Showing posts with label Kirillov. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kirillov. Show all posts

February 16, 2011

Jumalan kanssa ei-mihinkään ja takaisin - nihilismi tässä ja nyt: Aleksei Kirillov - Antikristus, Jeesus-parodia vai pyhimys ilman armoa?

Hold your tongue; you won't understand anything. If there is no God, then I am God.
*
Motto:
1
Camus has summed it up well: "The reasoning is classic in its clarity. If God does not exist, Kirilov is god. If God does not exist, Kirilov must kill himself. Kirilov must therefore kill himself to become god. That logic is absurd, but it is what is needed."

 - ‘Absurd logic’ aside, the depiction of Kirillov is wholly positive. He is temperate in his habits and loves life, children and the natural world. He is protective towards (the virgin) Marya, is anxious to minimise the risk of harm at Stavrogin’s duel, and gives the money saved for his last meal to the impoverished Shatov. Moreover, Dostoevsky endows him with several characteristics of the saintly Prince Myshkin: his love of children, his ‘remarkably deep understanding of people’, his epilepsy. Kirillov’s parallels to Christ are also glaring.

2
Raskolnikov is, of course, by no means alone among Dostoevsky’s characters. Alexei Kirillov and Ivan Karamazov can also both be viewed as divided men living on what Malcolm Jones has recently termed ‘that perilous threshold between belief and unbelief’. And both—understood in light of certain trends in modern theology—can also be understood as implicit Christians.

- Variously described as a ‘secular saint’, a ‘saint without grace’, an ‘atheist-mystic’, and one in whom ‘extreme atheism joins hands with sainthood’, Kirillov is a strong candidate for Maritain’s conjecture of ‘the genuine, absolute atheist, with all his sincerity and devotion [who] is but an abortive saint’.

I
Minulla on uusi ystävä - tai ainakin huomaan hänen tulleen paljon läheisemmäksi kuin aiemmin olen kokenut. Mutta nyt alan tuntea hänet jo paremmin. Aleksei Nilych Kirillov on minun kaksoisolentoni ja vastakohtani yhtä aikaa. Tulen palaamaan häneen vielä usein, koska hänen nihilisminsä on erottamaton osa sitä ateismia, joka minussa uskoo Jumalaan - tai ainakin niin kovin haluaisi uskoa.

[Sanottakoon heti, että minun mielestäni Kirillov on camus'laisittain oikeassa [absurdisti], mutta hänen logiikkansa on samalla solipsistista eikä senkään vuoksi voi vakuuttaa kuin yhden ihmisen [kerrallaan] - jos hänetkään].

Voitteko kuvitella aidosti hyväsydämisen, lapsista pitävän ja vähäosaisia auttavan nihilistin? Arvatenkin omalaatuisen ja huvittavan, mutta kaikkea muuta kuin typeryksen. Sellainen on Aleksei Kirillov - insinööri ja nihilistisen yksityisajattelun kruunaamaton kuningas - Idiootin ruhtinas Myskin ilman Kristusta - eräs Dostojevskin kiehtovimmista henkilöhahmoista.

Kirillov on Riivaajien saatanallisen salaseuran ainoa ihminen, joka saa myötätunnon heräämään etenkin silloin, kun hän juuri ennen itsemurhayritystään ryhtyy pyydettäessä välittömästi ja vilpittömästi [hyvää hyvyyttään] auttamaan köyhtynyttä Satovia tämän saatua yllättävän vieraan [Satovin 'vaimo' palaa; tarvitaan paitsi ruokaa, lopulta myös kätilö ja jopa lääkäri synnytysapuun].

Kirillovin nihilistinen teorisointi on hänen henkilökohtainen projektinsa eikä oikeastaan lainkaan poliittisesti yhteydessä hänen nihilistisen viiteryhmänsä rikolliseen toimintaan, huijaukseen ja kaaoksen lietsontaan, minkä päähenkilö Stavroginin ideoita käytäntöön vehkeillyt Pjotr Verhovenski - eräs kirjallisuuden- ja ehkä koko aatehistorian kaikkein halveksittavimmista henkilöhahmoista - aikaansaa.

