Dostoyevsky Grand Inquisitor

Dostoevsky litters the novel with the biblical allusion of Lazarus. Sonia disseminates the legend to the largely agnostic Raskolnikov: “ ‘And when he thus spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth’” (Dostoevsky 328). This reference to Lazarus serves to foreshadow Raskolnikov’s own redemption. In fact, Raskolnikov

By not following the rules established by Christianity, Raskolnikov is essentially making himself God, which is an internal struggle throughout the novel because Raskolnikov feels guilty about it. Although he commits murder, which is impermissible in a religious and societal context, Raskolnikov actually saw some value in religion. It is for

The Inquisitor begins his plea with a grave tone and starting the rhetorical appeal of ethos to legitimize his view of the grave matter. In lines 1-5 he states “If you had seen what I have seen of heresy, you would not think it a light thing even in its most apparently harmless and even lovable and pious origins.”. Validating that he has dealt with heresy in a great matter, the Inquisitor hasn't seen this only once though, he states again in line 16 “I have seen this again and again”. He gives the audience the appeal to ethos, the audience now can believe what he is talking about because of his experience. He has now led the audience to be able to trust him. Now the Inquisitor, in his prestigious position, begins to persuade the audience with the horrors and legit wickedness of heresy. In lines 17-27 he gives a great deal of pathos and some aggressive diction, he expresses “Heresy ... ends

The Grand Inquisitor is also a corrupt character. As Grand Inquisitor, it is his job to cleanse Portugal of heretics. Despite his responsibilities, the Grand Inquisitor enters into an agreement with Don Issachar where he and Issachar share Cunégonde (Voltaire 18). One could correctly state that this behavior as hypocritical, the inquisition persecutes the Jews yet the Grand Inquisitor enters into an agreement with one. This behavior is also corrupt because access to Cunégonde is of person gain to the Grand Inquisitor.

A large part of what makes the Inquisitor’s monologue so off-putting is his commanding tone and a strong appeal to ethos. The Inquisitor’s diction is dark, violent, and unforgiving towards heresy, and he takes every

Dostoevsky did not specifically express belief nor disbelief in God. According to Philosophy in Russia, “Dostoevsky has been represented as a firm believer in God, whereas in a letter he said plainly that the existence of God was the principal question or problem which had tormented him throughout his life” (Copleston 163). Dostoevsky’s hesitant viewpoint also became present in his novel through his characters. For example, he characterized Raskolnikov with a similar unestablished faith, claiming on page 271 that “Perhaps God does not exist.” Raskolnikov struggles internally with guilt and shame that he questions his own beliefs. He speaks with Sonya shortly later, and confesses his belief to her that ‘Lord, I believe that thou art the Son of God, which should come into the world.” (Dostoevsky 276). Raskolnikov begins to have a change of heart about his faith once he is able to confess to another person and trust Sonya. Dostoevsky also incorporated his ideas of philosophy with the ideas of theology. He believed that people should be allowed to choose their religious preferences and faith. On the other hand, Dunya was presented as very devoted to a specific belief in God. She trusted God and used her faith as a form of reassurance when she stated “It was God himself who sent that man to us, although he comes straight from some drinking bout. I am sure we can rely on him” (Dostoevsky 172). Although she knows Raskolnikov is unreliable and irresponsible, she uses God as her source of certainty. Dostoevsky gives his characters the freedom to establish their own outlooks while expressing his belief in existentialism. Some of his characters are heavily devoted, while others are erratic with their position, reflecting Dostoevsky's beliefs in character

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in his commencement address to Harvard University entitled “A World Split Apart,” warns of the decline of Western society. Solzhenitsyn begins by indicating that he intends to impart truth upon his audience, though it may be bitter, insisting “that it comes not from an adversary but from a friend” (1). This implies he is about to discuss a controversial topic in such a way that is not likely to be received kindly. His ultimate purpose is to encourage a return to religion and spirituality, connoting this to be the only means of redemption for the West. Solzhenitsyn utilizes an insightful yet urgent tone in order to convey to his audience the direness of the situation.

