Good and evil in Bulgakov's understanding. Mini-essay on the topic “Good and evil in the novel “The Master and Margarita.” Short essay The Master and Margarita - Good and Evil

Shapkina Victoria

The problem of good and evil is an eternal problem that has worried humanity for centuries. The author of the study is trying to figure out how good and evil are related in M.A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita.” Does good always triumph and does evil always bring misfortune? These and other issues are addressed in the work.

Download:

Preview:

There is another assessment of the hero’s action. V.A. Chalmayev believes: “Even after forgiveness, Pilate cannot free himself from the thought of the “past execution”, he is looking for confirmation that it did not happen. However, he is no longer separate from Yeshua. He will forever be the embodiment of “pilatchina”, avoidance of one’s conscience. Pontius Pilate received his punishment for cowardice - the immortality of eternal guilt." Hence condemnation as a natural reaction to the actions of Pontius Pilate. However, is it worth rushing to condemn the hero, because in the last chapter of the novel, at the request of the Master and Margarita, Pontius Pilate receives liberation and forgiveness, and together with Yeshua leaves along the lunar path. Why am I still closer to L.M.’s assessment? Yanovskaya, which more accurately, in my opinion, reflects the intention of the writer himself, who avoids categoricalness.

Pontius Pilate and Yeshua are having a discussion about good and evil. Yeshua believes in goodness, in the predetermination of historical development leading to a single truth. Pilate is convinced of the ineradicability of evil in man. Maybe both are wrong? The path along the lunar path became the result of the dispute between Pilate and Yeshua, which brought them closer together forever; This is how evil and good merged together in human life.

So, in the Yershalaim chapters of the novel Yeshua– a bearer of goodness, a symbol of moral fortitude and humanity.And Pontius Pilate cannot be classified as either a bearer of evil or a bearer of good, because he combines both principles, which may also well define human essence. The images of Pontius Pilate and Yeshua make it possible to understand that good does not always triumph on earth, and the struggle of these two principles does not always end in the victory of good.

Woland’s conclusion is well known: human nature cannot change so quickly, everything remains the same. Woland's visit, like the brilliant novel of the Master, who guessed the events of two thousand years ago, could not change anything in modern Moscow. Bulgakov draws this conclusion.

Did Woland have prototypes? Most likely not, because the writer himself emphasized in a letter to S. Ermolinsky: “Woland has no prototypes, I beg you, keep this in mind.”.

The depiction of the devil in Russian and world literature has a centuries-old tradition. It is no coincidence that the image of Woland combines the features of heroes from many literary sources. For example, Woland’s name and the epigraph to the novel are borrowed from Goethe’s Faust.

Woland is endowed with omniscience. He sees the future and the past, knows the thoughts of his heroes, their intentions and experiences. And there is nothing supernatural here, because he is the creator of this entire world. I agree with the opinion of V.V. Petelin is that if “... we remove all the external tinsel, all these transformations, fantastic paintings, all these clothes suitable only for a masquerade, then Bulgakov himself will appear before us, subtle and ironic.” This is exactly how subtle and ironic it appears to me
M. A. Bulgakov as the author of the novel.

Everything that Woland turns his gaze to appears in its true light. Woland does not inspire or sow evil, he does not lie or tempt. “He just reveals evil, exposing, burning, destroying what is truly insignificant,” - says L.M. Yanovskaya. And I agree with this competent opinion.

Thus, in the Moscow chapters of the novel, the Master is a bearer of good. Even though he gave up the fight, for his suffering he deserved, if not light, then peace. His Margarita is a symbol of goodness and mercy. Through her fate, Bulgakov presents us with the path of goodness to truth with the help of the purity of the heart and the enormous, sincere love burning in it, which contains strength.

And Woland is part of that force that, in theory, should do evil, but in fact does good. He is the eternally existing evil,becoming a necessary condition for the manifestation of good.It is his image that reflects Bulgakov’s moral concepts thatgood and evil are created by the hands of man himself. All of Woland’s knowledge, ideas of amazing depth, were discovered from the rich experience of observing the life of Bulgakov himself. In the created image, Bulgakov seemed to declare that good and evil in life are inseparable and are the eternal essences of life.

In this version, God commanded Satan and was therefore responsible for all the evil in the world. In the final form, God’s “guilt” is removed, the prince of darkness receives his kingdom in full power, and the former order becomes just a request to grant the master peace (but not light). Here evil follows the logic of Goethe's paradox: while desiring evil, evil still (sometimes) brings good.This paradoxical role makes darkness, if not light, then a cleansing fire.