Lopulta Kirillov katkaisee jotakuinkin väkivaltaisesti [mutta merkillisesti: puremalla käteen] välinsä rikolliseen ja alhaiseen Verhovenskiin, jota [kuten viimein myös Stavroginia] hän avoimesti halveksii asettuen murhattavan Satovin [joka on eronnut nihilisti-ryhmästä ja tuomittu kuolemaan Verhovenskin johtajuudella] puolelle, mutta kaikki on jo silloin [oikeastaan jo alusta lähtien, sillä Dostojevski näyttää groteskisti, miten ryhmän toiminnan taustalla vaikuttaa aito saatanallinen pahuus seurauksineen] liian myöhäistä, eikä toisaalta Kirillovkaan ole luopunut itsemurhan kautta Jumalaksi tulemisen-ideastaan [itsemurha näyttäytyy hänelle siten lähes korkeimmalta sakramentilta ellei suorastaan ihmiskunnan pelastamiselta].

Kirillov siis ajattelee, että Jumala on ihmisen keksintö kuolemanpelkoa vastaan. Ainut keino voittaa itse aiheutettu eksistentiaalis-metafyysinen kaipuu ja kauhu [Jumala ja/eli kuolemanpelko] on tappaa itsensä tietoisen harkitusti tämän päättelyn seurauksena.

Koska ihminen itse on Jumalan luonut, hän itse on silloin Jumala. Näin ollen ihminen voi myös voittaa riippuvuuden [johon on ajautunut] tästä antropomorfistisesta fantasiastaan tekemällä itsestään lopun. Tällä tavoin [Kirillovin logiikalla] ihminen itsemurhan aktissa todella muuttuu Jumalaksi.

Kirillov suostuu 'riivaajien' jäseneksi syystä, jota me pitäisimme mielipuolisena, mutta jossa K. itse näkee mahdollisuuden olla hyödyksi yleisen tietoisuuden vapautumiselle peloistaan. Stavroginin alkuperäinen luonnos-idea on hänelle vain pelkkä lähtökohta kehitellä 'dogmaattista ja jopa pelastavaa' ratkaisua ulos omista pakkomielteistään Jumalan suhteen.
*
Itse asiassa koko ultraliberaali anarko-terrori-liike on Stavroginin omaatuntoa vailla olevan suorastaan perverssin häikäilemättömän egoismin tuotos ja häntä jumaloivan Pjotr Verhovenskin masinoima huijausten ja väkivaltaisen provokaation kierre ilman mitään rakentavaa/järkevää suunnitelmaa, mutta vaikka Kirillov ymmärtääkin riskit, hän elää anarkistien jäsenenäkin omaa nihilismi-projektiaan - ei niinkään Stavroginin ja etenkin Verhovenskin riivausta.

Stavroginin aatteet juontuvat kieroutuneesti mutta yhtä kaikki eurooppalaisen valistuksen tieteellisen ateismi-sekularismin lähtökohdista - olihan hänen varhaisnuoruuden opettajansa Isä-Stephan Verhovenski - tuo liberalismin ja anti-venäläisyyden apostoli, joka sisäisti persoonassaan [myös sen] narsistisen heikkouden, joka ei ymmärtänyt, mitä hänen ympärillään tapahtui eikä varsinkaan sitä, että tuli päästäneeksi pirulliset voimat liikkeelle opettaessaan huippulahjakasta psykopaattia.

Tosin Stavrogin vetäytyisi mieluummin syrjään ja yksinäisyyteen, koska alkaa tajuta oudon hulluutensa ja sen seuraukset, mutta katua hän ei osaa [häneltä puuttuu tyystin kyky empatiaan, vaikka onkin tarkka ihmistuntija] edes tunnustaessaan pedofilia-viettelyn mystikko-pyhimys Tiihonille. - Tiihon vihjaakin naulan kantaan, että Stavroginin tunnustus on hänen kauhistuttavan egoisminsa vielä kauhistuttavampi huipentuma - ja tämä sivallus osuu Stavroginin sisimpään, koska hän tunnistaa siinä itsensä ja raivostuu Tiihonille, jota ei arvannut ihan noin nerokkaaksi ihmissielun tuntijaksi.
*
Kirillov ajattelee absurdisti pystyvänsä kuolemallaan hyödyttämään kumouksellista ideaa [anarko-sosialismi, ateismi/nihilismi], josta Stavrogin [Othellon Jagoon verrattava pahuuden lähes ylimaallinen ruumiillistuma] on saanut hänet kiinnostumaan. Tästä syystä Kirillov suostuu auttamaan ryhmää ottamalla kontolleen liikkeen aatetta edistävän [Satovin!] murhan [muttei tekemään sitä] - aikoohan hän muutenkin ampua kuulan kalloonsa todistaakseen 'jumala-nihilisminsä' oikeaksi.