In his article “Men Have Forgotten God,” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn writes about how after several events in world history, corruption is rampant and conscious is dissipated. Using atheism as a base reason, he explains how the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and World War Two became bases for forms of hatred. He also mentions that people everywhere have become hardened to the things of this world, and the results of the hatred formed on atheism. In contrast, he mentions the fact that in Russia, a “pious way of life” was sought, and a true Christian church was the norm of the country. Atheism, in his mind, was a poison that has seeped through the world, slowly changing the very fabric that people’s foundations are based upon. In order to understand Solzhenitsyn’s thinking, mankind must understand atheism and all of its effects on the people surrounded by it.

Dostoyevsky most likely modeled Crime and Punishment after his own experiences. Since the two men's lives had striking similarities, many people believed that was evidence to prove their thinking. As Raskolnikov was overcome with tremendous suffering, sent to Siberia, and fell madly in love with a beautiful woman; so did Dostoyevsky within his lifetime. "I do believe that the character (Raskolnikov) was the epitome of Dostoyevsky's life." (Timoney)

In addition, Ivan’s basic assumptions, regarding freedom and happiness, brings up ideals of western individualism. On page 24 of The Grand Inquisitor, Dostoevsky says, “But let me tell Thee that now, today, people are more persuaded than ever that they have perfect

“Nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom.” –The Grand Inquisitor” “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.” - Father Zosima. These two quotes voice the polarized philosophies that impregnate the book, The Brothers Karamazov. Ivan, the second of the three sons, and Zosima, the old monk, are huge commentators on the question, “Is the burden of free will to much for a human to bear?”

Nihilism is one of the most difficult philosophies to accurately define because of its ambiguous nature. In its simplest form, one might consider it an extremely pessimistic form of skepticism in which the individual discounts even the idea of existence. Therefore, to a nihilist, all values, relationships, authority, beliefs, and emotions are baseless and empty. First popularized in Ivan Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons in 1862, nihilism is associated with a revolutionary movement that occurred in Russia from 1814 to 1876. The principles of nihilism often can be linked with those of utilitarianism, existentialism, and anarchism. Dostoevsky demonstrates his aversion to this philosophy through

If I could meet Dostoevsky I would ask him what his inspiration for Crime and Punishment was. Sometimes I wonder if the novel was written to give us insight to how Dostoevsky felt about the world. Maybe he is using the character Raskolnikov to portray a part of him who feels alienated from the world, and is torn apart

While in a conversation with Sonia, Raskolnikov says “I did not bow down to you [Sonya], I bowed down to all the suffering of humanity." (Dostoevsky, Page 350) Meaning that he went through both physical and mental suffering which contributed to the guilt that he had after the murder. But he would not have felt this guilt if he had successfully eclipsed into the Superman. But he didn’t accomplish this and still remained unaffected by his crime. Raskolnikov’s idea of the superman theory continues by a conversation he has with Porfiry Petrovitch where they talk about an essay in which Raskolnikov wrote about the superman theory with his own thoughts that got published in the newspaper, in Raskolnikov’s essay he states “In a word, you (Raskolnikov) introduce, if you remember, a hint to the effect that there are persons who are able, or rather, not who are able but who have every right, to commit any wrong or crime, and that laws, so to say, are not made for them.” (Dostoevsky, Page 220) Afterwards, Raskolnikov responds by saying “The extraordinary man has the right... I don’t mean a formal, official right, but he has the right in himself, to permit his conscience to overstep… certain obstacles, but only in the event that his ideas require it for their fulfilment.” (Dostoevsky, Page 220) Raskolnikov basically makes a distinction between the ordinary and the extraordinary. Raskolnikov’s ideology to

During the semester we have read three very influential works: “Fathers and Children” by Ivan Turgenev, “What is to be done?” by Nikolay Chernyshevsky, and “Crime and Punishment” by Fyodor Dostoevsky. All of these novels are tied together with similar ideas. However, authors interpret them in different ways. One of the biggest ideas is about “Extraordinary Man Theory”. Chernyshevsky, in his novel, tries to show that ideal world consists of communities and each community should have ordinary folks, servile group, and extraordinary men, leaders of the community who have all the power and can persuade the rest of the commune to follow their ideas and beliefs.