What kind of good should be - with or without fists? In what cases does an Orthodox Christian have the right to use physical force, and does he have it at all? How to make the right choice in a difficult situation?
I do not want to return now to the problem of such a “reading” of the Gospel and the Holy Fathers - experience shows that for those who profess “Orthodoxy with fists”, any arguments “against the fists” are not valid. But in the process of communicating with some of them, as well as simply with people trying to understand this problem, one, as it turned out, disturbing question for many emerged: does a Christian have no right to use physical force at all? And if suddenly it does, then when, in what cases?
The question, if you look at it abstractly, is even a little funny, but at the same time it is quite relevant for a believer today. And not only because someone needs to fight sexual minorities and destroy clubs or defend churches from blasphemers. But simply - our time is still not the calmest, and aggressive, pugnacious people are often found, and in general - different things happen, just read the reports of incidents.
On the one hand, there is a commandment, the existence of which cannot be unknown to any person who has read the Gospel at least once - it is so amazing, it so overturns our usual ideas about protecting one’s own honor and dignity. “Whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also” (Matthew 5:39).
On the other hand, with regard to these words of the Savior, confusion very often arises: should they really be understood literally, or is this an allegory? Indeed, next to this commandment there are several more, the exact fulfillment of which is no less, and perhaps even more difficult: “Whoever wants to sue you and take your shirt, give him your outer clothing, and whoever forces you to go alone with him the field, go with him two” (Matthew 5:40–41).
You turn your left cheek, and then they’ll completely blow your head off... You’ll give away your outer clothing, and then you’ll catch a cold and die, because there’s no other one. If you agree to go with anyone who forces you, you will spend your whole life just walking, there will be no time or strength left for anything else.
Of course, there were saints who, just as every commandment, every word of Christ, decided to fulfill in the most literal sense, they also fulfilled these commandments. But we see more of those who understood them rather spiritually. So the Monk Ambrose of Optina wrote: “Look, it says here “who will hit you on the right cheek,” but this is inconvenient, they usually hit you on the left - with the right hand.”
And he further explained that, from his point of view, the Lord is speaking here about a situation where they have offended, insulted, slandered us undeservedly and we are ready to be indignant and rebel, because we consider ourselves innocent victims, we are right! This is the right cheek. But we also have a left side - our misdeeds, sins, passions, which are known primarily only to God and for which we did not properly suffer and were not punished. So remember, when you are not guilty, what you are guilty of, and understand that one “balances” the other. And does it balance?
Returning to the question of how to understand the commandment, literally or not, we must first of all understand that we are talking here about the most important thing, about the principle - “do not resist evil.” And not just “do not resist”, but like this: “you have heard that it was said: an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you...” (Matthew 5:38-39). “Do not resist,” that is, do not multiply the evil that already exists and operates - with your own evil.
From this position, even the most “just” revenge is meaningless and sinful: it multiplies evil at least twice. From this position, whenever there is such an opportunity, it is better to step aside, retreat and yield. When is there such an opportunity... And when is it there and when is it not? Here's what to find out!
If we carefully examine the lives of a variety of saints, we can see that with all their desire to “not resist evil,” they were extremely far from what is called “Tolstoyanism” in our time. Naturally, the saints stood until their blood (their own) against inciting them to betray their faith, against schisms and heresies. But besides that, someone, likewise, blessed the army for the battle against foreign invaders.
Someone very decisively polemicized with fellow believers on various fundamental aspects of church life from his point of view, such as the Venerables Nil of Sorsky and Joseph of Volotsky. Someone could take an extremely firm position on one or another, not only and not so much a church issue, but on a state, public or social issue. There are countless examples here - Chrysostom, and, and...
One ancient ascetic, when gladiator fights resumed in his city, already a Christian empire, ran into the arena and began to separate the fighting warriors. The angry crowd followed him into the arena and simply tore him to pieces. And when she retreated back, people saw with horror that in a fit of madness they had killed the saint they revered. And no more gladiator fights were held in that city...
But it is difficult to find a saint who would bless in peacetime, not wartime, the reprisal of any wicked people and sinners, and especially who would take part in such reprisal. But the saints could well, it seemed, do this if necessary, not out of passion, but simply based on the words of the Apostle Jude: “But save others through fear...” (Jude 1:23). But they didn’t. And therefore, it’s not worth it for us, sinners.
