I have considered this since I read it probably 6 years ago to be my favorite book, or at least the book that has challenged me the most. It's as powerful of a testament to Christian nonviolence as I imagine has ever been written. Probably it's most well-known claim to fame is that Gandhi cites it as the book that influenced him most in his life, even though he was a devout Hindu.

"La pregunta que cabe hacerse es: ¿cómo resolver los conflictos que surgen entre los hombres, cuando unos consideran que el mal es aquello que otros consideran el bien, y al revés? No sirve como respuesta la afirmación de que el mal es aquello que yo considero como tal, a pesar de que mi enemigo lo considere bien. Existen, pues, dos posibles soluciones a esta cuestión: o encontramos un criterio fiable e irrefutable de lo que es el mal, o no resistimos a éste con la violencia. La primera solución se ha intentado aplicar desde el principio de los tiempos, y, como es sabido, nunca ha dado resultados favorables. La segunda solución -no resistir con la violencia a aquello que consideramos como el mal hasta que encontremos un criterio único que lo determine - es la que nos propuso Jesucristo". ▪️ Lev Tolstói sufrió una terrible crisis espiritual que le llevó a reflexionar y concentrar sus escritos alrededor de las cuestiones morales y religiosas que más le preocupaban. De esa época en concreto surge esta obra, un compendio de pensamientos y argumentaciones acerca del Cristianismo y de la doctrina de la no resistencia al mal con la violencia. Para Tolstói la verdadera enseñanza de Cristo reside en el Sermón de la Montaña, en el amor al prójimo, la humildad, la compasión y sobretodo en la resistencia pacífica que pensadores como Ghandi también llevaron a cabo en su lucha. No está de acuerdo con los ritos y la fe que propugna la institución de la Iglesia y tampoco está de acuerdo con aquellos hombres de ciencia que imaginan el Cristianismo solo como una serie de sucesos milagrosos y paranormales. Para él, la religión es una guía en la historia de la humanidad. Una forma de estudiar el pasado y de enfrentarse al futuro: el espíritu de los pueblos y de la humanidad. Para el autor existen tres fases: El yo individual y animal, el Yo social (en el que estaríamos ahora inmersos) y el Yo universal y divino. Este último lo entiende no como un sentimiento de humanidad total si no como una vuelta a la misma individualidad desde la que se ama fraternalmente al resto de personas y a Dios. Una especie de Yo despojado de sí mismo en el que se ha tomado conciencia de Dios y por tanto, del Amor. Crítico con el Servicio Militar Obligatorio de la época, crítico con la contradicción de propugnan unos valores cristianos que no se respetan en las Guerras ni en el día a día, crítico también con toda institución estatal. Para Lev Tolstói el Cristianismo no consiste solo en creer o no creer si no en transformar la vida de uno del todo, de principio a fin. Me ha encantado el libro sobretodo por la forma en que expone ideas y las rebate, considero este un mecanismo muy útil para hacer pensar al mismo lector y ayudarle a argumentar su pensamiento. Respecto a lo expuesto, yo siempre he confiado firmemente en la necesidad que tenemos los humanos de crear cultura y de sostener nuestros pensamientos. Quisiera creer también con la misma fuerza que lo hace Tolstói en que todo hombre experimenta en el transcurso de su vida un momento de despertar donde la contradicción de su propia conciencia con su vida no es capaz de sostenerse. Comparto muchas cosas con el pensar de este escritor pero quizás en lo que más me encuentro es en esa forma de entender que aquellos que sufren o incluso que más alejados están de amar al resto (ya sea por violencia o por cualquier otro motivo) son los que a la vez, más cerca están de arrepentirse algún día.