[Jos on olemassa alruistista nihilismiä, niin Kirillov on aika hyvä ehdokas sellaisen edustajaksi ;\?]

Jätän Kirillovin kuitenkin tässä vaiheessa asuntoonsa meditoimaan. Sitäpaitsi Riivaajien juoni vaatii jo muutenkin useamman pohdiskelun/katsauksen, joten jään sitä pohtimaan tykönäni. Onhan kyseessä 1800-luvun ehkä merkittävin aateromaani ja itse Kirillov Albert Camus'n Sisyfoksen myytissä lanseeraaman absurdin ihmisen paradigmaattisin tyyppi-esimerkki.

II
Alexei Kirillov:

Man has done nothing but invent God, so as to live without killing himself [. . .] I alone for the first time in history did not want to invent God. [. . .] Fear is man’s curse . . . But I will proclaim self-will, it is my duty to believe that I do not believe. I will begin, and end, and open the door. And save.
*
I must affirm my unbelief, for there's nothing higher for me than the thought that there's no God. The history of mankind is on my side. Man kept inventing God in order to live, so as not to have to kill himself. To this day, the history of mankind consists of just that. I am the first man in history to refuse to invent God. I want it to be known always.
...
I'll be the first and last, and that will open the door. And I'll save them. That alone can save people, and the next generation will be transformed physically. Because the more I've thought about it, the more I've become convinced that, with his present physical make-up, man can never manage without the old God.
*
'[H]ere are seconds—they come five or six at a time—when you suddenly feel the presence of eternal harmony in all its perfection. It's not of this earth, I don't mean by that that it's something heavenly but only that man, as he is constituted on earth, can't endure it. He must be either physically transformed or die. It is a clear, unmistakable sensation. It is as though you were suddenly in contact with the whole of nature, and you say, "Yes, this is the truth." When God was creating the world, He said, after each day's creation, "Yes, this is the truth, it's Good." It's not elation, really, it's simply joy.... If it lasted for more than five seconds, the soul wouldn't be able to stand it; it would have to disappear.

III
Alexei Nilych Kirillov is an engineer. He is a thorough nihilist, and has decided his own will is the ultimate reality. He means to commit suicide, and Pyotr Stepanovich means to use his suicide to further his revolutionary purposes. He is a "thoroughgoing madman", driven to such a state by his obsession with the belief that man can only stop living in fear of death when he rejects such fear to such an extent that he is willing to kill himself without any care. A man who can do this becomes the true God in Kirillov's view.
...
Stavrogin, who seems to find most people boring, takes an unusual interest in Kirillov and spends a lot of time talking to him alone in his apartment, more so probably than any other character, to try to understand his ideas. Kirillov appears to spend almost all day in his apartment alone thinking, such that whenever a character needs to talk to him, they can show up at his home and find him there, as in this humorous passage: "Pyotr Stepanovitch went first to Kirillov's. He found him, as usual, alone, and at the moment practicing gymnastics, that is, standing with his legs apart, brandishing his arms above his head in a peculiar way. On the floor lay a ball. The tea stood cold on the table, not cleared since breakfast." Later he states, "I want to put an end to my life, because that's my idea, because I don't want to be afraid of death." Kirillov infers that if one commits suicide, he directly rejects God's existence. - Kirillov – as a truly absurd character, is a major subject of deliberation in Camus' philosophical essay The Myth of Sisyphus.
*
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riivaajat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Possessed_(novel)
http://shows.vtheatre.net/devils/characters.html
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoevsky
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Sisyphus
http://litthe.oxfordjournals.org/content/22/1/16.full.pdf

March 28, 2009

God is a pain in the fear of death (Kirilov)

- Evil men have no songs. How is it then,that the Russians have songs?
- Insanity is the exception in individuals. In groups, parties, people, and times, it is the rule.
*

Kirilov

Alexei Nilych Kirilov (or Kirillov) is one of the most astonishing characters in The Possessed. He is a "thoroughgoing madman", who has been driven to nihilistic ideas by Nikolai Stavrogin. On the one side, he is just an ordinary unsociable man, though particularly concerned with his health.

