly.

The father, under the influence of his stepmother, drove his own daughter out of the house, pushed her to commit suicide.

But evil is not only in terrible betrayal. It turns out that Levko has a terrible rival. His own father. A terrible, vicious man who, being the Head, pours cold water on people in the cold. Levko cannot get his father's consent to marry Galya. A miracle comes to his aid: pannochka, a drowned woman, promises any reward if Levko helps get rid of the witch.

Pannochka

It is to Levko that he turns for help, since he is kind, responsive to someone else's misfortune, with heartfelt emotion he listens to the sad story of the lady.

Levko found the witch. He recognized her because "something black could be seen inside her, while the others shone." And now, in our time, these expressions are alive with us: “black man”, “black inside”, “black thoughts, deeds”.

When the witch rushes at the girl, her face sparkles with malicious joy, malevolence. And no matter how evil is disguised, a kind, pure-hearted person is able to feel it, to recognize it.

The idea of the devil as the personified embodiment of the evil principle has been worrying the minds of people since time immemorial. It is reflected in many areas of human existence: in art, religion, superstition, and so on. This topic also has a long tradition in literature. The image of Lucifer - a fallen, but not repentant angel of light - as if by magical power attracts an irrepressible writer's fantasy, each time opening from a new side.

For example, Lermontov's Demon is a humane and sublime image. It causes not horror and disgust, but sympathy and regret.

Lermontov's demon is the embodiment of absolute loneliness. However, he did not achieve it himself, unlimited freedom. On the contrary, he is lonely involuntarily, he suffers from his heavy, like a curse, loneliness and is full of longing for spiritual intimacy. Cast down from heaven and declared an enemy of the celestials, he could not become his own in the underworld and did not get close to people.

The demon is, as it were, on the verge of different worlds, and therefore Tamara represents him as follows:

It wasn't an angel

Her divine guardian:

Wreath of rainbow rays

Did not decorate his curls.

It was not a hell of a terrible spirit,

Vicious Martyr - oh no!

It looked like a clear evening:

Neither day nor night - neither darkness nor light!

The demon yearns for harmony, but it is inaccessible to him, and not because in his soul pride struggles with the desire for reconciliation. In the understanding of Lermontov, harmony is generally inaccessible: for the world is initially split and exists in the form of incompatible opposites. Even an ancient myth testifies to this: when the world was created, light and darkness, heaven and earth, firmament and water, angels and demons were separated and opposed.

The demon suffers from contradictions tearing everything around him. They are reflected in his soul. He is omnipotent - almost like God, but both of them are unable to reconcile good and evil, love and hate, light and darkness, lies and truth.

The demon yearns for justice, but it is also inaccessible to him: a world based on the struggle of opposites cannot be fair. The statement of justice for one side always turns out to be injustice from the point of view of the other side. In this disunity, which gives rise to bitterness and all other evils, lies a universal tragedy. Such a Demon is not like its literary predecessors in Byron, Pushkin, Milton, Goethe.

The image of Mephistopheles in Goethe's Faust is complex and multifaceted. This is Satan, an image from a folk legend. Goethe gave him the features of a concrete living individuality. Before us is a cynic and a skeptic, a witty creature, but devoid of everything holy, despising man and humanity. Speaking as a concrete person, Mephistopheles is at the same time a complex symbol. In social terms, Mephistopheles acts as the embodiment of an evil, misanthropic principle.

However, Mephistopheles is not only a social symbol, but also a philosophical one. Mephistopheles is the embodiment of negation. He says about himself: "I deny everything - And this is my essence."

The image of Mephistopheles must be considered in inseparable unity with Faust. If Faust is the embodiment of the creative forces of mankind, then Mephistopheles is a symbol of that destructive force, that destructive criticism that makes you go forward, learn and create.

In the "Unified Physical Theory" by Sergei Belykh (Miass, 1992), one can find words about this: "Good is static, peace is a potential component of energy.

Evil is movement, dynamics is the kinetic component of energy.”

The Lord defines the function of Mephistopheles in this way in the Prologue in Heaven:

Weak man: submissive to destiny,

He is glad to seek peace, because

I will give him a restless companion:

Like a demon, teasing him, let him excite him to action.