And yet, there are circumstances when a Christian can and even must act with the use of force. What are these circumstances and how do we understand that we are in them and are not mistaken?
The Venerable Abba Dorotheos cites one patristic rule, perhaps familiar to us simply as worldly wisdom: “When you are presented with two evils to choose from, then you must choose the lesser.” And of the two goods, accordingly, the greater. So a believer then has the right to “physical influence” when it is the lesser of two evils.
Why has the Church from time immemorial blessed the war against the invaders who came to enslave our people? Because of his “merging with power”? No, due to the fact that no matter how horror, no matter how madness the war may be, “surrendering to the mercy of the winner” is even greater horror and even greater madness. Firstly, because mercy in such conditions is more than doubtful, and secondly, because refusal to protect the Fatherland would make its capture overly attractive for any aggressor and they would simply replace one another.
But you can fight in different ways, you can do it in a pagan way, or you can do it in a Christian way. And this is not a play on words. In fact, in war you can kill with hatred and even some kind of perverted pleasure, or you can kill with sorrow and compassion. One of my acquaintances, in the recent past the head of a fairly large federal special forces unit, told his soldiers:
You should not hate your enemies, even those you kill. Otherwise... you will be no different from them.
It somehow sounds wonderful, beautiful-hearted to the point of absurdity, you can only shrug your shoulders and turn around to hide a smile from such a person, who himself probably doesn’t know what he’s talking about. There is only one “but”: he has many years of service in Alpha, business trips to Chechnya, the release of hostages...
He personally, after his group entered Nord-Ost, leaving behind only the corpses of the militants guarding the entrance, had to go through the ranks and eliminate the female suicide bombers at point-blank range. He did this without hatred, professionally, guided by the same principle of “greater or lesser evil”: if one of them had woken up, then each would have taken with it the lives of several dozen innocent people. Such a terrible debt...
But besides war or participation in some special operation to “enforce peace” or to preserve it, there are cases when the use of force, based on the above-mentioned principle, is justified. For example, they beat a person in front of our eyes on the street. What to do? You look around and don’t see anyone who could come to your aid. Your verbal calls to stop the beating change absolutely nothing. You see how a body thrown to the ground is kicked, how this body contracts from pain, you hear how a person cries from it.
What's left for you? Or - what would you want from a random passerby if it were your body? We would like active actions that would put an end to this nightmare. This means that you also need to somehow decide on these actions. What exactly they will be depends on many factors, starting with your physical fitness and ending with the psychological characteristics of the one you are trying to stop. It is possible, however, that you will intervene, but you will get it yourself.
Or another example. What is quite real today: some attackers broke into the temple and intend to desecrate it. Should they be prevented, should they be stopped by force? Of course it is necessary. But what is the extent of the use of this force, will the temple not be desecrated in the same way by a gladiatorial fight with the participation of parishioners or guards capable of this fight?
The answer to this question can only be given by the conscience of a Christian who finds himself in a specific situation and is forced to act according to circumstances. (In general, the technical solution in this case should be a “panic button”, and the absence of it is an unforgivable bungling.)
A separate topic is what to do if something (or someone) threatens not the Church, not our neighbor, but us personally. Should I still turn the other cheek, or evade, or fight back? The question is not only separate, but also extremely difficult. After all, on the one hand, here too we can remember those sins for which this one beating us is not the greatest reward. On the other hand, to think that if he kills and maims us, then he will have to answer for it later. And our loved ones will grieve...
We can turn to the experience of saints and devotees of piety, but when we turn to it, we will see different examples. On the one hand, he allowed himself to be maimed by robbers without hindrance, although he had an ax in his hands and possessed remarkable strength. On the other hand, Abba Daniel from Fatherland, who, while escaping from the barbarians, killed one of them. Or, who threw out of his cell, calling on the name of God, a huge fellow who was trying to strangle him.
Therefore, there is no other adviser here except the same Christian conscience. The main thing is that it is clean and not cloudy. In fact, if a person throughout his entire life tries to seek one thing - the will of God, and in relations with his neighbors he is guided by love and humility, then he will not make a mistake or sin even in an extreme situation.
