Imaginary Interviews: My Visit with Leo Tolstoy

In this imagined interview, I sat down with Leo Tolstoy (1828–1910), the Russian literary giant whose novels War and Peace and Anna Karenina redefined the possibilities of fiction, and whose later philosophical and spiritual writings reshaped his life and influenced global thought. A man of profound contradictions, Tolstoy was both an aristocrat and a champion of the poor, a soldier turned pacifist, and a novelist who ultimately sought truth beyond art. Here, I explore the pivotal moments that drove his midlife transformation, his embrace of pacifism, and the roots of his enduring influence as a writer and thinker. Through Tolstoy’s own words, we glimpse his restless spirit, unyielding moral quest, and vision for a better world.

EN: Count Tolstoy, your novels War and Peace and Anna Karenina are considered masterpieces. How did your early life shape your path to becoming such an influential writer?

Leo Tolstoy: My early years were a tangle of privilege and pain. Born in 1828 to a noble family at Yasnaya Polyana, I was orphaned young—my mother died before I was two, my father when I was nine. That loss left a void, a hunger for meaning. I was a wild youth, prone to gambling, debauchery, and searching for purpose in all the wrong places—university, the army, society’s pleasures. Yet, those years in the Caucasus as a soldier and my travels exposed me to life’s raw edges: the courage of peasants, the brutality of war, the simplicity of nature. Writing became my way to wrestle with these truths. I poured my questions about life, love, and death into stories, striving to capture the chaos and beauty of human existence. My novels grew from that struggle to understand, to make sense of a world both glorious and flawed.

 

EN: In your fifties, you made the radical decision to release your serfs and renounce your estate. What prompted this dramatic shift in your life and values?

Leo Tolstoy: By my fifties, I was drowning in despair despite my wealth and fame. Anna Karenina was behind me, yet I felt empty, haunted by the question: What is the meaning of life? I saw the injustice of my aristocratic life—my comfort built on the toil of serfs, men and women no less human than I. My Christian awakening, not the Church’s dogma but Christ’s teachings, pierced me. In the Gospels, I found a call to simplicity, to love all as equals. Keeping serfs, owning vast lands while others starved—it was sin, plain and simple. In 1861, I’d supported the emancipation of serfs in Russia, but that wasn’t enough. I freed those on my estate and tried to give away my lands, though my family resisted. I could no longer live a lie, hoarding what belonged to all in God’s eyes.

EN: You served as a soldier in the Crimean War, yet later became a fervent pacifist. What led you to reject violence and advocate for nonresistance?

Leo Tolstoy: War scars the soul. In the Crimea, I saw men cut down, their lives snuffed out for empires’ games. I carried that weight, but it was my spiritual crisis in the 1870s that turned me fully against violence. Reading Christ’s words—“Resist not evil” and “Love your enemies”—I realized war and killing were an affront to God’s law. Violence begets violence, chaining humanity to suffering. My book The Kingdom of God Is Within You lays it out: true power lies in love, in refusing to harm another, even an enemy. I saw governments and armies as tools of oppression, not progress. Pacifism wasn’t weakness but strength—a radical trust in humanity’s capacity for good, guided by the divine spark within us all.

 

EN: Your works have inspired readers, writers, and thinkers worldwide, from Gandhi to modern novelists. How did you achieve such profound influence as a writer?

Leo Tolstoy: Influence was never my aim—truth was. I wrote to grapple with life’s questions, to hold a mirror to the human soul. War and Peace and Anna Karenina wove history, love, and morality into stories that felt alive because they came from my own struggles. I didn’t shy from showing people’s flaws, their contradictions, their search for meaning. Readers saw themselves in that. Later, my essays and moral writings—A Confession, What I Believe—spoke plainly to universal longings: purpose, justice, peace. I wrote for the peasant as much as the scholar, in a language raw and honest. If I influenced anyone, it’s because I dared to ask hard questions and live by the answers, however imperfectly.

EN: You faced criticism, even from your family, for your radical changes. How did you reconcile your ideals with the realities of living in a complex world?

Leo Tolstoy: Reconciliation was a daily battle. My wife, Sonya, bore the brunt of my choices—she managed our estate while I preached simplicity, a hypocrisy that pained me. I wanted to give everything away, but family duties tethered me. Critics called me a dreamer, a fool, yet I couldn’t unsee the truth: wealth and power corrupt. I strove to live simply, wearing peasant clothes, working the fields, but I was still a count, entangled in privilege. The struggle taught me humility—to act on truth as best I could, knowing perfection is God’s alone. I urged others to do the same: live your conscience, even if you stumble.

