A Confession and Other Religious Writings

by Leo Tolstoy, Aylmer Maude (translator), Louise Maude (translator)

Enter the realm of spiritual introspection with Leo Tolstoy's 'A Confession and Other Religious Writings.' In this profound collection, Tolstoy grapples with the complexities of faith, morality, and the human condition. From his candid exploration of personal doubts and struggles in 'A Confession' to his reflections on Christian ethics and the nature of existence, Tolstoy invites readers on a transformative journey of self-discovery and enlightenment. With timeless wisdom and introspection, these writings continue to resonate with seekers of truth and spiritual seekers alike.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Nonfiction, Classics, Russia, Russian Literature, Theology

252 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1987

About the author

Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (Russian: Лев Николаевич Толстой; most appropriately used Liev Tolstoy; commonly Leo Tolstoy in Anglophone countries) was a Russian writer who primarily wrote novels and short stories. Later in life, he also wrote plays and essays. His two most famous works, the novels War and Peace and Anna Karenina, are acknowledged as two of the greatest novels of all time and a pinnacle of realist fiction. Many consider Tolstoy to have been one of the world's greatest novelists. Tolstoy is equally known for his complicated and paradoxical persona and for his extreme moralistic and ascetic views, which he adopted after a moral crisis and spiritual awakening in the 1870s, after which he also became noted as a moral thinker and social reformer.

His literal interpretation of the ethical teachings of Jesus, centering on the Sermon on the Mount, caused him in later life to become a fervent Christian anarchist and anarcho-pacifist. His ideas on nonviolent resistance, expressed in such works as The Kingdom of God Is Within You, were to have a profound impact on such pivotal twentieth-century figures as Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Reviews

[Ben · Rating 5 out of 5]

Religion is a very personal matter and all too often a very controversial one at that. My ancestors practiced a variety of different faiths, but I was raised in the Catholic Church. I attended Catholic school from kindergarten through the 12th grade and, like many “reformed Catholics,” I swallowed what was fed me at first, without really questioning why it might be good for me or what it might do to me spiritually or psychologically. But with knowledge of the hard and social sciences and evident contradictions in the formal church, I strayed further and further from organized religion.

I know I’ve not addressed Tolstoy’s work yet specifically, but I’m getting to it in a roundabout way, with an introduction to my review that is structurally very similar to the way that Tolstoy opens “A Confession” (the introductory lines of which I include later on). It is perhaps because of my own experiences with organized religion in my youth that I found the work so intriguing. And although I have since distanced myself from Catholicism as an organized religion, it is not something I can really escape from entirely. I can no more escape from Catholic guilt, which was instilled in me from my childhood into my early adult years, than I can from accepting the mathematical truth that 2 + 2 = 4, similar to points made by some of my favorite Catholics in the world of cinema, Federico Fellini, Martin Scorsese and Roger Ebert. Though I was born in a different era, having been raised in a Catholic family and sent to a Catholic school, the rituals and dogmas of the Church are part of the mold in which I was shaped and although I can try to bury them, renounce them or ignore them, I can never erase them, for they were such an essential (if contradictory) part of my life growing up.

For me, one of my earliest disillusionments with organized religion that I can recall occurred at the age of nine. Here’s the background, in brevity: When I was two-years (too young to remember), the priest of our church was embroiled in a sexual abuse scandal involving teenage altar boys in the parish. This was a few decades before sexual abuse in the Catholic Church gained prominence in the national and world headlines, and (as was often the case in those days) the diocese simply swept the matter under the rug and moved the priest to a new parish, where his impulses led him soon enough back to his old ways, only to be once again hushed up by the church hierarchy.

The priest who came in after him was not only a reformer and a new thinker, but he was very critical of the hypocrisy within the church. He often used the pulpit to speak about these injustices, fully aware that the church was giving pedophile priests the opportunity to act again. He wrote letters, met with officials and otherwise caused a good deal of trouble for those higher up. And with his vocal opposition to what the church was doing, he soon began receiving threats on his safety and life in the form of letters and phone calls, some of them originating from those higher up in the church hierarchy. Rather than backing down, this priest informed the parishioners of these threats, which continued to increase. I didn’t realize much of what he spoke of in his sermons as a child, but I recognized that there was a contradiction between what the church preached and what the church, as an organized body, did.

When I was nine-years old I attended the church with my mother (this was a rare occasion, as it was usually my grandmother who took me church) and my mother and many others in the pews wept as the priest delivered his final homily. In it he summed up, with wet eyes, the history of abusive acts committed by the former priest, the actions taken by the church to hide the priest’s crimes and sins, the actions he took as a pastor to bring the actions of the former priest and of the church itself to light and the threats on his life that he had been receiving. In response to the growing threats on his life he announced that he was stepping down from the priesthood. This was a rattling moment for me. Why was a priest who was trying to do something right being threatened by those within the church organization? Isn’t the church supposed to be a voice of moral goodness? It didn’t make sense.