كتاب قمة...هو بنظري مرجع...ميزته هو ان تولستوي كتبه بعد ان وصل للحق ..فيه يواجهك بكل فكرة لديك و كل شيء كنت تضحك على نفسك به...لينسفه و يضع امامك الحق الذي لا جدال فيه...كما قلت..هو مرجع يبدأ منه الانسان و يعود...و بالتأكيد سيغير فيك...على قدر استعدادك للتغيير

Great content, love Christian anarchists, but the writing is just not up to the standards I was expecting from Tolstoy? Maybe it’s the translator, or maybe he didn’t have an editor on this one? idk

It's easier to go along with the flow of life than it is to stand firm on eternal truths and thus to oppose political and religious paradigms. Sure enough Tolstoy can find dozens of ways to state his case that Christianity is good and organized religion is not. And every way is relevent and true. Church complicity with worldly authorities, ready to support the violence of war and the oppression of the weak is quite at odds with the messages of Jesus Christ himself.

Read this (p. 317): "...it is madness to remain under the roof of a building which cannot support its weight, and that we must leave it. And indeed it is difficult to imagine a position more wretched than that of the Christian world today, with its nations armed against one another, with its constantly increasing taxation to maintain its armies, with the hatred of the working class for the rich ever growing more intense, with Damocles sword of war hanging over the heads of all, ready every instant to fall sooner or later."

Whew! And this was written in 1894!

Seeking out literature on Christian pacifism, I bought this book under the false impression that the author himself was a Christian, albeit one with a strong dislike for ecclesiastical authority. Had I done better research and known in advance that Tolstoy actually departs radically from traditional orthodox Christianity, I would not have wasted my money on this heretical junk, which is peppered with Unitarianism, universalism, anarchism and liberalism.

Like Tolstoy, I agree that Christians are mandated by Jesus to live out a commitment to non-violence. However, the tangent he goes off in chapter 3 was the deal-breaker for me and I could not, as a sincere person of faith, fathom reading this work any further. In this chapter Tolstoy virulently attacks not only the Church (Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant), but the historic creeds (setting up a false dichotomy between them and the Sermon on the Mount), the credibility of the Bible, and most importantly God Himself. He denies the deity and redemptive work of Jesus, making the Saviour out as no more than a good moral teacher. With quotes such as: "In these days only a man who is absolutely ignorant ... can remain in the faith of the Church", it's needless to say that 'The Kingdom of God Is Within You' is not exactly edifying reading.

This antagonized me so much that I could not care less what Tolstoy has written in the rest of his book. Which is a pity, because I had high hopes of gaining more knowledge on pacifism with a view to application in my own life. Instead, all I seem to have encountered were the weak, self-righteous ramblings of a man who should have stuck to writing novels.

P.S This particular edition by Watchmaker Publishing is riddled with typos.

Not your regular Tolstoy. This book is his case for non resistance as a normal Christian perspective. His main reason comes from Jesus’s words in Matthew 5. He takes this perspective to the far side by saying paying taxes funds the government, the government causes war, therefore if we pay taxes to the government we participate in the violence. An extreme book for non extremists.

Tolstoy's radical take on Christianity may not sound so radical at first: he insists on a rigid adherence to the specific verbal instructions of Jesus as described in the Gospels. The sermon on the mount, in particular, is afforded special emphasis as a sort of new set of commandments. This is, notably, the sermon in which Jesus instructs us to turn the other cheek and be forgiving and loving of one another. These teachings, he writes, constitute the body of Christianity- they define what it means to be a follower of Christ.

For Tolstoy, this naturally raises questions on the social & political levels. If we are to love one another universally, how can we reconcile this with state obligations that would have us go to war? What are we to do about the imprisoning, torture and killing of evildoers? Is it truly a Christian society that relies on the widespread exploitation and deprivation of lower classes? Jesus's vision is a radical one that aims to unite all peoples in love as equals- so how close are we to this, after two millennia of rule of so-called "christian nations?"

Tolstoy sees an inherent contradiction between Christ's teachings and the function of the state as a largely repressive, violent institution. His doctrine also calls into question the focus on superstition and supernatural dogma of the established churches. Nothing like the church, he argues, appears in Jesus's direct teachings, with all its earthly powers and authority.