Commenting on the “Prologue in Heaven”, N. G. Chernyshevsky wrote in his notes to “Faust”: “Negations lead only to new, purer and truer convictions ... With negation, skepticism, the mind is not hostile, on the contrary, skepticism serves its goals ...”

Thus, denial is only one of the turns of progressive development.

Negation, "evil", of which Mephistopheles is the embodiment, becomes the impetus for a movement directed

Against evil.

I am part of that force

that always wants evil

and eternally does good -

This is what Mephistopheles said about himself. And these words were taken by M. A. Bulgakov as an epigraph to his novel The Master and Margarita.

With the novel The Master and Margarita, Bulgakov tells the reader about the meaning and timeless values.

In explaining the incredible cruelty of the procurator Pilate towards Yeshua, Bulgakov follows Gogol.

The dispute between the Roman procurator of Judea and the wandering philosopher about whether there will be a realm of truth or not sometimes reveals, if not equality, then some kind of intellectual similarity between the executioner and the victim. At times it even seems that the first will not commit a crime against a defenseless stubborn one.

The image of Pilate demonstrates the struggle of the individual. In a person, principles collide: personal will and the power of circumstances.

Yeshua spiritually overcame the latter. Pilate was not given this. Yeshua is executed.

But the author wanted to proclaim: the victory of evil over good cannot be the end result of social and moral confrontation. This, according to Bulgakov, is not accepted by human nature itself, should not be allowed by the entire course of civilization.

The prerequisites for such a belief were, the author is convinced, the actions of the Roman procurator himself. After all, it was he, who condemned the unfortunate criminal to death, who ordered the secret murder of Judas, who had betrayed Yeshua:

In the satanic, the human is hidden and, albeit cowardly, retribution for betrayal is being committed.

Now, after many centuries, the carriers of diabolical evil, in order to finally atone for their guilt before the eternal wanderers and spiritual ascetics, who always went to the stake for their ideas, are obliged to become creators of good, arbiters of justice.

The evil spreading in the world has acquired such a scale, Bulgakov wants to say, that Satan himself is forced to intervene, because there is no other force capable of doing this. This is how Woland appears in The Master and Margarita. It is to Woland that the author will give the right to execute or pardon. Everything bad in that Moscow bustle of officials and elementary townsfolk experiences the crushing blows of Woland.

Woland is evil, a shadow. Yeshua is good, light. In the novel, there is a constant opposition of light and shadow. Even the sun and moon become almost participants in the events ..

The sun - a symbol of life, joy, true light - accompanies Yeshua, and the moon - a fantastic world of shadows, mysteries and ghostly - the kingdom of Woland and his guests.

Bulgakov depicts the power of light through the power of darkness. And vice versa, Woland, as the prince of darkness, can feel his strength only when there is at least some kind of light that needs to be fought, although he himself admits that light, as a symbol of goodness, has one indisputable advantage - creative power.

Bulgakov depicts light through Yeshua. Yeshua Bulgakov is not quite the gospel Jesus. He's just a wandering philosopher, a little weird and not at all evil.

"Se is a man!" Not God, not in a divine halo, but simply a man, but what a man!

All his true divine dignity is within him, in his soul.

Levi Matthew does not see a single flaw in Yeshua, therefore he is not even able to retell the simple words of his Teacher. His misfortune is that he did not understand that light cannot be described.

Matthew Levi cannot object to Woland’s words: “Would you be so kind to think about the question: what would your good do if evil did not exist, and what would the earth look like if all shadows disappeared from it? After all, shadows are obtained from objects and people? Don't you want to skin every living thing because of your fantasy to enjoy the full light? You're stupid". Yeshua would have answered something like this: “To have shadows, sir, we need not only objects and people. First of all, we need a light that shines even in the darkness.”

And here Prishvin’s story “Light and Shadow” (the writer’s diary) comes to mind: “If flowers, a tree rise to light everywhere, then a person from the same biological point of view especially strives up, towards the light, and, of course, he is this very movement of his up, towards the light calls progress ...

Light comes from the Sun, shadow from the earth, and life generated by light and shadow takes place in the usual struggle between these two principles: light and shadow.