A couple of years later one of the staff members at our school was dismissed for her refusal to stop referring to God as “She.” And this was followed through the years by a number of other contradictions: a progressive nun (who taught us sexual education because she believed that abstinence only policies were nonsensical!) who was fired for her progressive views because her teachings were opposed to Church doctrine, a theology teacher who introduced us to the teachings of Marx and the liberation theologians (things that would never be mentioned from the priest’s pulpit), a theology teacher who organized student protests and a female teacher who was fired for her refusal to condemn homosexuality and later threatened for becoming ordained as a priest, challenging the Catholic Church’s stance that only men can be ordained. People were openly challenging the dogma and hierarchy of the Church, while still embracing faith and what they saw as the essential principles of Christianity (much like Tolstoy).

These events, combined with insights gained through studies of history, anthropology, sociology and the “hard sciences” drew me further and further away from any sort of organized religion. So, with that lengthy, personal, and perhaps roundabout introduction to this review, how does this relate back to Tolstoy?

In this book, A Confession and Other Religious Writings Tolstoy discusses many religious and social ideas – some which I agree with to some extent, and others which I find a bit questionable – ranging from the perversion of Christianity in the hands of the Church (i.e., organized religion is not representative of ‘true religion’); his own path away from religion and back to it; the need to abolish governments, all of which are based on violence; realizing the kingdom of God on earth (very similar to the liberation theologians who would follow); and, most importantly, his search for an answer to the question of the meaning of life. Tolstoy was undoubtedly very polarizing at this time and caused concern particularly for the Russian government, which wanted to censor him but feared that doing so could incite an unwanted response from his many followers.

In works like War & Peace and Anna Karenina characters such as Pierre and Levin sought answers to questions similar to those that Tolstoy posed in many of his religious works and these fictional characters are widely believed to be representative of the author and the struggles that were already beginning in his troubled soul. By the time that his religious writings came around, Tolstoy had renounced many of the literary masterpieces that we have come to know and love him for, seeing them as a shallow attempt to deliver some truth (that he didn’t even know) to the public. Before his great literary achievements were translated in English, Tolstoy was already known for his controversial religious views in much of the Western world.

Today, as society seems to be moving further away from religion, it is Tolstoy’s great works of fiction that he is remembered for, and his religious and philosophical works – which first established his reputation in the West – have in many ways become obscured. Though it was existential and religious questions that Tolstoy was mostly concerned with even in his fictional works, at least as much time and effort (probably more) is spent discussing Tolstoy’s art (his writing style and use of repetition and very short sentences), his character development, and so on. And when we do discuss his philosophy, it is often as it is represented by his rich characters and their existential struggles (like Levin, Pierre or Prince Andrei) or his views on free will and determinism, as laid out in War & Peace. But it was his views on religion that Tolstoy wanted most to be remembered for (hence when he thought he was close to death he took up a pen and wrote down his last thoughts on religion, which he felt he very much needed to share with the world, as represented by the last essay in this collection, “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence,” which he concludes succinctly with the words, “This is what I wanted to say to my fellow men before I die”).

This collection of essays contains several pieces of a religious nature. They include (in order): “A Confession”; “What is Religion and of What Does Its Essence Consist?”; “Religion and Morality”; and “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence.” The essays are followed with helpful endnotes courtesy of the translator, Jane Kentish.

“A Confession” begins:

“I was baptized and brought up in the Orthodox Christian faith. I was instructed in it both as a child and throughout my boyhood and youth. But when at the age of eighteen I left university in my second year, I no longer believed in any of the things I had been taught. . . . Judging from various memories, I had never believed very seriously but had merely trusted in what I was taught and in what was professed by my elders; but this trust was very unstable.”

Perhaps I was hooked from the beginning because I could very much relate – but whereas Tolstoy has made his way back to religion (though rejecting the Church), I continue to struggle with questions about the meaning of life, though less resolutely than Tolstoy. As the piece unfolded, it felt to me very personal. Tolstoy shared his doubts about the merits of his artistic works and even admitted that suicide was an idea that often presented itself to him in moments of grave existential uncertainty.

Reading this piece was like having a very personal conversation with a close friend. At times I disagreed with his reasoning – as I have in my readings of others like Freud and Hegel, who have also presented me with ideas that I have questioned but have nonetheless caused me to reevaluate my own philosophical positions – and other times I agreed wholeheartedly (as was the case with passages such as: “Nowadays, as before, the public declaration and confession of Orthodoxy is usually encountered among dull-witted, cruel and immoral people who tend to consider themselves very important. Whereas intelligence, honesty, straightforwardness, good-naturedness and morality are qualities usually found among people who claim to be non-believers” or “[I]n much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow”).