But in general... In general, in relation to the problem of “physical confrontation”, we need to remember again what Abba Dorotheos says about the need to choose between greater and lesser evil. There are cases, he explains, when lying turns out to be such a lesser evil. But even then, the monk convinces, one must treat this as a time of temptation and carefully watch oneself, so that what one has done out of extreme need does not unnoticed turn into a habit. Moreover, the use of physical force should not become a habit for a Christian, and should not become the usual way of solving complex issues.
Moreover: if something like this happened, then you definitely need to consider yourself: why did this temptation befall me, why did the Lord allow me to experience it? And what was in my heart at the moment of this temptation and what is in it now? Such an examination will certainly reveal to us what our actual guilt is, what we should go to confession with - we can hardly expect that our heart will turn out to be pure from sin, not moved by passion.
The worst thing is if we see that the critical moment has become for us a moment not of temptation, but of relief, that in the depths of our souls we have been waiting: when will it be possible to give vent to the accumulated emotions, to the “negativity” that overwhelms us, as they say today. And when they finally got it, they were simply happy. Or they didn’t even wait and didn’t wait, but were simply looking for a suitable reason... Or they didn’t even look for it, but created it themselves...
All this can also be seen in the lives of a certain part of modern Christians. But these are probably those Christians for whom the issue discussed here is, in principle, meaningless. “When a believer can...” When he wants, then he can. But I really don’t want to return to this topic anymore.
Kindness and fists, are they compatible? Multimedia presentation for an extracurricular activity.
View document contents
"The Young Man and the Starfish"
The young man and the starfish
One day at dawn, an old man was walking along the seashore and saw a young man picking up starfish on the sand and throwing them into the water. The old man asked why he was doing this. The young man replied that the stars could dry out and die under the rays of the hot sun.
But the coastline stretches for many miles, and there are millions of starfish. What's the use of your efforts? - said the old man.
The young man looked at the starfish he was holding in his hands, threw it into the sea and said quietly:
This starfish has a point...
View presentation content
"Good must be with fists"
Goodness must come with fists: is this so?
Egorov B.V.
MCOU secondary school in the village of Preobrazhenka
Kindness is the sun that warms a person’s soul.
(M. Prishvin)
Exercise: after listening to this wonderful song, you
You're probably in a good mood and you're ready
by drawing pictures for them with a call to be
kind and polite.
Like a holiday, like happiness, like a miracle,
Kindness is walking across the earth...
Good- the concept of morality, the opposite of the concept of evil, meaning an intentional, disinterested and sincere desire for the implementation of good, a useful act, for example, helping one’s neighbor, as well as a stranger or the animal and plant world.
This imperfect world consists of all of us.
He is a direct reflection of our feelings and our eyes.
This world will not get better and it will not become kinder...
If we ourselves don’t become kinder.
I. Talkov
Every person has the potential for good and evil.
Exercise: think and give an example of a kind person (relative, friend, acquaintance), argue your point of view.
Parable: The young man and the starfish
Questions:
- Why did the young man throw starfish into the water? What was the basis of his action?
- How would you respond to the words - you still can’t help everyone, and if you help a few, it won’t change anything in the lives of others?
- List what good deeds you did today, who did you make happier with your actions?
Good must be with fists,
Good must be harsh
So that the wool flies in clumps
From everyone who does good.
Good is not pity or weakness,
Goodness crushes the locks of shackles.
Good is not slush and not holiness,
Not absolution...
(S. Kunyaev)
How do you understand these words?
The Great Patriotic War
(1941 – 1945)
The entire Soviet people had to fight evil shoulder to shoulder.
Kindness
We are pleased to be in the company of kind people, but for this we ourselves must be kind people. Let's make rules of kindness with you, using which we will become truly kind.
There are many components of kindness, for example:
- Help people.
- Protect the weak.
- Share the latest with a friend.
- Don't be jealous.
- Forgive others' mistakes.
- Do not swear.
- Always fight manifestations of evil.
Remember: Try not to attack, but to give in.
Not to capture, but to give.
Don't show your fist, but your palm.
Don't shout, but listen.