The sun, rising and leaving, approaching and receding, determines our order on earth: our place and our time. And all the beauty on earth, the distribution of light and shadow, lines and colors, sound, the outlines of the sky and the horizon - everything, everything is a phenomenon of this order. But: where are the boundaries of the solar order and the human?

Forests, fields, water with their vapors and all life on earth strives for light, but if there were no shadow, there could not be life on earth, everything would burn out in sunlight ... We live thanks to the shadows, but we do not thank the shadow and we call everything bad the shadow side of life, and all the best: reason, goodness, beauty - the bright side.

Everything strives for light, but if there were light for everyone at once, there would be no life: clouds cover the sunlight with their shadow, and people cover each other with their shadow, it is from ourselves, we protect our children from overwhelming light with it.

We are warm or cold - what does the Sun care about us, it fries and fries, regardless of life, but life is arranged in such a way that all living things are drawn to the light.

If there were no light, everything would be plunged into night.”

The necessity of evil in the world is equal to the physical law of light and shadows, but just as the source of light is outside, and only opaque objects cast shadows, so evil exists in the world only due to the presence in it of “opaque souls” that do not let the divine light. Good and evil did not exist in the primordial world, good and evil appeared later. What we call good and evil is the result of the imperfection of consciousness. Evil began to appear in the world when a heart appeared capable of feeling evil, that which is evil in essence. At the moment when the heart admits for the first time that there is evil, evil is born in this heart, and two principles begin to fight in it.

“A person is given the task of finding the true measure in himself, therefore, among “yes” and “no”, among “good” and “evil”, he fights with a shadow. Evil inclination - evil thoughts, deceitful deeds, unrighteous words, hunting, war. Just as for an individual the absence of peace of mind is a source of anxiety and many misfortunes, so for an entire people the absence of virtues leads to famine, to wars, to world plagues, fires and all sorts of disasters. With his thoughts, feelings and actions, a person transforms the world around him, makes it hell or paradise, depending on his inner level ”(Yu. Terapiano.“ Mazdeism ”).

In addition to the struggle of light and shadow, another important problem is considered in the novel "The Master and Margarita" - the problem of man and faith.

The word "faith" is heard repeatedly in the novel, not only in the usual context of Pontius Pilate's question to Yeshua Ha-Nozri: "... do you believe in any gods?" “There is only one God,” answered Yeshua, “I believe in him,” but also in a much broader sense: “To each will be given according to his faith.”

In essence, faith in the last, broader sense, as the greatest moral value, ideal, meaning of life, is one of the touchstones on which the moral level of any of the characters is tested. Belief in the omnipotence of money, the desire to grab more by any means - this is a kind of credo of Barefoot, the barman. Faith in love is the meaning of Margarita's life. Faith in kindness is the main defining quality of Yeshua.

It is terrible to lose faith, just as the Master loses faith in his talent, in his brilliantly guessed novel. It is terrible not to have this faith, which is typical, for example, of Ivan Bezdomny.

For believing in imaginary values, for inability and mental laziness to find one's faith, a person is punished, as in Bulgakov's novel, characters are punished with illness, fear, pangs of conscience.

But it is quite scary when a person consciously gives himself to the service of imaginary values, realizing their falsity.

In the history of Russian literature, A.P. Chekhov has firmly established the reputation of a writer, if not completely atheistic, then at least indifferent to matters of faith. It's a delusion. He could not be indifferent to religious truth. Brought up in strict religious rules, Chekhov in his youth tried to gain freedom and independence from what was arbitrarily imposed on him earlier. He also knew, like many others, doubts, and those statements of his that express these doubts were later absolutized by those who wrote about him. Any statement, even if it was not quite definite, was interpreted in a very definite sense. With Chekhov, it was all the more simple to do this because he clearly expressed his doubts, but he was in no hurry to present the results of his thoughts, intense spiritual search to the judgment of the people.

Bulgakov was the first to point out the world significance of ideas" and the writer's artistic thinking: "By the power of religious quest, Chekhov leaves behind even Tolstoy, approaching Dostoevsky, who has no equal here."