EN: If you could observe the modern world, what aspects of your teachings do you think are most needed today?

Leo Tolstoy: Your world chokes on greed, division, and endless wars. My teachings—simplicity, love, nonresistance—are cries for sanity. Live simply, free from the tyranny of possessions. See every soul as equal, whether prince or pauper, to heal your fractured societies. Above all, reject violence—your weapons grow deadlier, but peace is still the only path to true progress. Seek the kingdom of God within you, not in power or wealth. That inner truth can still redeem a world lost in noise.

 

EN: Any final words for our readers?

Leo Tolstoy: Life is a gift, but only if you seek its meaning. Question everything—your comforts, your society, your heart. Live by love, not force; by truth, not lies. The divine is within you, waiting to guide you to a life of purpose. Dare to follow it, no matter the cost, and you’ll find peace that no wealth can buy.

EN: Thank you again for this time together and your work to make this world a better place. 

* * * * *

Related

Imaginary Interview #1: A Visit with Artist Paul Klee  

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-1-five-minutes-with-artist-paul-klee-a378aa96a2dd?sk=9467841105ad8239bbf5364b0174704d
Imaginary Interview #2: John S. Hall, the Blind Poet of Ritchie County

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-2-john-s-hall-the-blind-poet-of-ritchie-county-5bddd0db5cd7?sk=071d23202a4673f2091abeaab1517499

Imaginary Interview #3: The Influential French Author Honore Balzac 

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-3-the-influential-french-author-honoré-de-balzac-eec642f739cf?sk=20aa802f87d49f0cf5bcfc51e2475b72

Imaginary Interviews #5: A Visit wth George Fox, Founder of the Religious Society of Friends (a.k.a. Quakers)

https://pioneerproductions.blogspot.com/2025/08/imaginary-interviews-visit-wth-george.html 

Imaginary Interviews: A Visit wth George Fox, Founder of the Religious Society of Friends (a.k.a. Quakers)

About seven years ago I created several imaginary interviews as a creative way of introducing friends and readers to people from the past whom I found interesting. This week I thought it. might be interesting to continue this series, beginning with George Fox, founder of the Religious Society of Friends, better known as the Quakers. 

I was in part interested because the Quakers had several times cropped up in my readings on other people such as the influence the Quakers later had on men like Leo Tolstoy and Mahatma Gandhi. Also, being a descendent of Daniel Boone, my roots intersected with the Society of Friends when the Boone's first settled in Eastern Pennsylvania five decades before the American Revolution. 

In this imagined interview, I sat down with George Fox (1624–1691) to explore the convictions that shaped his revolutionary spiritual movement. Born in a turbulent era of religious and political upheaval in England, Fox’s radical vision of a direct, unmediated relationship with God challenged the established churches and inspired a movement grounded in simplicity, equality, and pacifism. This conversation delves into Fox’s spiritual journey, the challenges he faced, and the timeless relevance of Quaker principles in a modern world.

Cook Street Gate, one of the twelve gates in
Coventry where Fox received the first of his three 
initial "openings"--his term for vision ot revelation.
Photo: Creative Commons.

EN: Mr. Fox, could you share the pivotal moment that sparked your spiritual journey and led to the founding of the Quaker movement?  

George Fox: I’d be glad to recount it, though it’s a tale of divine disruption. I was born in 1624 in Leicestershire, raised Puritan, with a heart ever turned toward God. Yet, by my early twenties, I grew weary of the churches—corrupt, rigid, and far from Christ’s true spirit. In 1647, at 23, I wandered alone in the woods, wrestling with despair. Then, a voice pierced my soul: “There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition.” It was as if God Himself reached down, revealing I needed no priest or steeple to know Him. That moment set me ablaze. I began preaching a direct communion with God, gathering those who’d later be called Quakers. We sought truth in simplicity, free from dogma’s chains.

EN: You faced fierce opposition—imprisonment, beatings, even death threats. How did you remain steadfast, and what advice would you offer those enduring hardships for their beliefs?  

George Fox: Persecution was our daily bread. I was jailed eight times, beaten, mocked, yet I stood firm by fixing my eyes on God’s light within. That Inner Light was my anchor; it whispered I was on the true path. My fellow Friends, too, were my strength—together, we bore the blows, knowing we weren’t alone. To those suffering for their convictions, I say: Hold fast. Trust the divine spark within you. Hardships fade, but truth endures. Lean on your community, and let God’s voice guide you through the storm.

