One of the main themes of Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov is the concept of justice, both earthly and divine. Dostoevsky investigates the differences between the two forms and examines different aspects of justice. The novel introduces different philosophies on justice and shows what the people who follow them are like. The investigation of these concepts culminates in a trial, which frames the final demonstration of the power of divine justice. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Earthly justice is the very most basic concept introduced in the novel. It is simply the idea of ​​the current justice system, the laws imposed by the government, the trials and punishments they inflict. In the novel, earthly justice is represented by several characters with careers in law enforcement, who are introduced towards the end of the novel when Dmitry's arrest is imminent. Guilt under the earthly justice system means that the person actually committed the crime of which he or she is accused. For example, in this novel, Dmitry is guilty according to earthly justice if he actually killed his father and stole the money that his father had hidden. His previous thoughts and desires are not relevant to whether he is guilty or not, all that matters is whether he did the action he is accused of. In the earthly justice system, it is up to those responsible for enforcing justice to find concrete evidence that the accused person committed the crime. This evidence should involve outside witnesses and some physical evidence that helps establish that the accused person was definitely involved. On the contrary, divine justice is the moral code passed down by religion. Punishment under the divine justice system ends in Hell rather than Heaven after one's death. The system of divine justice is based on the notion of the immortality of man. The only punishment received during earthly life is the burden placed on people by their conscience, which in reality is nothing more than ingrained teachings of religion that help prevent them from ending up eternally damned. People can avoid punishment in the afterlife through atonement. One of the main distinctions made between divine and earthly justice is the distinction between sins of omission and sins of commission. Divine justice is based on the principle that sins of omission are worse than sins of commission and should be punished more severely. Manipulating someone else into committing the crime for you is infinitely worse than committing the crime yourself, since it means that not only are you guilty of wanting a crime to be committed, but you are also responsible for someone else committing a crime. However, in earthly justice, the only sin that can be punished is that of commission. It is not for juries and judges to punish those who lead others into temptation; this is something that must be left to God. The Karamazov brothers show many occasions of sins of omission. Smerdyakov is a major agent of temptation and is responsible for numerous sins in other people. It does not appear that any punishment was inflicted on him; his suicide is not the result of guilt, but rather a method of revenge against the Karamazov family. He arranges the murder of Fyodor Pavlovich and his suicide in such a way that all members of the Karamazov family end up injured. Smerdyakov is described as the only truly conscienceless character in the novel. He is living proof of what would happen to all of societyif faith in God and immortality did not exist. He does not fear earthly justice and does not believe that divine justice exists. Without the threat of divine justice to keep him within the bounds of the moral code, he does whatever he wants to get the revenge he has wanted for years. He exists to tempt others into doing evil, simultaneously committing sins of commission and omission, all for his own selfish purposes. While Smerdyakov is depicted as the tempter and foil to Ivan Karamazov, Grushenka bears her fair share of sins. also of omission. When Dmitry is first accused of the murder, he declares his guilt, which is entirely true according to the principles of divine justice. The whole affair happens because both Dmitry and Fyodor are trying to woo Grushenka and Dmitry doesn't have the money to be able to impress her in the same way as his father. He believes that Fyodor has money rightfully left to him since his mother's death and therefore believes that the 3,000 rubles he learns that Fyodor has set aside for Grushenka is rightfully his. Grushenka is fully aware of this conflict and encourages it by refusing to choose between men. Continue to bring out the competition between them, so you can continue to enjoy attention from both of them. When Dmitry is first accused of parricide, she acknowledges her guilt and proclaims her love for him. She becomes determined to follow him everywhere and share his punishment as best she can. The main sin of omission comes from Ivan Karamazov. He allowed Smerdyakov to convince him to make the murder possible. He himself was fully convinced, albeit unconsciously, that he had no idea what would happen if he left the city when Smerdyakov asked him to, despite Smerdyakov almost coming out and saying that Fyodor Pavlovich would be murdered. He confronts Smerdyakov after being convinced of Dmitry's innocence and comes to terms with the fact