Chekhov is unique in his work in that he searched for truth, God, the soul, the meaning of life, exploring not the lofty manifestations of the human spirit, but moral weaknesses, falls, impotence of the individual, that is, he set himself complex artistic tasks. “Chekhov was close to the cornerstone idea of Christian morality, which is the true ethical foundation of all democracy, “that every living soul, every human existence is an independent, unchanging, absolute value that cannot and should not be considered as a means, but which has the right to charity of human attention."

But such a position, such a formulation of the question requires from a person extreme religious tension, for it is fraught with a danger that is tragic for the spirit - the danger of falling into hopelessness of pessimistic disappointment in many life values.

Only faith, true faith, which is subjected to a serious test during Chekhov's staging of the "mystery about man", can save a person from hopelessness and despondency - but otherwise it will not reveal the truth of faith itself. The author also forces the reader to approach the line beyond which boundless pessimism reigns, impudence is powerful "in the decaying lowlands and swamps of the human spirit." In a small work, The Tale of a Senior Gardener, Chekhov argues that the spiritual level on which faith is affirmed is invariably higher than the level of rational, logical arguments on which unbelief resides.

Let's look at the content of the story. In a certain town lived a righteous doctor who devoted his life without a trace to serving people. Once he was. found murdered, and the evidence undeniably denounced the "famous for his depraved life" varmint, who, however, denied all charges, although he could not provide convincing evidence of his innocence. And at the trial, when the chief judge was about to announce the death sentence, he unexpectedly for everyone and for himself shouted: “No! If I judge incorrectly, then let God punish me, but I swear, he is not to blame! I do not admit the thought that there could be a person who would dare to kill our friend, the doctor! Man cannot fall so deep! “Yes, there is no such person,” the other judges agreed. - Not! the crowd responded. - Let him go!

The trial of the murderer is a test not only for the inhabitants of the town, but also for the reader: what will they believe - "facts" or a person who denies these facts?

Life often requires us to make a similar choice, and our fate and the fate of other people sometimes depend on such a choice.

This choice is always a test: will a person retain faith in people, and therefore in himself, and in the meaning of his life.

The preservation of faith is affirmed by Chekhov as the highest value in comparison with the desire for revenge. In the story, the inhabitants of the town preferred faith in man. And God, for such faith in man, forgave the sins of all the inhabitants of the town. He rejoices when they believe that a person is His image and likeness, and grieves if they forget about human dignity, people are judged worse than dogs.

It is easy to see that the story does not deny the existence of God. Faith in man becomes for Chekhov a manifestation of faith in God. “Judge for yourselves, gentlemen: if judges and juries believe more in a person than in evidence, physical evidence and speeches, then isn’t this faith in a person in itself higher than all worldly considerations? It is not difficult to believe in God. The inquisitors, Biron, and Arakcheev also believed in him. No, you believe in a person! This faith is accessible only to those few who understand and feel Christ.” Chekhov recalls the inseparable unity of Christ's commandment: love for God and man. As mentioned earlier, Dostoevsky has no equal in the power of religious quest.

The way to achieve true happiness in Dostoevsky is to join the universal feeling of love and equality. Here his views merge with Christian teaching. But Dostoevsky's religiosity went far beyond the framework of church dogma. The Christian ideal of the writer was the embodiment of the dream of freedom, the harmony of human relations. And when Dostoevsky said: “Humble yourself, proud man!” - he did not mean humility as such, but the need for refusal

each from the selfish temptations of personality, cruelty and aggressiveness.

The work that brought the writer worldwide fame, in which Dostoevsky calls for overcoming selfishness, for humility, for Christian love for one's neighbor, for purifying suffering, is the novel Crime and Punishment.

Dostoevsky believes that only through suffering can humanity be saved from filth and get out of the moral impasse, only this path can lead it to happiness.

The focus of many researchers studying "Crime and Punishment" is the question of the motives of Raskolnikov's crime. What pushed Raskolnikov to this crime? He sees how ugly Petersburg is with its streets, how ugly the eternally drunk people are, how ugly the old pawnbroker is. All this disgrace repels the intelligent and handsome Raskolnikov and evokes in his soul "a feeling of the deepest disgust and malicious contempt." From these feelings, the “ugly dream” is born. Here Dostoevsky with extraordinary power shows the duality of the human soul, shows how in the human soul there is a struggle between good and evil, love and hatred, high and low, faith and unbelief.