"Pyotr Stepanovitch went first to Kirillov's. He found him, as usual, alone, and at the moment practising gymnastics, that is, standing with his legs apart, brandishing his arms above his head in a peculiar way. On the floor lay a ball. The tea stood cold on the table, not cleared since breakfast."

But on the other side, this introverted engineer is also a theorist. We can trace both philosophy of religion and philosophy of freedom in his character. They are intertwined, and completelly influenced by atheism. Without any doubt, those theories had lead Kirilov to a suicide, who considered it as a highest act of free will. In the explanatory scheme of this idea, we will start with philosophy of religion and then proceed to philosophy of freedom.

Fear is a specific notion that has got a lot in common with "pain", which is the central theme in this discourse. Dostoevsky illustrates this notion with a following example - consider a big rock which would kill you if it fell onto you. Even though we are sure of it, we also know, that because of its enormous size and mass, it is sure that we wouldn't feel any pain.

In other words, we are not afraid of a rock, but of death. Since fear is a component of pain, in this case it follows that pain is in death. Now comes a crucial point: God is a pain in the fear of death'. For if there was no death or pain there would be no need for a God or Gods.

Now, we can continue with philosophy of freedom. Kirilov is obsessively attached to freedom, so that he doesn't agree, not in a single moment, that there is the slightest possibility that he is not a free agent. In a conversation to Pyotr Stepanovitch, he argues:

"It's not an agreement and not an obligation. I have not bound myself in any way." or "I didn't bind myself, I agreed, because it makes no difference to me."
And even if Kirilov doesn't bring into question the very existence of free will, he is convinced that there are several levels of it. A highest act of free will is a suicide.
"I want to put an end to my life, because that's my idea, because I don't want to be afraid of death."

Kirilov can now infer that if one commits suicide, he directly rejects God's existence, since he does not have any fear, and God is a fear. Hypothetically, one would kill oneself not in affection, but in calmness. Such an agent, who would prove that there is no God, would then declare himself as God. As one who can give and take life as one who can create or cause.

Although this is an idea of Stavrogin, Kirilov is proud of it, and lives in its accordance. At few occasions, he gets very unpleasant, when this theory is set on scene.
"No, it's not excellent, for you are being tedious. I am not obliged to give you any account of myself and you can't understand my ideas."

Pyotr Stepanovitch however, to whom these words were directed, didn't care much even if he didn't understand Kirilov ideas. Pyotr Stepanovitch only cared for the plan he was set on executing. Here Kirilov plays a central role in the plot of the novel. Pyotr Stepanovitch's plan involves an agreement between Kirilov and Pyotr Stepanovitch. That Kirilov would take guilt onto himself for a murder that Pyotr Stepanovitch's conspiracy group intends to commit.
*
Ivan Shatov is a son of former serf, as well as a former university student and another intellectual who has turned his back on his leftist ideas. This change of heart is what attracts Pyotr Stepanovich Verkhovensky to plot Shatov's murder. Shatov is based on I. I. Ivanov, a student who was murdered by Sergey Nechayev for speaking out against Nechayev's radical propaganda, an actual event which served as the initial impetus for Dostoyevsky's novel.

He was tutored by Stephan and from his childhood was greatly indebted to Varvara. A one time radical socialist, Shatov converts to a Russian idealist. He is married, but separated to the governess of his former merchant. Shatov is a member of the group, who tries to breakout, but fails.

Shatov wants to believe in God, but feels he has no faith. He values the idea of God and feels that religion is essential to the Russian identity. Shatov believes that his lifestyle and principles are in conflict with allowing him to have faith. He admits to the existence of God, but that alone can not give him complete faith. Dostoevsky places Shatov in a tragedian role.

As soon as he begins to understand himself and develops a religious conviction, he is murdered. Throughout the novel he seeks faith and once he has a chance to grasp it Dostoevsky has him killed. Both Kirillov and Shatov have firm convictions, the former has faith but does not believe in God, and the latter believes in God but has no faith. Therefore, Shatov is the type of character who is placed in difficult circumstances, because he tryes to have faith in God, but when he's on the good road, he is murdered, and it's taking place a tragedy.
*
*