that he is actually the one responsible for the murder. He had previously wished for parricide to occur, which according to the limits of divine justice already makes him guilty of parricide, and then leaves the city to let Smerdyakov do as he pleases. This leaves him doubly guilty, as he had the first guilt for wishing for his father's death and the second for committing the sin of omission that would allow this to happen. Not only did he help provide the opportunity for parricide, but he is the one who helped convince Smerdyakov that there is no God and there is no reason to obey earthly laws. He also let Smerdyakov know that he wished for his father's death, thus making Smerdyakov believe that he was acting on Ivan's wishes. Ivan ends up seriously ill and hallucinates conversations with the devil. This is a pretty clear example of how divine justice is served, as these hallucinations become strong immediately after realizing his guilt and the image is that of the devil. The devil converses with Ivan about all the theories he has proclaimed throughout the novel. These theories are the same ones he passed on to Smerdyakov, the ones that helped influence Smerdyakov's decision to kill Fyodor Pavlovich. Therefore, the hallucination is a clear manifestation of Ivan's guilt. The devil is the master of temptation, and by repeating Ivan's theories to him, he helps demonstrate how Ivan was responsible for Smerdyakov's temptation. The devil haunts Ivan until he confesses his crime at Dmitry's trial. Despite knowing that he cannot actually prove that Smerdyakov committed the crime, he takes the 3,000 rubles to court and declares that Smerdyakov is the real murdererand that he himself is guilty of instilling the idea in Smerdyakov's head. . However, at this point he is driven mad by guilt and needs to confess his crime to free himself from the burden. In both this novel and Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky describes confession as one of the most necessary steps in the atonement of sins and the alleviation of guilt. Ivan's confession allows him to begin to atone for his guilt, which he continues to try to do by trying to help Dmitry escape. After the sentence is passed Throughout the novel, Dostoevsky demonstrates the extent to which earthly justice and divine justice are connected. The characters often discuss whether there would be morality in the world if there were no God. If people cease to believe in God, and therefore in the afterlife, they no longer have reason to follow the current moral code. After all, as Ivan Karamazov states during the trial, "Who does not wish for his father's death?" (Dostoevsky, p. 651). Without divine justice telling us to honor our fathers and mothers and not kill, everyone would be out committing parricide. Earthly justice could not have existed or been maintained without divine justice, since there would be no basis for creating laws. Earthly justice is simply a tool that provides a secondary method of enforcing divine justice and helping those who commit sins atone. The entire process is a demonstration of the way in which earthly justice can become the instrument of divine justice. Dmitry spent the entire novel struggling with his paradoxical personality, attempting to find a balance between his vile, animalistic side and his noble, honorable side. After his long interrogation of Mokroe, he dreams of an innocent child suffering and realizes that he has the opportunity to take on some of the innocent suffering. This appeals to his better nature and he begins to accept that, although he has committed no crime in the earthly sense, he can atone for his past misdeeds by suffering for the innocent. At this time, despite all his previous chatter, he found himself firmly ensconced in the honorable side of his personality. This is especially important because up until this point it seemed to have settled on the lower side. He had used the 1,500 rubles left over from the initial theft of Katerina's money, which was the only thing that had firmly anchored him as not entirely vile. As long as he kept that money, he could return it to him and thus stop being a thief and go back to being simply a scoundrel. When he went to Mokroe, he was ready to spend all that money and die like a thief. Instead, the prosecutors arrive in time to stop him from committing suicide, thus allowing him to atone for his past sins and embrace his honorable side. During the trial, the prosecutor, who had previously intervened to prevent Dmitry from committing suicide, continues to act as if by the hand of divine justice, with the result that the man who is convicted is not the one who actually physically committed the crime. act of murder. It is not his job to examine the defendant's thoughts; if it were purely earthly justice it would simply examine his actions. They hear Dmitry's claims of parricide from many people and use this fact to determine that he must actually be guilty, and then ignore the evidence that proves that Dmitry is not the one who actually killed his father. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence pointing to the fact that Dmitry did not have 3,000 rubles in Mokroe, which would be a key point in determining that he did not rob his father and was in fact telling the truth about hoarding the money he stole . by Katerina Ivanovna. However, since prosecutors have become.