The call "Humble yourself, proud man!" as well as possible suits Katerina Ivanovna. Pushing Sonya into the street, she actually acts according to Raskolnikov's theory. She, like Raskolnikov, rebels not only against people, but also against God. Only by pity and compassion could Katerina Ivanovna save Marmeladov, and then he would have saved her and the children.

Unlike Katerina Ivanovna and Raskolnikov, Sonya has no pride at all, but only meekness and humility. Sonya suffered a lot. “Suffering… is a great thing. There is an idea in suffering, ”says Porfiry Petrovich. The thought of purifying suffering is persistently instilled in Raskolnikov by Sonya Marmeladova, who herself meekly carries her cross. "Suffering to accept and redeem yourself with it, that's what you need," she says.

In the finale, Raskolnikov throws himself at Sonya's feet: the man has come to terms with himself, casting aside selfish daring and passions. Dostoevsky says that Raskolnikov is waiting for a "gradual rebirth", a return to people, to life. And Sonya's faith helped Raskolnikov. Sonya did not become embittered, did not harden under the blows of an unjust fate. She kept faith in God, in happiness, love for people, helping others.

The question of God, man and faith is even more touched upon in Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov. In The Brothers Karamazov, the writer sums up his many years of searching, reflections on man, the fate of his homeland and all of humanity.

Dostoevsky finds truth and consolation in religion. Christ for him is the highest criterion of morality.

Mitya Karamazov was innocent of the murder of his father, despite all the obvious facts and irrefutable evidence. But here the judges, unlike Chekhov's, preferred to believe the facts. Their disbelief in man forced the judges to find Mitya guilty.

The central issue of the novel is the question of the degeneration of the individual, cut off from the people and labor, violating the principles of philanthropy, goodness, and conscience.

For Dostoevsky, moral criteria and the laws of conscience are the basis of the foundations of human behavior. The loss of moral principles or forgetfulness of conscience is the highest misfortune, it entails the dehumanization of a person, it dries up an individual human personality, it leads to chaos and destruction of the life of society. If there is no criterion of good and evil, then everything is permitted, as Ivan Karamazov says. Ivan Karamazov subjects faith, that Christian faith, faith not just in some superpowerful being, but also spiritual confidence that everything the Creator does is the highest truth and justice and is done only for the good of man. “The Lord is righteous, my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him” (Ps. 91; 16). He is a stronghold; his works are perfect, and all his ways are righteous. God is faithful, and there is no unrighteousness in him. He is righteous and true...

Many people broke down on the question: “How can God exist if there is so much injustice and untruth in the world?” How many people come to the logical conclusion: "If so, then either God does not exist, or He is not omnipotent." It was along this knurled track that the “rebellious” mind of Ivan Karamazov moved.

His rebellion boils down to a denial of the harmony of God's world, for he denies the Creator justice, thus showing his unbelief: “I am convinced that suffering will heal and be smoothed out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pitiful mirage, like a vile invention of a weak and small , like an atom of the human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the world finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, for the drowning of all indignations, for the redemption of all the villains of people, all the blood they shed, enough to make it possible not only to forgive, but also to justify everything that happened to people - let it all be and appear, but I don’t accept this and don’t want to accept it! »

The eternal theme for every person, the most relevant in our time - "good and evil" - is very clearly expressed in Gogol's work "Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka". We already meet this topic on the first pages of the story “May Night, or the Drowned Woman” - the most beautiful and poetic. The action in the story takes place in the evening, at dusk, between sleep and reality, on the verge of the real and the fantastic. The nature surrounding the heroes is amazing, the feelings experienced by them are beautiful and reverent. However, in the beautiful landscape there is something that breaks this harmony, disturbs Galya, who feels the presence of evil forces very close by, what is it? A wild evil has happened here, an evil from which even the house has changed outwardly.

The father, under the influence of his stepmother, drove his own daughter out of the house, pushed her to commit suicide.

Pannochka turns specifically to Levko for help, since he is kind, responsive to someone else's misfortune, with heartfelt emotion he listens to the sad story of pannochka.