 

EN: Quakerism’s principles—simplicity, equality, pacifism—are distinctive. How did you envision these transforming society, and do they still resonate today?  

George Fox: I saw these principles as God’s blueprint for a just world. Simplicity frees us from greed, turning our hearts to what matters—love, faith, community. Equality, rooted in the Inner Light, demands we honor every soul as God’s own, dissolving divisions of class or creed. Pacifism calls us to seek peace, not with swords, but through understanding. Today, your world—rife with strife and materialism—cries out for these truths. Simplicity could heal your obsession with wealth, equality your fractured societies, and pacifism your endless wars. These are not old notions but living remedies.

EN: The concept of the "Inner Light" is central to Quaker spirituality. Can you explain what it means to you and how it shaped your life and interactions?  

George Fox: The Inner Light is God’s presence in every soul—a divine spark that speaks truth, guides conscience, and kindles wisdom. It’s no distant deity but a living voice within, urging us to righteousness. For me, it was my compass, guiding decisions, softening conflicts, and teaching me to see others—rich or poor, friend or foe—as bearers of that same light. It made me listen, not judge; love, not condemn. When I met a soul, I sought their light, and it forged bonds stronger than any doctrine.

EN: You lived in a time of religious conflict. How did you engage with those of different faiths while staying true to your beliefs?  

George Fox: I met all—Puritans, Catholics, even skeptics—with openness, seeking the light in them. I believed God speaks to every heart, not just Quakers, so I listened, spoke plainly, and stood firm in my truth without scorn. I’d dispute fiercely with priests I thought misled their flocks, but never to wound—only to awaken. My aim was unity in God’s spirit, not division. Stay true to your light, I’d say, but honor the light in others, whatever their creed.

EN: Quakers’ unprogrammed worship and consensus-based decision-making seem unique. How did you envision these fostering community and purpose?  

George Fox: Our silent worship is no empty ritual—it’s a gathering in God’s presence, where each soul listens for divine guidance. No priest dictates; the Spirit moves us to speak or hold silence. This binds us, for we seek God together, equal in His sight. Our consensus reflects that equality—every voice matters, and we wait on God to guide our decisions. This builds a community rooted in trust, not hierarchy, united in purpose to live out God’s love. It’s a living faith, not a performance.

EN: Quakerism has diversified over time, with varied branches. How do you view this, and what principles must remain constant?  

After a lifetime of curiosity I finally attended a
Society of Friends worship service here at the
Quaker Meeting House in Duluth.

George Fox: I rejoice that the Friends have grown, though I grieve when divisions arise. The light within us is one, and its truth doesn’t bend to factions. The core must hold: the Inner Light as God’s voice in all, simplicity to keep us humble, equality to honor every soul, and peace to heal a violent world. Let branches flourish, but let these roots remain, for they are God’s eternal call to us.

EN: Observing today’s world, what Quaker values do you think are most urgently needed?  

George Fox: Your world drowns in noise, greed, and conflict. The Inner Light is needed to quiet the clamor, guiding you to truth amid lies. Simplicity could free you from chasing hollow wealth, equality heal your divisions of race and rank, and pacifism end your wars born of pride. Above all, listen—to God, to each other. Live as if all are equal in God’s sight, for they are. That’s the path to a just, compassionate world.

EN: What role does the Bible play in Quakerism? Is the Inner Light informed by Scripture or independent of it?  

George Fox: The Bible is a sacred record of God’s dealings with humanity, a guide to truth—but not the only one. The Inner Light, God’s direct voice within, is our truest compass. Scripture can illuminate that light, stirring the soul to righteousness, but it’s no substitute for God’s living presence. I’ve said, “The Scriptures are a good rule to guide us, but we must also have the Spirit to lead us into all truth.” The Light confirms the Bible’s truths and speaks afresh to each heart, for God is not silent.

 

EN: Any final words for our readers?  

George Fox: Seek the Light within—it is God’s gift to you, a spark that never fades. Live simply, love fiercely, and stand for truth, no matter the cost. You are never alone, for God speaks to all who listen. Let that truth guide you to a life of peace and purpose.

