[restabs text=”More” tabcolor=”#dd9933″ tabheadcolor=”#1e73be”]
[restab title=”RESUME” active=”active”]

The article is aimed at presenting and analyzing main criticism directions of Tolstoyism by its disciples. The idea of moral self-improvement is considered as the central principle, uniting all Tolstoyans; existence among them of two various its interpretations causes the logical division of Tolstoyism’s criticism into religious and social aspects. Due to the specifics of Tolstoyism and the Tolstoyan movement, such category as “former tolstoyans” can’t be distinguished, therefore the opinions of all the people, who had ever been Tolstoy’s followers are presented. Within the criticism of the religious concept Tolstoyans paid attention to the abstractness of Tolstoyism ideals which generated, on the one hand, compromises with convictions, and on the other hand, problems with a choice of the lifestyle in accordance to them. Tolstoyans noticed the narrowness of religious rationalism of Tolstoyism which could not always satisfy their religious requirements. Moreover, Tolstoyans’ opinions on the particular philosophical principles of Tolstoyism are presented in the article: concept of the evil, vegetarianism, negation of sexual life. Author specifies, that Tolstoyans, as well as outside observers, criticized Tolstoy’s inconsistency in carrying out his social ideas: sometimes the disappointment in L.Tolstoy’s person turned into the loss of faith in the Tolstoyism principles feasibility and into their gradual denial. The concept of the society transformation by moral improvement of its certain members was the main object of the Tolstoyan movement criticism in terms of social aspect: Tolstoyans not only noted its impossibility, but also stressed their dissatisfaction with the passive struggle for social justice. Tolstoyan social program was closely related to the non-resistance to evil principle which frequently became the object of social ideas criticism. Prince Mikhail Khilkov, who after the Tolstoyism was seized by revolutionary ideas and then returned to Orthodoxy, paid considerable attention to the question of nonresistance. In different periods of his life he pointed at the reactionism and harmfulness of the Tolstoyans’ social ideas, at theoretical invalidity and practical inapplicability of nonresistance doctrine. The author notes that the scheme for the main criticism directions of Tolsoyism by its disciples stated in this work could be enlarged and extended in future.[/restab]

[restab title=”ABOUT AUTHOR“]

AGARIN E.V. – Nizhny Novgorod State University named after Lobachevsky (Russia).[/restab]

[restab title=”FULL TEXT“]DOWNLOAD.[/restab][/restabs]