Tolstoy concludes in this piece:

“I had come to faith because apart from it I had found nothing, absolutely nothing, other than destruction; it was therefore impossible to give up faith, and so I submitted. . . .”

For him, faith in God was necessary to live. But, I do not think this is the case for all and I think it is possible to find meaning in life outside of religion.

The second piece, “What is Religion and of What Does Its Essence Consist?” was also a very fascinating essay, and I again found myself nodding in agreement at times and other times arguing with the author in my mind, just as before. Namely I felt that some of his points about religion – such as the claim that it has been around from the beginning of humankind – run contrary to today’s anthropological consensus. But his arguments were very interesting even if not always entirely agreeable.

In this essay he presents a definition of religion: “a relationship established between man, everlasting life, and God in conformity with reason and contemporary knowledge, and which alone pushed humanity forwards to its destined aim.” He also raises many points that were then and continue to be provocative, points raised before him by many of the Deists (notably Jefferson and Paine), about such things as St. Paul’s perversion and misrepresentation of Christ’s teachings, and the illogical/nonsensical teachings of the Church (including, but not limited to “the creation of light before the sun, the creation of the world six thousand years ago, the housing of all of the animals in the ark . . . the various immoral atrocities [of the Old Testament] . . . . the absurdity of the sacrament of . . . eating your own God” and so on).

In the very short piece, “Religion and Morality,” written in 1893, Tolstoy attempts to provide answers to questions put to him by a German ethical cultural society about his understanding of the word ‘religion’ (a definition provided in the previous essay and reiterated here) and whether or not he feels that morality can exist outside of religion – he does not. On this matter I again disagreed with many of the points used in his argument, but appreciated the fact that he got my mental processes set in motion at full speed. For a great writer (like a great filmmaker for that matter) needs not write something that one agrees with, but need only make a compelling or moving case. I am troubled by the racist elements of many of the films of John Ford and by D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation as much as I am by some of Freud’s racist and sexist views and by Hegel’s conclusions in Reason in History but these are works with great artistic and/or philosophic merit. They may be “unenlightened,” as film critic Roger Ebert writes of Ford’s films, but they are still great works of art. And great works of art and philosophy are not “perfect,” but they do what they do well, using imagery, poetry or arguments that make a compelling case or make an impact on one’s life and outlook. Tolstoy’s views in this particular piece, and elsewhere, are a bit troubling for me, but his arguments are well-constructed and well-supported and he challenges me – as just one of his many readers – to see the world in a different way. I found myself underlining passages, making notes in the margins and dog-earring pages as much, if not more, when I disagreed with something as when I found myself approving of Tolstoy’s line of reasoning.

The final essay in this collection, “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence,” was written near the end of Tolstoy’s life, in 1908, and its critique of organized religion (namely Christianity) is as damning as, if not more so than his earlier religious essays. Again, there is much here that challenges my own worldviews and religious outlook, but the work is in many ways prophetic and Tolstoy’s well-supported and incendiary arguments against the Church are spot on. Tolstoy’s arguments against slavery and capitalism in this essay are very similar to those made by Marx, another great nineteenth century thinker. But whereas Marx is a materialist, Tolstoy’s approach is, as Jane Kentish writes in the introduction: “spiritual, anti-materialist, based on universal truths of love, non-violence and moral perfection.”

In this essay Tolstoy takes aim at class oppression, the exploitation of the poor and working classes at the hands of the rich and very notably against the hypocrisy of so-called Christian nations and their embrace of things such as war and militarism, police brutality and capital punishment.

At the heart of all these essays are questions of religion and life purpose and an embrace of Christian principles—the necessity of creating the kingdom of God on earth and the importance of the Golden Rule and Christ’s ‘Sermon on the Mount’ more than any other teaching(s), i.e., the necessity of non-violence in all cases.

In many ways, as can be evidenced from these essays, Tolstoy’s ideas were shaped by thinkers before him, including Blaise Pascal, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, the Deists and others. Many of his ideas were not new in the world, but he revived and refined them and brought these controversial issues to the forefront in late 19th century and early 20th century Russia and also to places like India, where Tolstoy and the non-violent civil disobedience of Henry David Thoreau, would shape the philosophies of the young M.K. Gandhi (whose life was captured wonderfully in film by director Richard Attenborough, who just yesterday passed). And they would also find expression in some of the liberation theologians (though some have been more willing to embrace violence in self-defense than Tolstoy ever would have permitted) and the teachings of Martin Luther King.

War & Peace might be considered Leo Tolstoy’s magnum opus. Anna Karenina is up there, too (undoubtedly among the greatest novels of the 19th century, and likely of all time). But these were not the works for which Tolstoy wanted to be remembered. Not only as a service to him, but to ourselves, Tolstoy’s philosophical and religious works deserve to be read at least once if not repeatedly. And perhaps my own experiences with religion and the contradictions of the church and my general interests in matters of philosophy, ethics and religion make me more interested than others would be. Yet even if not for the merits of the ideas themselves, from a literary perspective these essays deserve to be read as a key to the torments experienced by characters like Levin and Pierre on their paths of spiritual development.

