The Brothers Karamazov

The conflict between faith and science is explored in Father Zosima’s burial as well as Dmitri’s trial. Though faith appears to be diametrically opposed to science, the novel presents avenues for faith to retain its relevance and value despite the increasingly scientific view of the world following the Enlightenment.

The smell of Zosima’s body during his funeral is the result of nature; the natural biological and chemical processes have taken over in the body’s decay. The narrator notes that the window was closed, so the air was stagnant. With science in mind, the odor holds no spiritual significance.

The expectation of a miracle—and the disappointment, disillusionment, and sense of betrayal when there is no miracle—adds another layer of meaning to the “Grand Inquisitor” passage in which Ivan writes that people want miracles, not God. When Alyosha experiences deep doubt following Zosima’s funeral, he repeats a passage from the Grand Inquisitor in his response to Rakitin; he states that it is not God that he rejects, but “his world” (341). Not only Alyosha is affected: Madame Khokhlakov says, “I’m all for realism now, I’ve been taught a good lesson about miracles” (384).

Alyosha’s faith is challenged by the natural world, in which decay and corruption are simple science. Alyosha is also angry because he feels it is unjust that people are questioning Zosima’s holiness after the funeral, though he admits that he himself has the same doubts. This incident shows the human desire for the miraculous, but it also proves that Ivan is wrong, because Alyosha maintains his faith even without the miracle. Another kind of miracle occurs that reinstates his faith, which is symbolically connected to the “onion” that Alyosha gives to Grushenka in his act of compassion and forgiveness toward her later that day (357). That evening, Alyosha has a vision of Father Zosima, and his faith has been strengthened by surviving this test.

Dmitri’s trial offers another view on the conflict of faith and science. When the doctors take the stand, the esteemed doctor from Moscow cites psychological science to argue that Dmitri was not capable of rational thought (672). Dr. Herzenstube has little helpful information to share; however, an anecdote he shares with the jury from Dmitri’s youth alters the jury’s perception of Dmitri dramatically. When Dmitri was a small boy, Dr. Herzenstube gave him a pound of nuts and taught him how to say “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit” in German because he felt pity for him since he appeared so neglected. Dmitri returned to Herzenstube and thanked him for this kindness 23 years later. Herzenstube calls Dmitri “a grateful young man” (675). This moment redeems Dmitri in the jury’s eyes and calls into question whether he could have murdered his father. These two testimonies represent the conflict between faith and science. Later, Dmitri’s attorney criticizes the value of psychology by calling it a “stick with two ends” (725) because the same events can be interpreted differently.

Suffering presents opportunities for redemption. Dmitri exemplifies this action in taking the punishment for murdering his father. The narrative negates the idea of responsibility in the sense that all the brothers share guilt for their father’s death: When Kolya asks Alyosha who killed his father, Alyosha says “the lackey” did it, but even this statement is ambiguous. Smerdyakov’s suicide note read “so as to not blame anybody” (651), which implies that he did not feel he was principally responsible. His statements to Ivan the night of his death further support this, because he blames Ivan and says he was only doing what Ivan asked him to do.

The opportunity for redemption exists in the burden of responsibility, even for the failings of others. Dmitri takes the fall for his brothers Ivan and Smerdyakov; in another reading, all of the brothers have a part, however small, in the murder of their father, and the fact of who actually wielded the murder weapon less important than the fact that someone must suffer for this immoral act. Father Zosima’s bow to Dmitri at the monastery prophesied that Dmitri would suffer for someone else’s wrongdoing. Father Zosima’s teaching about the nature of suffering and the way that suffering can teach spiritual strength, and the value of confession for freeing oneself of shame, come together in the story of Dmitri, Ivan, and Fyodor. They are all controlled by shame, and their refusal to confess to their individual wrongdoing is related to this. The story of the official, Mikhail, who murdered a woman and then tormented himself for years demonstrates the power of shame to destroy the human spirit and trap a person within a self-created hell.

Dmitri is connected to the symbol of the horse in the suffering that he will undergo for the murder of their father. Horses’ symbolism as Christlike beings appears in the conversation between Dmitri and the coachmen, Andrei, on the way to Mokroye to find Grushenka. Andrei is worried that Dmitri plans to harm Grushenka or her former lover. Andrei tells him that every living thing “has been created, a horse, for example, because there’s people that just barrel on regardless, some of us coachmen” (412). Horses have been mentioned several times as examples of meekness in the face of human’s abuse. Zosima specifically mentions horses in one of his homilies where he speaks of every living thing as being an expression of God. Zosima emphasizes the beauty of nature and the innocence of all of nature, including animals. He states that “every little leaf” is an expression of God’s nature, and mentions horses in particular as meek creatures that are sinless and love humans, despite humans’ cruelty (295). Humility and patience in the face of suffering are virtues exemplifying the spiritual teaching of Christ.