* * * * * 

Related

Imaginary Interview #1: A Visit with Artist Paul Klee  

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-1-five-minutes-with-artist-paul-klee-a378aa96a2dd?sk=9467841105ad8239bbf5364b0174704d
Imaginary Interview #2: John S. Hall, the Blind Poet of Ritchie County

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-2-john-s-hall-the-blind-poet-of-ritchie-county-5bddd0db5cd7?sk=071d23202a4673f2091abeaab1517499

Imaginary Interview #3: The Influential French Author Honore Balzac 

https://ennyman.medium.com/imaginary-interviews-3-the-influential-french-author-honoré-de-balzac-eec642f739cf?sk=20aa802f87d49f0cf5bcfc51e2475b72

Leo Tolstoy on Pacifism and Non-Resistance to Evil

Leo Tolstoy, 1897

A conscientious objector is an individual who refuses to perform military service or participate in armed conflict due to deeply held ethical, moral, or religious beliefs. The concept is rooted in the conviction that certain actions, particularly those involving violence and killing, are fundamentally incompatible with one's principles. 

For Leo Tolstoy, pacifism and non-resistance to evil were fundamental beliefs rooted in the teachings of Jesus Christ, specifically Matthew 5:39, "Resist not evil." 

 

Tolstoy's influence went beyond being one of the greatest and most influential authors of all time, nominated for the Nobel Prize for Literature each year from 1902-1906. He was also nominated several times for the Nobel Peace Prize. (1901, 1902 and 1909.) His novels War and Peace and Anna Karenina have often been cited as two of the greatest books of all time.

Though Count Tolstoy grew up in upper crust society, in his mid-forties he underwent a moral crisis that resulted in his embrace a life of self-renunciation and anarchism, which at that time meant owing no allegiance to any state or political power. His ideas on non-violent resistance had a profound impact on future leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, and the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. It was a stance toward life that he took seriously.

It is also a conviction that stands at odds with many other Christian leaders throughout the centuries. The first who came to mind, and the reason I decided to write about this, was C.S. Lewis, who in his writings defended the idea that Christians could participate in war, especially in the defense of justice and in resisting evil. One of his radio talks during World War II addressed this and was later published in a small volume titled The Weight of Glory.

Saint Augustine supported the notion of war under certain conditions.He made a distinction between just and unjust wars. This notion of "Just War Theory" was expanded upon in greater detail by Thomas Aquinas eight centuries later. Martin Luther viewed military service as acceptable for Christians as a form of service to lawful authority. And Dietrich Bonhoffer participated in a plot to assassinate Hitler.

In short, these and many other Christians has found ways to reconcile their faith with military service. But who is right? 

Tolstoy stands in separate camp. His understanding of the teachings of Jesus, especially as delineated in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) forbids Christians from taking up arms to go to war.

 

In the year 1884 Tolstoy wrote a book titled "What I Believe," in which he made a sincere statement of his beliefs. The response to this book prompted to amplify his convictions with a follow-up titled "The Kingdom of God Is Within You." The preface begins as follows:

In affirming my belief in Christ's teaching, I could not help explaining why I do not believe, and consider as mistaken, the Church's doctrine, which is usually called Christianity.

Among the many points in which this doctrine falls short of the doctrine of Christ I pointed out as the principal one the absence of any commandment of non-resistance to evil by force. The perversion of Christ's teaching by the teaching of the Church is more clearly apparent in this than in any other point of difference.

* * *

Many Christians today would find Tolstoy's ideas so radical that they are not worth the slightest consideration. I myself feel challenged by them. Would any of the original Apostles become soldiers for the Roman Empire had they been recruited for military service?

The entire document is online courtesy of the Gutenberg Project. Here is a link followed by a couple excerpts.

TOLSTOY’S “The Kingdom of God Is Within You"

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/43302/43302-h/43302-h.htm

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."—John viii. 32.

THE DOCTRINE OF NON-RESISTANCE TO EVIL BY FORCE HAS BEEN PROFESSED BY A MINORITY OF MEN FROM THE VERY FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIANITY.

Among the first responses called forth by my book were some letters from American Quakers. In these letters, expressing their sympathy with my views on the unlawfulness for a Christian of war and the use of force of any kind, the Quakers gave me details of their own so-called sect, which for more than two hundred years has actually professed the teaching of Christ on non-resistance to evil by force, and does not make use of weapons in self-defense. The Quakers sent me also their pamphlets, journals, and books, from which I learnt how they had, years ago, established beyond doubt the duty for a Christian of fulfilling the command of non-resistance to evil by force, and had exposed the error of the Church's teaching in allowing war and capital punishment.