It is unlikely that many readers today will agree with all or even most of what Tolstoy preaches in these works. But, I think it can be agreed that, as in his works of fiction, Tolstoy here proves his thoroughness, craft and skill as a writer and thinker capable of not only setting the workings of the mind in motion, but also the inner-workings of the soul, which can but needn’t have solely a religious connotation.

[Sarah Far · Rating 3 out of 5]

حقیقت خود را به شکل عشق نشان می‌دهد

این کتاب، رمان نبود،داستان هم نبود،نوشته هایی بود در مورد

ایمان
هر کجا و هر مردمی را می‌دیدم،به این نتیجه رسیدم
هر کجا ایمان باشد زندگی نیز وجود دارد
خداوند
خداوند زندگی‌ست،او همین جاست،در جستجوی او باش و زندگی کن

خودکشی و مرگ:

انسان خردمند در تمام دوران زندگی مرگ را می جوید و از مرگ هراسی ندارد

و خودکشی،حقیقت،زندگی و سوالهایی
مانند:
من کیستم؟چیستم؟ و چه فرقی با دیگران میتووانم داشته باشم؟من کجای جهان قرار دارم؟


هر چند که تولستوی ادعا نمیکند پاسخ همه ی این سوالات را میداند،بلکه به طور بسته میگوید که هر انسانی خود باید به دنبال سوالاتش باشد و هرگز حقیقت کامل به دست نمی آید(حرفی که همیشه خودم بهش ایمان داشتم)

این کتاب کوتاه رو به دوستانی پیشنهاد میکنم که دنبال این چنین سوالاتی هستند و در آستانه ی بیهودگی،پوچی و بی معنایی زندگی!

صد در صد این کتاب و کلا کتاب برای چنین سوالاتی کافی نیست،چون باید خود جستجو کنید و هر کس به قدرِ فهمِ خود :)

هرکسی از ظن خود شد یار من/ از درون من نجست اسرار من

[grace · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was enjoyable to read some non-fic from Tolstoy after being a fan of his fiction work for so long. This book is definetly an interesting read if you are interested in theology /philosophy and though I didn't agree with all of what he wrote, Tolstoy's way of words and cathartic reflections certainly made it a book worth reading.

[Sean Wilson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Passionate writings on simple living through the literal teachings of Jesus Christ, philosophical essays on religious morality, violence, love, anarchism and existential despair. Tolstoy writes beautifully and honestly. An incredible collection of essays, although The Law of Love and Law of Violence is certainly the weakest of the four.

[Frankie · Rating 3 out of 5]

In these essays Tolstoy came across to me as slightly fractured and confusing, even at times egotistical and condescending. Contrary to his definition of faith, I got the impression that he has too much faith in man. He deserves credit, however, for some simply brilliant points. Anyone with even a layman's knowledge of Gandhi's life should have respect for Tolstoyan non-violent activism.

His first real admirable conclusion falls at the end of chapter two of the Confession essay. He speaks on the dissipation of the printed work and the steadily decreasing impact of the author in a mass media society. His suggestion that a writer only strokes his ego and garners praise without any real impact hits close to home. He moves through his confession in a seeming attempt to disregard and make fallible science and industry. I'm not sure his arguments and reasoning move beyond the assessment that - yes, science is fallible. For those who have admitted this to themselves, there is not much to glean from Tolstoy's arguments.

In fact, I agree with him on 90% of his points. Yes, atheism and "church Christianity" are led my immature and dissipated idiots. The view here that frightens me is Tolstoy's apocalyptic vision of man's slide into perdition. If we take the abolition of slavery as an example, could we really say that there is no progress without repentance? Is everything always getting worse? I don't agree.

The final essay "The Law of Love and the Law of Violence" is wonderfully written. It's easy to see where Gandhi was influenced. It is a bit redundant, but only in the sense of a carefully planned socio-cultural formula or treatise. Each chapter builds on the premise a little more. The only problem with this work is its failure to reference quotations, but there is a long footnote regarding this in the intro.

[Maughn Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

I started reading Tolstoy’s religious writings after reading Gandhi credit them as a powerful influence on his own life. (The two corresponded, and Gandhi named his ashram in South Africa “Tolstoy Farm.” The translator of this edition states that Tolstoy's most lasting influence was in India, through Gandhi.) My appraisal:

Tolstoy’s example of following his conscience against religious and political conventionalism is inspiring.

His autobiographical "Confession," detailing his growing despair over his felt recognition of the spiritual degradation of his enormous wealth and fame, and his discovery of peace and joy in a life of renunciation, simplicity, and service to the poor, is good pedagogy.