Nowhere in the novel is there any talk of any “balance” of good and evil, light and dark, or the priority of good. This problem is clearly defined, but is not finally solved by the author either in favor of good or in favor of evil.

So, good and evil in the novel “The Master and Margarita” exist in inextricable unity. If in dualistic ideas about the world the opposition of good and evil as polar principles was formed, then it is also obvious that these concepts can only exist in relation to each other. In this case, evil plays an extremely important role, since only thanks to it we learn good, and even more precisely, evil leads us to good. In the novel “The Master and Margarita”, good and evil are not two different phenomena opposed to each other, they represent a single picture of the world. The phenomena of good and evil are valuable in their unity.

Conclusion

In the course of the study, after analyzing the Yershalaim chapters of the novel, it was found that Yeshua is the bearer of good, a symbol of moral fortitude and humanity. Pontius Pilate cannot be classified as either a bearer of evil or a bearer of good, because he combines both principles, which may also well define human essence. The images of Pontius Pilate and Yeshua make it possible to understand that good does not always triumph on earth, and the struggle of these two principles does not always end in the victory of good.

It is determined that in the Moscow chapters of the novel the Master is a bearer of good. Even though he gave up the fight, for his suffering he deserved, if not light, then peace. His Margarita is a symbol of goodness and mercy. Through her fate, Bulgakov presents us with the path of goodness to truth with the help of the purity of the heart and the enormous, sincere love burning in it, which contains strength.

And Woland is part of that force that, in theory, should do evil, but in fact does good. He is an eternally existing evil that becomes a necessary condition for the manifestation of good. It is his image that reflects Bulgakov’s moral concepts that good and evil are created by the hands of man himself. All of Woland’s knowledge, ideas of amazing depth, were discovered from the rich experience of observing the life of Bulgakov himself. In the created image, Bulgakov seemed to declare that good and evil in life are inseparable and are the eternal essences of life.

A comparison of good and evil in the two layers of the novel led to the conclusion that good and evil in the novel “The Master and Margarita” exist in inextricable unity. If in dualistic ideas about the world the opposition of good and evil as polar principles was formed, then it is also obvious that these concepts can only exist in relation to each other. In this case, evil plays an extremely important role, since only thanks to it we learn good, and even more precisely, evil leads us to good. In the novel “The Master and Margarita”, good and evil are not two different phenomena opposed to each other, they represent a single picture of the world. The phenomena of good and evil are valuable in their unity.

The hypothesis was not confirmed, because in this novel we saw that good and evil are in balance without a clear advantage of good, and evil is not always opposed to good.

List of used literature

1. Abraham P. Pavel Florensky and Mikhail Bulgakov. Philosophical Sciences. 1990.
2. Abraham P.R. The novel “The Master and Margarita” by M. Bulgakov in the aspect of literary traditions. - M., 1989
3. Belobrovtseva I., Kulyus S. Roman M. Bulgakova “The Master and Margarita”. Comment / I. Belobrovtseva, S. Kulyus. – M., 2007.
4. Bulgakov M.A. Collected works. In 5 volumes. Volume 5. The Master and Margarita. - M., 1992.
5. Bulgakov M.A. Unknown Bulgakov. M., 1993.
6. Bulgakov M.A. The Great Chancellor: Draft editions of the novel “The Master and Margarita” / Publ., intro. and comment. V. Loseva. M., 1992.

The problem of good and evil has worried the minds of writers at all times. She did not bypass the brilliant 20th century writer Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov. The novel “The Master and Margarita” was written in the 1930s, but was published only in 1966. It was classified as fantastic, realistic, grotesque and even atheistic. The appearance of Yeshua Ha-Nozri, the prototype of Jesus Christ, and Satan in the same novel aroused unprecedented interest. Already from the example of these characters, one could conclude that the plot of the work is based on the struggle between good and evil. However, it is not necessary that these are different people, because good and evil can collide in one person. Each person, whether he wants it or not, faces the problem of choice. The same thing happened with the heroes of the novel “The Master and Margarita”.

Bulgakov's Jesus, Yeshua Ha-Nozri, is an ordinary person with his fears and weaknesses. He could have been completely weak if not for his faith. He sincerely believes that all people in the world are good and that there are no evil people. Being an honest man, he speaks directly about his beliefs, not renouncing them even under pain of death. He sincerely believes that someday the time for justice will come and there will be no cruelty in the world. Yeshua makes this choice and does not deviate from his path. For this he is endowed with Light.