Don't tear it apart, but glue it together.
And further:
Good - something that contributes to the moral improvement of a person and the salvation of his soul.
Evil - that which contributes to the moral degradation of a person, pushes him to bad deeds and destroys the soul.
Are fists good?
The phrase Good must be with fists has long become a catchphrase. This is how they talk about the ability and need to defend one’s ideals (and nowadays – forgive the pun! – and one’s good).Etymology of the catchphrase
The phrase “Goodness must be with fists” was suggested to students of the Literary Institute in 1959 as a topic for an exercise by the Soviet poet Mikhail Arkadyevich Svetlov (1903 – 1964). Among his students were poets Stanislav Kunyaev and Yevgeny Yevtushenko, critic Lev Anninsky...
Stanislav Kunyaev did the exercise better (and more sharply!) than anyone else:
Good must be with fists.
Good must be harsh
so that the wool flies in clumps
from everyone who tries to do good.
Goodness is not pity or weakness.
Goodness crushes the locks of shackles.
Good is not slush and not holiness,
not remission of sins.
Being kind is not always convenient
accept not just the conclusion
what is fractional-fractional, good-good
knew how to operate a machine gun,
that the meaning of history is ultimately
in one good action -
calmly knock out with your knee
goodness to those who did not give up goodness!
This poem was published in the collection “Poetry Day” in 1960.
It should be noted that there is also a popular expression “ fist law", meaning the right of brute force, the right of the strong, the law of force. This expression goes back to the German Faustrecht (“fist right”). In the XI – XIII centuries. the most common form of resolving disputes and conflicts (especially in Germany) is by force of fist and weapon (whoever is stronger is right!).
By the way, maybe it was not without reason that the German scientist, who became the prototype of the famous Goethean character, bore the name “Faust” (German Faust - fist)?
The historical Faust, a scientist (or a charlatan?), lived in 1480 - 1541, it is about him that in 1587 a book that became popular was published in Frankfurt - “The History of Doctor Johann Faust, the notorious magician and warlock.”
And in the German theme of the 18th century. Faust is the embodiment of the insatiable - and never quenchable! – craving (at any cost, even at the cost of your life, even at the cost of your immortal soul!) towards Knowledge, towards Her Majesty the Truth.
But this embodiment of the desire for Knowledge, when it is necessary to make a choice - for example, translating the Greek word “logos” from the Gospel of John, gives preference not to Word and Thought, but to Strength and Deed (it’s not for nothing that the fist is a symbol of brute force, its – strength! – visible embodiment!):
...The cure for mental laziness -
Divine revelation
Almighty even today.
Most warmed by them
Pages of the New Testament.
By the way, they are nearby.
I write everything in German
I want, without sparing my efforts,
Locked up alone,
How should it be translated?
(Opens the book to begin work.)
“In the beginning was the Word.” From the first lines
Mystery. Did I get the hint?
After all, I don’t value words so highly,
To think that it is the basis for everything.
“In the beginning there was a Thought.” Here's the translation.
He conveys this verse closer.
I'll think about it, however, so that right away
Don't ruin your work with the first sentence.
Could a thought breathe life into a creature?
“In the beginning there was Power.” That's the point.
But after a little hesitation
I reject this interpretation.
I was again, as I see, confused:
“In the beginning was the Work” - the verse reads...
(Goethe. Faust. Part one. Translation by B. Pasternak)
...And yet, is Good with fists still Good, or already Evil?
By what methods can Good fight Evil?
Is everything allowed for Good in this struggle?
Will Good in this struggle turn into the very worst Evil?
There are no answers to questions...
It was probably not without reason that Goethe called his creation a tragedy.
...By the way, “at the age of maturity” Stanislav Kunyaev reconsidered his youthful maximalism and to the question “Should goodness come with fists?” answered like this:
Wait. Really? Should it really?
Retribution, justice - this is true.
Please. But not good
which is aimless and immeasurable.
Confusion of words is unacceptable
substitution of syllogisms and concepts,
when the result is death and blood,
the number of sorrows, the number of curses.
The tricks of the mind are in vain,
in vain passion throws its shackles -
good originally, like the earth,
and “Good” is written with a capital letter.