His polemics against Darwin and Nietzsche are largely wrong: Darwin is irrelevant and Tolstoy’s critique of the Russian church uses Nietzsche’s own hammer.

His promotion of non-superstitious supernaturalism is oxymoronic.

His critique of much organized religion as collective, “tribal” self-interest and chauvinism is exactly right.

His insistence that the morality of self-salvation (concern for wellbeing and suffering) is inconsistent with self-sacrifice for others is utterly mistaken.

His articulation of non-violent social disruption is game-changing: it was one of the roots of Gandhi’s work (and so of King, Nhat Hahn, Mandela, etc.).

His insight that a better life requires inner work for a change of consciousness is the fundamental truth that all wisdom traditions urge.

Tolstoy wrote:

“The Law of human life is such that the improvement of it, whether for the individual or for society, is only possible through inner, moral perfection. All the efforts people make to improve their lives through violent external behavior towards one another serve as the most potent form of propaganda and example of evil, and do not improve life, but, on the contrary, increase the evil which gathers size like a snowball and increasingly alienates people from the only possible way of genuinely improving their lives.” (123)

“[T]he people of the Christian world live like animals, guided in life by nothing other than personal interests and mutual strife; and they are only differentiated \ from the animals by the fact that since time immemorial animals have kept the same stomachs, claws and fangs, while humanity moves, ever more rapidly, from dirt roads to railroads, from horses to steam, from spoken sermons and letters to the printing press, telegraph and telephone; from sailing boats to ocean liners; from side arms to gunpowder, cannons, machine guns, bombs and bomber planes. And life with telegraphs, telephones, electricity, bombs and aeroplanes, and with enmity between all peoples, who are guided not by some unifying spiritual principle but by alienating animal instincts, and who use intellectual faculties for their own pleasure, is becoming more and more futile and calamitous.” (159-60)

[Paul H. · Rating 1 out of 5]

Somehow even worse than I expected. Tolstoy is a very, very good novelist; he is a hilariously naive and inconsistent theologian.

There's a reason that people generally don't listen to Nietzsche's piano compositions (to be fair, they aren't THAT bad); genius in one creative field certainly does not necessarily equate to genius in other creative fields. (See also Einstein's writings on religion, Borges's poetry, James Wood's novels, etc.)

Obviously everyone is free to maintain any sort of faith whatsoever, even if I happen to disagree with them -- indeed, I've spent a significant amount of my life reading theology that I disagree with -- but I can respect Tolstoy's faith while recognizing that the written development of his views should not, imo, be even remotely noteworthy or interesting to anyone except Tolstoy himself.

[Kristin · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Like all madmen, I thought everyone was mad but myself." - Tolstoy

[jess b · Rating 1 out of 5]

These essays are a mess. It's just two hundred pages of Tolstoy trying to tell us that God for sure exists (but only in precisely the way Tolstoy has decided that God exists) through a series of self-referential logical fallacies. Occasionally he'll start to touch on something interesting (mostly his discussions on religion and societal inequality—the final essay, "The Law of Love and the Law of Violence", is the best of the four for this, but that's not saying much). But this only lasts a page or two before he's right back to "no rational being has ever lived without religion because a being cannot be rational and live without religion" or whatever circular nonsense. Condescending, redundant, unsubstantiated. It's honestly baffling to me that so many people seem to think these are worth reading.

[Seraj Mahdi · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5, brilliant book. It's unfortunate my moving interrupted my flow with the book. Either way, Tolstoy makes many great points about the idea and utility of religious thought. Many of which I think would be advantageous to anyone, whether they are believers or non-believers, especially today.

[James Violand · Rating 1 out of 5]

Tolstoy is known as one of the world’s favorite authors. But when you learn of his later life, your opinion of him changes. After War and Peace, Anna Karenina and other novels, he went off the deep end. He abandoned his loyal wife and family, dismissed all claims to royalties from his novels (thereby impoverishing his wife) and became an introspective jerk who questioned every established entity. Government, religion, philosophy, science – all he ridiculed because he intellectually couldn’t find the Truth behind any and turned away from it all. He experimented with trying to be a serf, but gave that up as he did every vocation he previously espoused. Lenin celebrated Tolstoy’s influential passivism as partly responsible for the Russian Revolution.
In this book, one confronts the inherent inconsistency of a Confession: the dichotomy between false modesty and braggadocio. The writer asserts his unworthiness, while demanding the focal point of attention. His thoughts are paramount to all previous existence. His conundrum is the ultimate because no one thought as deeply as he has done ever before. Tolstoy became dissatisfied with everything because he understood nothing.
What a disappointment.