Living at the turn of the 20th century in Russia, Tolstoy saw the writing on the walls: he repeatedly calls for reason and unity in the face of the mad building-up of war machines that lead toward inevitable massacre. He foresaw at least World War One, and makes other prescient remarks essentially about mutually assured destruction. This is the real focus of his work, to ask why as a species we seem hellbent on self-destruction and why we all willingly work together to enact the hateful, mad schemes of our imposed rulers, to the deprivation of ourselves and our neighbors. The way out of this blood-soaked labyrinth is his "Christian conception of life."

The heart of his theory concerns human motivation. He outlines a rough sort of history / anthropology moving between the pagan conception of life, through to the state conception and then to the Christian. Importantly, he identifies a link between our spiritual / metaphysical beliefs, and our behavior as a whole.

Rational self-interest, the latest holy cow of enshrined state philosophy, is in Tolstoy's argument both the mode of the state conception of life ("I will do what's best for me and my family") and the critical link in the chains that keep us fettered to mass suffering. As long as we look out for number one, we can never mount a meaningful resistance to this maltreatment, for to step out of line as a solitary soul risks much while accomplishing little (for the self, that is.) Directing all of us to focus on ourselves rather than our collective interest is the ultimate "divide and conquer" that drives a wedge between everyone.

Tolstoy's "Christian conception of life", by contrast, places adherence to a Godly ideal above all else: the love of every fellow human. Now if this is our deepest motive, above all petty self-interest, we should have no problem suffering and even dying in order to serve this higher spiritual vision of human potential. Tolstoy means total radical non-compliance with the state, especially forced conscription, while maintaining nonviolence and accepting the punishments that the rulers of this earthly realm may dish out. Sounds an awful lot like the early Christians who were persecuted by the Romans- even Jesus himself, killed for challenging the authorities of his time.

I believe that Tolstoy is onto something very important here. Rational self-interest has been studied extensively in game theory and economics. It can be mathematically (and experimentally) shown in the "prisoner's dilemma" that it doesn't always lead to the best possible outcome- and in fact causes us to figuratively shoot ourselves in the foot. Hofstadter's notion of "hyperrationality" was one attempt to get out of this self-imposed trap; I think Tolstoy is dealing with exactly the same questions.

Altogether, this was a very interesting and powerful polemic, and I was extremely excited to finally find an author who seems to take the same understanding of Christianity as I have. Tolstoy lacks economic theory, and as a result seems to see wars as a result of the petty vanities and disagreements between our rules. Perhaps true in his time, but I am inclined to think war has always been an economic device. Nevertheless, he was a remarkably visionary author and reads as a voice of sanity crying out in the wilderness, as his era slipped inexorably toward the yawning pit of global catastrophe.

Tolstojus kaip visada įtaigus. Knyga visiems, kurie ieško savo asmeninio tikėjimo. Neapsigaukite dėl pernelyg didelio autoriaus dievobaimingumo - net ir labiausiai užkietėjęs ateistas ras puikios medžiagos apmastymams. Nerealios autoriaus įžvalgos dėl artimiausios ateities ( knyga pabaigta rašyti 1893 metais). Tiesiu taikymu į privalomos literatūros sąrašą

Did I just become an anarchist?

This is a book I think everyone should read, but with the warning that it's like Pandora's box, once you open it there's no putting everything back inside. This book clearly and logically explains that the time for government and organized religion has had its time and place which are now both past, and that the singular way forward is with an ironclad commitment to love and nonviolence.

The subtitle of this book really puts it best. You won't find any mysticism or even any spirituality in this book, only an explanation for why nobody can make sense of our modern society anymore, a new way of seeing the world, and a path for making it fair and uplifting for everyone.

"Ye have heard, it was said of old, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say unto you Resist not evil. But if one smites thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also; and if one will go to law with thee to take thy coat from thee, give him thy cloak also."

