The paper investigates the dependence of Leo Tolstoy’s ethical, religious and political ideas on Benedict Spinoza’s philosophy. The Soviet philosopher Valentin Asmus offered a solution to this problem by attempting to emphasize rationalist elements in Tolstoy’s teachings while glossing over his religious inclinations. Asmus treated Tolstoy’s “life’s religion” as a peculiar form of humanist ethics, just like Spinoza’s idea that “God” is merely infinite Nature. Asmus compared the Spinozist and Tolstoyan understanding of the relationship between metaphysics and ethics. He also showed that the fundamental difference between Tolstoy’s and Spinoza’s doctrines, was in their different understanding of human freedom. According to Tolstoy, a “free action” goes beyond the limitations of the laws of history. Regarding their relation to “real life,” Tolstoy’s, in many ways, was polar opposite to that of Spinoza’s.

该论文调查了列夫·托尔斯泰的伦理、宗教和政治思想对本尼迪克特·斯宾诺莎哲学的依赖。苏联哲学家瓦伦丁·阿斯穆斯（Valentin Asmus）试图通过强调托尔斯泰教义中的理性主义元素，同时掩盖他的宗教倾向，为这个问题提供了解决方案。阿斯姆斯将托尔斯泰的“生命的宗教”视为人文主义伦理的一种特殊形式，就像斯宾诺莎认为“上帝”只是无限的自然一样。阿斯姆斯比较了斯宾诺兹主义者和托尔斯泰主义者对形而上学和伦理学之间关系的理解。他还表明，托尔斯泰和斯宾诺莎的学说之间的根本区别在于他们对人类自由的不同理解。根据托尔斯泰的说法，“自由行动”超越了历史规律的限制。关于它们与“现实生活”的关系，托尔斯泰的，