[JCJBergman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tolstoy's "A Confession" is a captivating read that I found myself exponentially relating to - my love of this first essay is the only reason why I have rated the book four stars. The rest of the essays are not as intellectually strong. Tolstoy, after undergoing years of depression as an atheist, becomes a Christian based on the fact that Christian values are preferable for the individual and collective society when compared with secular efforts. Now, I agree with this conclusion, but that does not make the existence of God vindicated, nor does it serve as sufficient evidence in of itself that Christianity is the correct religion.

My problem is that Tolstoy as an atheist was intellectually rigorous at the expense of his depression, but it felt as if he could not cope with life without following God and Christianity so he sort of just decided to believe in it all. In other words, his criticality of which I loved reading in his "A Confession" completely disintegrates in his later writings on the subject. True, he admits that the existence of God is not reducible to a set of premises (I partially agree), but the fact that he just jumps to the other side merely because he can't cope with the alternative is intellectually shameful and utterly embarrassing.

[Bram · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Confession = 5 stars.

What Is Religion and of What Does Its Essence Consist? = 3.5 stars.

Religion and Morality = 3 stars.

The Law of Love and the Law of Violence = 5 stars.

[Jack Chambers · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really fantastic explanation of the logic behind faith and love. Also, his vehement hatred of all things government makes my heart sing.

[Kassandra Cornejo · Rating 4 out of 5]

he just like me fr fr

[Alexis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Don't be fooled by the rating. I ADORED "A Confession" and loved "What Is Religion and of What Does Its Essence Consist?". I didn't get into "Religion and Morality" so much, but I definitely enjoyed "The Law of Love and the Law of Violence" quite a bit. This seems like a good time to say I consider myself agnostic if I consider myself religious at all; it did not detract from the read. I found myself agreeing with the majority of his sentiments, and I have the annotations to prove it. I actually think there are maybe two pages of "A Confession" that I didn't highlight and doodle all over.

I really didn't know what I was getting into with this read. I aquired it at a library sale. I've loved the fiction I've read from Tolystoy, so I decided why not? I'm glad I did.

"A Confession" is an extraordinarily dark and personal piece. In it, Tolstoy talks about becoming disenchanted with religion and struggling to find meaning in life to the extent that he came to view suicide as the only rational action he could take. His contemplation of suicide is lengthy and extremely bleak. I have to imagine it could be triggering for people. What saves him is that after an extended quest to search for meaning in the sciences, he comes to the conclusion that meaning can only be found in religion. The rest of the writings go on from there, and genuinely, the thought that he put into the pieces is so clear.

What's striking is not that he finds meaning in religion but rather how he defines religion, which he differentiates from morality at some length, but I have to say, I still see as essentially morality. He believed that we all have God inside us and that that is our religion, essentially a force guiding us towards a moral life. That's how I took it, anyway.

He is pretty damning of organized religion and especially of how it has been warped to encourage violence. In his view, the ultimate message of religion is unity, and he was disgusted by the way it was used and is used instead to divide people. He writes about corruption and the way religions evolve, and it reads really well even now - maybe especially now.

Where these writings let me down a bit was just in their repetition. It sometimes felt like he was drawing a circle with words and just couldn't stop. I think this is particularly true with "Religion and Morality".

Still, this collection delighted me. I could never have predicted how much of it would resonate when I picked it up. His discussions of classism, violence, corruption, and morality feel as timely as ever. I'm really, really glad I picked it up.

[Oliver Sime]

Tolstoy's use of narrative in his self discovery makes for a good read. It is fascinating to hear one of the greatest writers of all time refer to himself with such humility.

[Sean · Rating 4 out of 5]

“A Confession and Other Religious Writings” by Leo Tolstoy is a book that I’ve carried around with me for a while. I would pick it up, read bits of it intensely, and then forget about it. Then I would have to go back and restart the book. I finally resolved to sit down with a pencil in hand it get through it. I am very glad that I did. Most people know Tolstoy as the author of “War and Peace” and “Anna Karenina,” two of the best books in the Western literary canon. But there was another side to Tolstoy—a Christian mystic and religious thinker—a side I think will have a much more lasting influence in the long run.

This collection, excellently translated by Jane Kentish, collects four of his most important religious pieces: “A Confession” (1879), “Religion and Morality” (1893), “What Is Religion and What Does its Essence Consist Of?” (1902), and “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence” (1908). Taken together, we see the insights of a profoundly sensitive writer who saw the inequality, violence, and poverty around him and called upon humanity to realize their true spiritual nature and practice love and non-violence. His conceptions of non-violence had a deep impact on Gandhi and his concept of satyagraha. His critiques of society, capitalism, and institutionalized religion had some influence of are trenchant and worth contemplating.