I have always said that Jesus Christ is one of the greatest humanists there has ever been and the starting point of many revolutionary ideas. Here Tolstoy attempts to disassociate Christ's teachings from the church and Christianity. I'll let the man speak for himself:

'The conventional positions, established hundreds of years, recognized for centuries and by everyone, distinguished by special names and dresses, and, moreover, confirmed by every kind of solemnity, have so penetrated into men's minds through their senses, that, forgetting the ordinary conditions of life common to all, they look at themselves and everyone only from this conventional point of view, and are guided in their estimation of their own actions and those of others by this conventional standard.

It is principally through this false idea of inequality, and the intoxication of power and of servility resulting from it, that men associated in a state organization are enabled to commit acts opposed to their conscience without the least scruple or remorse. Under the influence of this intoxication, men imagine themselves no longer 
 simply men as they are, but some special beings— noblemen, merchants, governors, judges, officers, tzars, ministers, or soldiers—no longer bound by ordinary human duties, but by other duties far more weighty—the peculiar duties of a nobleman, merchant, governor, judge, officer, tzar, minister, or soldier.'

It's worth mentioning that it's this same book that inspired Ghandi to pursue non-violent protest which led to India's independence, this further inspired the civil rights movement in the U.S with off-shoots all across the world and all because Tolstoy, despite the strangeness of the concept of 'turning the other cheek', firmly believes that it is the only way to emancipate man and return the reign of truth on earth. He is vindicated in every respect. 

I expected this book to be preachy but its actually a brutal attack on the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, the state, the Czar and indeed all institutions that feign acceptance of Jesus' teachings whilst engaging creative ways of sanctioning war or robbing the poor. In his commentary he sites other thinkers who have reached the same conclusion about Christianity one of which I thought was strikingly concise:

'War, too, is a Christian duty. Is it not a Christian duty to kill hundreds of thousands of one's fellow-men, to outrage women, to raze and burn towns, and to practice every possible cruelty? It is time to dismiss all these false sentimentalities. It is the truest means of forgiving injuries and loving enemies. If we only do it in the spirit of love, nothing can be more Christian than such murder. - Adin Ballou, 


It has always struck me as strange that under the guidance of the religion, the state or certain institutions, people of upright character have been somehow deceived into committing the most heinous crimes. Like in the Milgram Experiment where people keep pushing that button because their ability to reason has somehow been transferred to a 'higher authority.' Im always disgusted by UK Judge's who give 7 years imprisonment to pedophiles who have managed to rape their victims because it's written in some book that that is the right response. And on another level bankers take huge bonuses because it's somehow their right and just recently the government increasing student fees three fold and cutting NHS services to deal with the deficit and in the same week advancing millions to save UK Banks in Ireland. I digress but you get the point.

Excellent layout of Tolstoy's theological and Christian principles. While reading this, I constantly wanted to share excerpts and paragraphs of it with social media, but quickly realized I would end up paraphrasing the whole book. There was that much great stuff to say! I had wanted to obtain this book for a little while, after reading Gandhi's autobiography. The Mahatma cites this book as a huge influence on his philosophies and one of his three favorite books of all time. With a recommendation like that, I had to see what was going on within. Main themes are the focus on the teachings of Jesus Christ, citing the Sermon on the Mount as the true Christian code all should live by. Tolstoy believes that a new paradigm of humanity when all are able to ascend to the teachings truly. However, he says there are many who, even though they think they are living the message, are deceiving themselves and others. He states firmly, many times over, that Christianity and Nationalism can never coincide. The idea of a nation sets some apart from others, delivering us away from Christ's message of total global unity. He also says a true Christ follower may never be violent and, therefore, may never support or partake in any war. Thus, a Christian, in Christ's message, may not be a Patriot and he may not be a Soldier. In no conceivable way, would Christ have condoned either of these. Tolstoy also goes on to speak of non-violent resistance and its uses in our struggle against those who have not come to realize their unity between all men and God. He expounds the ideas of his Utopia, which he says, could naturally unfold if we could all act more like the Shepherd instead of the Sheep.