Russian, Stalinist and Soviet re-readings of Kierkegaard: Lev Shestov and Piama Gaidenko

Canadian Slavonic Papers, Mar-Jun 2002 by Anna Makolkin

According to Shestov, the entire corpus of Dostoevsky's works-The Idiot, The Brothers Karamazov, The Possessed, The Notes from the Underground, The Dream of the Ridiculous Man and others-were "but variations on the theme from the Book of Job, as [were] the works of Kierkegaard."11 In Shestov's view, Dostoevsky and his Danish double both "withdrew from the general," both regarded Truth as a terrible illusion, allegedly believing that "all the horrors of existence have come into the world from the allness toward which our reason summons us."12 Both Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard, claims Shestov, shy away from Reason and Knowledge, which failed to bring happiness and freedom to mankind.

Swayed by Romantic desire and passion, and shifting away from Reason, Shestov states: "Knowledge has not brought man to freedom, as we are accustomed to think and as speculative philosophy proclaims; knowledge has enslaved us, has made us wholly at the mercy of eternal truths."13 Nostalgically he quotes Kierkegaard, saying that "in the state of innocence there is peace and tranquility." On the other hand, seeing the obvious flaw of a world without knowledge and without the burden of culture, Shestov replies: There is nothingness, the same nothingness that the pagans feared and called fate. However, Fate is the nothingness of fear. Thus, with or without knowledge, homo sapiens has no escape from Fear and Fate. Knowledge has indeed "crashed human consciousness" and led to our Fall. The only new possibility for mankind is to regain Faith, or, as Kierkegaard would say, "to believe in spite of reason," and this would constitute martyrdom. Shestov captures the conceptual transition of the two thinkers, their movement away from the position of the Enlightenment to that of the Romantic philosophers who elevate Feeling or Soul over Mind or Reason. Both Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard "leave Hegel for Job, "the ignorant Job," as Shestov describes him. Even more, Kierkegaard went from Hegel to Job and from Socrates to Abraham, solely because Hegel and Socrates demanded that he love Reason, but he hated Reason more than anything else in the world.14 Shestov, a post-Nietzschean thinker, willingly embraces Dionysus, the God of Paradox, and his absurd world of ignorant bliss, thereby rebelling against Culture, Civilization, Knowledge, and Reason.15 Neither Plato, nor Socrates would have approved of Kierkegaard's infatuation with Job and Abraham, their respect for Reason and Knowledge would have protected them from the absurd symposium with the naive shepherds, the followers of Faith. Kierkegaard seeks not Wisdom but peace, which he obtains in Faith by defying the rational and the wise. Shestov sees necessity as the cause of the Kierkegaardian metamorphosis. Necessity, with its heavy, stonelike tread, is closing in on helpless man.16 Necessity-accepted by Plato and Aristotle, Hegel and Spinosa-would be rejected by both Kierkegaard and his "Russian double" Dostoevsky, who would also neglect Reason, the "god of philosophers," and be drawn to Faith, "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."17 While Tolstoy, another significant existentialist in his own right, would later see Virtue as the opposite of Sin or Vice, both Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky still regarded Faith as their opposite. "Faith is Faith in God," concludes Shestov. However, if Kierkegaard's God is a monotheistic entity, Dostoevsky's God is actually not a Christian, but a Hebrew God, a particular deity for a particular nation. Shestov does not doubt Dostoevsky's statements about Faith, accepting them blindly and remains unaware of the basic antinomy in Kierkegaard's "Russian double." "Faith begins where thinking comes to an end"-asserts Kierkegaard, utterly oblivious of the thoughtful choice made by the Russian existentialist about the nature of faith.18 Having embraced Kierkegaard's and Dostoevsky's rather modernist positions on Faith as the new revisionist ethical standards-which place no demands on man-Shestov establishes the two forms of the Ethical: one that gives man nothing, but makes demands on him; and one that gives Faith and demands nothing in return. Hence, Shestov obviously neglected the dilemma of Job and Abraham, whose Faith demanded the ultimate sacrifices.19 Shestov's vision of Kierkegaard's and Dostoevsky's existential goals based on Faith make him also turn away from Reason. His desire to believe ultimately overpowers his craving for wisdom and knowledge. Shestov could not possibly have been unaware of the general or universal in Christianity. Nonetheless, he passionately stated: "The religious dwells above and beyond the sphere of the 'general'."20