Tolstoy was a popular writer, but he was profoundly unsettled with questions about the meaning of life. He had achieved more than most people but was still profoundly unhappy. He documents his slow, tortured journey to realization in “A Confession.” I won’t go into too many specifics, but I will note a few points that stood out to me. First, the idea that all states and societies are predicated on the idea of violence and the only way to meet violence is with non-cooperation with violence. Second, his conception of religion is central to his conception of humanity. He believes all human beings have a religious impulse. Third, Tolstoy places great emphasis on reason and wants a religion that accords with his reason. Fourth, when you understand Tolstoy’s life, you realize that he tried to practice what he wrote—renouncing his noble titles, working as a peasant on a farm, and trying to live out the commands of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. Out of the four pieces, I found that I liked “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence” the best because it seems to capture the essence of his writings the most and gives the reader the clearest call to action.
His religious writings are challenging, and they do not fall neatly into any ideological mold. In that way, he reminds me of Rabindranath Tagore and Simon Weil. His clarity of thought, willingness to stake out difficult positions, and his ability to raise complex questions is very refreshing

[Carey Chalifour · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had read through a few other books in which Tolstoy had been mentioned as a 'great christian man.' As I picked up this work of his I had hoped to be challenged in my faith and strengthened in the out workings of it. As I began his Confessions I was able to relate in someways to his questionings of mans purpose and the journey that took him on however where he ended up I find very sad. Instead of realizing that we were created by God with the purpose of Glorifying Him and enjoying Him forever through the reconciling work of His Son, Jesus, and by the power of the Indwelling Spirit of God, Tolstoy ended up lifting from the Word of God portions of Scripture that fit with the Idol he had created for himself. From there he carried the heavy burden of pursuing moral perfection down the road of all false religions, which can never reach the hoped for destination of communion with God. He did correctly point out some flaws and corruptions in the Eastern Orthodox Church, but he clearly missed the straight line of Church that points straight to Christ.

[B · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of my very favorite books on religion. Tolstoy's vision, which is a surprisingly fierce sort of theism which openly admits that the existence of God is unverifiable, finds its strength in its focus on the law of love and in its stark rejection of the "supernatural" and "senseless" dimensions of faith. His opposition to the dogmas of fundamentalism ("Church Christianity") combined with his insistence on an experiential life of meaning has a remarkable feel of authenticity. Equally attractive is his utter rejection of physical or mental coercion in the spiritual life. While his writing is sometimes a bit disorganized and rambling, his incisive questioning combined with his eruptions of clarity make this book a thoroughly worthwhile read.

[Javier · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tolstoy's Confession is incredible. He was so honest about aspects of life that I think perhaps we do contemplate from time to time, but tend to keep inside. I greatly appreciate his candor. I can see the affinities between the Confession and The Death of Ivan Ilych.

I generally agree with Tolstoy's Christian-anarchist argumentation here. The only major criticism I would have is that, at times, Tolstoy holds that one must of necessity have (Christian) faith in order to progress toward this liberated future, while at others he contradicts himself, stating that the same principles of love and mutual aid can be found in all religions.

I find his dismissal of socialism and communism to be too quick. Yet it is clear that he is an anarchist.

[Jill Hudson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having thoroughly enjoyed 'War and Peace' and 'Anna Karenina' I was already convinced that Tolstoy was a literary genius. But I didn't know he was a spiritual genius as well! This rather forbidding-looking book is like the Tardis. Though I don't agree with all of his conclusions (he does seem to throw out quite a few babies wih his bathwater) this man's insight into the Christian faith and its implications is astonishing.

[Diyanah · Rating 4 out of 5]

This collection of four essays is a deeply profound view of Tolstoy’s journey into religion and faith as he ponders on the question of what life is worth living for. For a fictional novelist, I found his philosophical ideas to be fuelled with surprising clarity and keen moral urgency. Still, his eloquence does fail to draw attention away from argumentative weaknesses and philosophical misinterpretations of Eastern religions in the final two essays.

[Andrew Calderon · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book changed my life. It has invariably altered it in ways I can't even begin to fathom.

My only hope is that if you read it, the same or even something approaching my experience will impress itself upon you.

[Mengsen Zhang · Rating 4 out of 5]

I immediately ordered this book after coming across a pungent quote from "A Confession" on twitter:"[...] thousands of us, contradicting and abusing one another, published and wrote with the aim of teaching others. Failing to notice that we knew nothing, that we did not know the answers to the most basic question of life -- what is good and what is evil -- we all spoke at the same time, never listen to one another. At times we indulged and praised each other in order be indulged and praised in return, at other times we grew angry and shrieked at each other, just as if we were in a madhouse", which resonated with my personal experience with modern academia. The book turns out to take on a much bigger theme that is the meaning of life. Despite what the title implies, I did not expect myself, a scientist, to carefully go through a book on religion.