He is opposed to the procurator of Judea - Pontius Pilate. This man, endowed with power and strength, also faces a choice: to pardon the innocent philosopher or execute him. However, he lacks the courage to go against the system. Fearing denunciation, he signs Yeshua's death warrant, although he is sure that the prisoner is innocent. As a result, it becomes a heavy burden on his conscience. In order to somehow atone for his guilt, he personally organizes the murder of the traitor Judah from Kiriath. But, as it turned out, Yeshua was right. You can atone for guilt only with sincere repentance, and not with a new murder. Only after repentance was Pilate granted forgiveness.

The problem of choosing good and evil faces not only the gospel heroes, but also the residents of Moscow in the 1930s. For example, the chairman of a large literary publishing house, Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz, was punished and doomed to death for not believing in the existence of God and the devil.

And the author confronts his main character, called the Master, with a choice. However, succumbing to cowardice and weakness, he repeats the actions of Pontius Pilate. He refused to fight for his work and chose to burn it, although he knew that it was worthy of publication. In contrast to him, Margarita, the master's beloved, takes a more active position. She is ready to fight for the well-being of her beloved and his creativity. For this reason, she even makes a deal with the devil, accepting his terms. She does not have the same faith as Yeshua, but she has an all-consuming love, which she does not renounce. As a result, she makes the right choice. Despite the fact that she chooses the side of the forces of darkness, her choice does not bring grief or suffering to anyone.

Using the example of his heroes, the author tries in every possible way to show the reader that in the novel no one commits sins at the prompting. Everything that happens is a conscious choice of everyone. Therefore, every person is responsible for his actions, both good and bad.

Sometimes life can be extremely difficult and incomprehensible. Unfortunately, there are no instructions for doing the right thing, so questions such as “to forgive or not to forgive?” or “revenge - forget?” become rhetorical. This became the basis for many literary works, in particular, the novel “The Master and Margarita” is imbued with the philosophy of life and “stuffed” with questions about human virtue.

1. (Can cruelty be justified?).“The Master and Margarita” is a novel that covered all sorts of philosophical topics and touched upon the problems of human life. The work begins with a story about two friends - Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny, arguing about people's faith, or more precisely, about the existence of God. During their conversation, a mysterious stranger appears, trying to judge the gentlemen on such a delicate issue. However, the comrades showed stubbornness and refused to believe in the existence of higher powers. Quite a short time later, Berlioz was hit by a tram. The moral concluded through the mouth of Woland: “Everyone will be rewarded according to his faith.” Can this be considered cruelty on the part of Satan, and, if so, is it justified? For his part, he deservedly punished the non-believers and taught them a lesson. With this lesson, Woland's revenge began on people - so sinful and godless. One can only blame him for the radicalism of the measures taken, but one cannot but agree that the punishments were deserved.
2. (False kindness turned into cruelty) Can kindness turn into cruelty? Yes, if we look at Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. Woland is the embodiment of Satan, throughout the book he gives people life lessons. It is worth remembering an episode from the Variety Theater. Woland decided to study the changed nature of Muscovites, and his retinue exposed human vices with their fantastic tricks. During this performance, citizens were literally generously showered with money, women were gifted with the latest models of dresses and the most fashionable accessories. Satan did not skimp on such gifts, which fully emphasized the commercialism and stinginess of people. The greed with which they tried to grab the “tidbit” turned them into animals who were ready to squabble over the desired thing. The greedy Muscovites paid in full for their behavior: the sinful exploits of the spectators were revealed, the money turned into dust, and the women ended up completely naked on the streets of the city. Woland taught a lesson to a generation spoiled by the housing issue. From this it is necessary to take away that kindness embodied in an act often has completely different motives. Often it is she who is the instrument of sophisticated cruelty for which Satan is so famous.
3. (Kindness is impossible without self-sacrifice) What is kindness? I think this quality includes an element of readiness for self-sacrifice. For example, the main character of the novel “The Master and Margarita,” distinguished by her kindheartedness, found herself in a rather difficult life situation, with her own problems and unanswered questions. She clearly needed the help of higher powers to understand the current situation. Fortunately for her, if I may say so, she turns out to be of interest to Satan, Woland, who has come to the city. She is honored to be invited to his Grand Ball, and even as a queen. By agreement with the devil, at the end of the ball the girl had the right to a request, which Woland undoubtedly had to fulfill. Finding herself at the celebration of evil spirits, Margarita fills her loneliness and fear with new acquaintances. So, on her way she meets the vicious Frida, who touches the heroine with her sad story. The victim suffers the vengeful ordeal of her sinful act of strangling her unwanted newborn child. Margarita is so imbued with the fate of her new acquaintance that at the end of the ball she uses her request to save Frida from torment. By asking not for herself, but for another person, Margarita discouraged the participants of the ball, and many readers. Instead of her happiness, she chose to help a person in need; such kindness on her part deserves a special bow. Thus, readiness for self-sacrifice is the main element of kindness, without which the manifestation of this quality is impossible.