Their illiterate formulas
I remember. And the more bitter the regret
that not only terms were introduced
I was then so misled.
...In general, in Russian history everything happened: good with fists, and fists with good...
Tolerance is the ability to defend goodness as long as it is possible and to the extreme limits using good methods. GOOD SHOULD NOT AND CANNOT BE WITH FISTS! As Bulgakov shows in The Master and Margarita, when good must act with fists, the request is transferred to Woland for execution. Fists may defend good, but they belong to a different sphere. We must remember that fists are fists, and good is good. And in particular, remember this every time when considering whether to use fists or not.
Victory for the Soul is the ability to maintain light and love in any situation, in relation to oneself and in relation to the world around us. To the human mind, the expression of one's aggression and superiority sometimes seems like a victory. When we show brute force, when we express anger, we lose, even if from the point of view of our mind it has the appearance of victory. Do not resolve your conflicts with brute force, aggression, or fighting each other. Be in love, be in your natural state, and then the disharmonious energies of others simply cannot cause you any harm. Win with the power of love, not with the power of shouting and fists.
Just stay in your Divine center, in peace, tranquility, in love. Do not let yourself be knocked out of this state by any disharmonious energies of those around you. Then you will see that your relationship will begin to change. Then you will see that the person who made you uncomfortable will either change and stop doing it or disappear from your life. And for this you will not have to try to educate him, somehow influence him, tell him something. Harmonious relationships are not established through words, hugs, or attempts to influence. Harmonious relationships are established when you are in a harmonious relationship with yourself. Start with this. And you will see how your environment changes, how people who make you uncomfortable disappear from your life, how people who love and understand appear.
Understand that you cannot force someone who makes you uncomfortable to become loving and understanding. Forcing is not the path of the Soul. But you can establish a harmonious relationship with yourself, being in the energies of Light and Love, and then the other will stop causing you discomfort, or will disappear from your horizon. Remember that the power is in you. Don't try to change others. Change yourself, change your energies, change the space around you, and you will find those with whom you will find the desired harmony.
What is the meaning of the expression “good comes with fists”? When you first hear this statement, you involuntarily think about what kind of good this is and why does it need fists? Some will imagine a muscular fellow defending his property from the encroachments of envious people, others will simply shrug their shoulders: this is the folk wisdom that has come to us from time immemorial. Let's figure out what the essence of the phrase “good comes with fists” is and how it came about.
An exercise in eloquence for beginning poets
According to recollections, the saying about goodness, who knows how to stand up for itself, was proposed by Mikhail Svetlov to students of the Literary Institute as an exercise for the development of imaginative thinking. This happened back in 1959. Twenty-seven-year-old Stanislav Kunyaev coped with the task better than others. This is how the famous lines were born.
It is likely that the young poet did not invest any global meaning in his creation; the meaning of the expression “good must be with fists” was outlined as a literary hyperbole. However, the first stanza turned out to be so sonorous and capacious that it quickly spread among the people.
As you know, in the sixties of the last century, people's interest in literature and poetry was very high. Author readings were held in concert halls and private apartments, and performances by singers of bard songs were organized.
It is possible that the poem, read with pathos at one of the poetry evenings, made an impression on the intelligentsia; the meaning of the expression “good must come with fists” became a reason for discussion. Over time, the phrase gained recognition and began to be perceived as a proverb. This situation is far from uncommon in Russian literature; it is enough to recall A. Griboedov’s play “Woe from Wit”, which is analyzed into quotes literally line by line.
Does good need fists?
What is good? This concept unites the positive qualities of a person: high morality, empathy, compassion for others. A good-natured person is a person who treats the problems of other people with understanding, tries to help everyone as much as possible, and often to the detriment of himself. It's hard to imagine such a good-natured guy with fists. If aggression comes from him, then what kind of mercy can we talk about?
But there is another point of view, which just follows from the sound of the famous poetic stanza. If you think about it, the meaning of the expression “goodness must come with fists” implies that a person should be able to stand up not so much for himself, but for his right to do good deeds. To fight off spiteful critics who repeat: “don’t go, don’t do it, why do you need it, nothing will work anyway,” fists are very useful for good. But I really want people to have to use this and any other weapon as little as possible.