Note, however, Tolstoy uses the word "religion" in a rather abstract, or as what I would call philosophical, sense: "[a rational person] must establish a relation to the immediate issues of life, a relation to the entire infinite universe in time and space, conceiving of it as a whole. " (chap 2, part 2), and "true religion is that relationship, in accordance with reason and knowledge, which man establishes with the infinite world around him, and which binds his life to that infinity and guides his actions" (chap 3, part 2). This definition of religion is quite intriguing to me because it is how I think about physics. Is it not the goal of the best of physics to establish a consistent relationship between transient events one measures in his/her finite life to the immutable laws of the universe? And for that matter, science, art, poetry, music, and conversations are all means in which we establish our relationship with the infinite world. This is where I depart from Tolstoy's discourse, especially in the second half of the book.

The book consists of four writings: "A confession", "What is religion and of what does its essence consist?", "Religion and morality", and "The law of love and the law of violence".

In "A confession", Tolstoy describes his profound existential crisis -- at a time when he had all the fortune, fame, and family life one would ever want, nothing could distract him anymore from the meaninglessness of life; then he found that all religious teachings said the same: life is meaningless if it does not establish a relation with infinity. This part hits very close to home with respect to my personal crisis many years ago, which did not turn me to religion but instead, to a very different way of looking at and participating in science than my earlier naive conception. In "What is religion and of what does its essence consist?", he gave the aforementioned definition of religion and an analysis of how it endows one the meaning of life, which I found intriguing philosophically. In the latter half of the book, however, his writing became quite repetitive, occasionally making profound statements followed by a lot of wishful thinking, e.g. predicting an imminent, large-scale spiritual awakening of the people, which appears particularly naive from 100 years later. Further, in contrast to his earlier claim of universality of the pursue of the meaning of life through religious means, he argued later in the book that True Christianity is the only way to go, yet I found his description of True Christianity more in line with ancient eastern writings such as the Upanishads.

All that being said, I recommend this book to all my friends who wonder about the meaning of life religiously or non-religiously, and hope to have some discussions about it.

[Trenton · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

I think people would be surprised at Tolstoy if they read his religious writings. His stance is much more in line with the view that God is man’s relationship with the universe and that the miracles/divinity of Jesus are far fetched (despite on the flip side being very anti science and education due to its correlation with the wealthy minority) - however the foundation of all his religious writings can be summarized by Jesus’ “love your enemy and turn the other cheek”.

At its best I am reminded that political weaponizing of religion is nothing new, and that sadly the majority of “Christians” fall into that bucket - focused more on nationalism and the state than the actual teachings of Jesus. Tolstoy’s pacifism always challenges me, especially with its focus on “zero exceptions” in a time where both political sides support wars - and his support of Jesus’ character makes it all the stronger. As someone with many family members falling into what he would call “the impoverished majority”, I also appreciate some of his more anti-system takes.

On the contrary, Tolstoy’s thoughts are often jumbled and more radical than I would agree with. He’s very anti government and anti all institutions - although his perspective is 1800s Russia so that may explain it. I also don’t agree with all of his religious interpretations, but obviously that’s okay

Overall, Tolstoy is preaching two things that I think most people can support: 1) love one another 2) the change has to start with you internally, focus on that rather than trying to change others.

[Patrick Bolt · Rating 3 out of 5]

this book has a really strong first half. Tolstoy then hits you with a huge let down and finds the meaning of life in christianity. that’s fine and all it’s just interesting to see how much has changed over the last century. it’s not that Tolstoys solutions to life’s struggles are outdated, it’s more that the atrocities that immediately follow the publication of this book display the harms of buying completely into religion and making it your life’s meaning. this can be incredibly misguided, i know he’s preaching non violence and condemning christian’s who kill, but it is interesting to leave out the appalling treatment of slaves under christianity. i have the sense that everything he’s saying may be true it’s just that the conduit of religion to provide value to peoples lives has been outgrown, we look more toward science and progress rather than religion and idealism. i’m not sure if that’s for the better but things en masse have become better in terms of the general collective struggle of people.

[Zhou · Rating 4 out of 5]

普通当代人面对的不再是是否参军，是否杀人，是否作恶这样深刻的挣扎，而是更加petty更加mean的甚至不值得被称为挣扎的一种挣扎。
Tolstoy真是超理想主义啊

‘The salvation of men from oppression, enslavement and ignorance will not be achieved through resolutions, nor through trade unions or world congresses, but through the simplest of methods: by every single person who is called upon to participate in violence over his fellow men and his own self recognising the true spiritual “I” within himself, and asking in amazement, “Well, why should I do that?”’

[Checo Zamudio · Rating 5 out of 5]

Grandiosas reflexiones de Leo Tolstoy en las que se buscan el sentido de la vida y la manera correcta de vivir la "religión verdadera".

[Lucas Smith · Rating 2 out of 5]

Trying to construct a Christian morality without acknowledging Christ’s miracles is sort of like driving a car that can only make left turns.