M.A. Bulgakov - novel “The Master and Margarita”. In Bulgakov's novel, the concepts of good and evil are intricately intertwined. Woland, Satan, is traditionally supposed to be the absolute embodiment of evil, but he often restores justice on earth by exposing human vices. The greatest evil, according to Bulgakov, is concentrated in the world of human society. And this has always been the case. The Master wrote about this in his novel, revealing the history of the deal between the procurator of Judea and his own conscience. Pontius Pilate sends an innocent man, the wandering philosopher Yeshua, to execution, since society expects such a decision from him. The outcome of this situation is endless pangs of conscience that overcome the hero. The situation in Bulgakov’s contemporary Moscow is even more deplorable: all moral norms have been violated there. And Woland seems to be trying to restore their inviolability. During his four days in Moscow, Satan determines the “true face” of many cultural figures, artists, officials, and local citizens. He accurately defines the inner essence of everyone: Styopa Likhodeev, a famous cultural figure, is a slacker, a reveler and a drunkard; Nikanor Ivanovich Bosoy – bribe-taker and fraudster; proletarian poet Alexander Ryukhin is a liar and a hypocrite. And at a session of black magic in a Moscow variety show, Woland literally and figuratively exposes the citizens who have coveted what they can get for nothing. It is noteworthy that all of Woland’s tricks are almost unnoticeable against the background of everyday life in Moscow. Thus, the author seems to hint to us that the real life of a totalitarian state, with its legalized party hierarchy and violence, is the main diabolical action. There is no place for creativity and love in this world. Therefore, the Master and Margarita have no place in this society. And here Bulgakov’s thought is pessimistic - for a real artist, happiness on earth is impossible. In a world where everything is determined by a person’s social status, good and truth still exist, but they have to seek protection from the devil himself. Thus, according to Bulgakov, the confrontation between good and evil is eternal, but these concepts are relative.

Searched here:

• good and evil in the novel The Master and Margarita
• good and evil in the novel The Master and Margarita essay
• essay good and evil in the novel the master and margarita

The eternal confrontation between good and evil is covered in almost every book of Russian literature. The novel “The Master and Margarita” was no exception. Good in this work illuminates the path of truth, and evil, on the contrary, is capable of leading a person into invisible distances.

Bulgakov was sure that it was religion, the faith of God, that helps a lost person find his true path. His characters help to understand Bulgakov's position.

As part of the “novel within a novel” that the Master wrote, his hero Yeshua appears before a ruthless judge. This episode is not really about the theme of good and evil, but rather the theme of betrayal of good itself. But why? The prosecutor was well aware that the accused who stood before him had not committed criminal acts, but nevertheless ordered his execution. He is a slave of the state system, and Bulgakov depicted the same slaves in Moscow (for example, Bosoy).

Yeshua is the embodiment of kindness and compassion, he was insightful, generous, selfless. Even the fear of death did not force him to renounce his views. He believed that a person’s good nature still prevails.

His opposition - Woland - believed on the contrary that it is evil and self-interest that predominates in man. He found in people their vices, sinful weaknesses, ridiculing them in various ways. He, along with his retinue, got rid of those who deviated from goodness, who were corrupt, ridiculing such people.

But why does Satan only cause a smile and positive emotions? The answer to the question is the epigraph to the novel, where it is said that evil eternally accomplishes good. In this novel, Woland is the arbiter of destinies; he stands for the balance between evil and good, trying to restore it. However, his actions still cannot be called good, because only with the help of evil does he show people his own vices.

The feeling between the Master and Margarita is also good in the novel. Their love shows what a person is ready to do, how he and the world around him change with the help of such power. There was evil spirits in Moscow, a coven appeared, and dark magic was happening. And everything seemed to go wrong, because it was the evil spirit that helped love. However, love itself is a divine gift, which proves that love is a manifestation of goodness and self-giving.

The novel is full of not only mysteries, but also values. Bulgakov colorfully described evil spirits, putting them in the foreground, but pure and bright love, all-consuming and all-forgiving, still prevails here. Good is presented in the novel as a creative force that nothing can distort or destroy.

Another main idea of ​​the author is the scene with Satan’s ball. That is, a person must go through all the horrors, the circles of hell, in order to realize one simple truth: love is the only path that will make him not only happy, but also the ruler of his own life. He will not become a slave, which the procurator was, he will be free in his own way.