In a whole series of arguments and texts showing that war—that is, the wounding and killing of men—is inconsistent with a religion founded on peace and good will toward men, the Quakers maintain and prove that nothing has contributed so much to the obscuring of Christian truth in the eyes of the heathen, and has hindered so much the diffusion of Christianity through the world, as the disregard of this command by men calling themselves Christians, and the permission of war and violence to Christians.

* * * 

And a little further on:

Conscientious objectors at Camp Pike, AK

But in the recent cases of refusal on the part of Mennonites to serve in the army on religious grounds, the government authorities have acted in the following manner:

To begin with, they have recourse to every means of coercion used in our times to "correct" the culprit and bring him to "a better mind," and these measures are carried out with the greatest secrecy. I know that in the case of one man who declined to serve in 1884 in Moscow, the official correspondence on the subject had two months after his refusal accumulated into a big folio, and was kept absolutely secret among the Ministry.

They usually begin by sending the culprit to the priests, and the latter, to their shame be it said, always exhort him to obedience. But since the exhortation in Christ's name to forswear Christ is for the most part unsuccessful, after he has received the admonitions of the spiritual authorities, they send him to the gendarmes, and the latter, finding, as a rule, no political cause for offense in him, dispatch him back again, and then he is sent to the learned men, to the doctors, and to the madhouse. During all these vicissitudes he is deprived of liberty and has to endure every kind of humiliation and suffering as a convicted criminal. (All this has been repeated in four cases.) The doctors let him out of the madhouse, and then every kind of secret shift is employed to prevent him from going free—whereby others would be encouraged to refuse to serve as he has done—and at the same time to avoid leaving him among the soldiers, for fear they too should learn from him that military service is not at all their duty by the law of God, as they are assured, but quite contrary to it.

The most convenient thing for the government would be to kill the non-resistant by flogging him to death or some other means, as was done in former days. But to put a man openly to death because he believes in the creed we all confess is impossible. To let a man alone who has refused obedience is also impossible. And so the government tries either to compel the man by ill-treatment to renounce Christ, or in some way or other to get rid of him unobserved, without openly putting him to death, and to hide somehow both the action and the man himself from other people. And so all kinds of shifts and wiles and cruelties are set on foot against him. They either send him to the frontier or provoke him to insubordination, and then try him for breach of discipline and shut him up in the prison of the disciplinary battalion, where they can ill treat him freely unseen by anyone, or they declare him mad, and lock him up in a lunatic asylum. They sent one man in this way to Tashkend—that is, they pretended to transfer him to the Tashkend army; another to Omsk; a third they convicted of insubordination and shut up in prison; a fourth they sent to a lunatic asylum.

* * *

The position of Christian humanity with its prisons, galleys, gibbets, its factories and accumulation of capital, its taxes, churches, gin-palaces, licensed brothels, its ever-increasing armament and its millions of brutalized men, ready, like chained dogs, to attack anyone against whom their master incites them, would be terrible indeed if it were the product of violence, but it is pre-eminently the product of public opinion. And what has been established by public opinion can be destroyed by public opinion—and, indeed, is being destroyed by public opinion.

The time will come and is inevitably coming when all institutions based on force will disappear through their uselessness, stupidity, and even inconvenience becoming obvious to all.

The time must come when the men of our modern world who fill offices based upon violence will find themselves in the position of the emperor in Andersen's tale of "The Emperor's New Clothes," when the child seeing the emperor undressed, cried in all simplicity, "Look, he is naked!" And then all the rest, who had seen him and said nothing, could not help recognizing it too.

The story is that there was once an emperor, very fond of new clothes. And to him came two tailors, who promised to make him some extraordinary clothes. The emperor engages them and they begin to sew at them, but they explain that the clothes have the extraordinary property of remaining invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position. The courtiers come to look at the tailors' work and see nothing, for the men are plying their needles in empty space. But remembering the extraordinary property of the clothes, they all declare they see them and are loud in their admiration. The emperor does the same himself. The day of the procession comes in which the emperor is to go out in his new clothes. The emperor undresses and puts on his new clothes, that is to say, remains naked, and naked he walks through the town. But remembering the magic property of the clothes, no one ventures to say that he has nothing on till a little child cries out: "Look, he is naked!"

This will be exactly the situation of all who continue through inertia to fill offices which have long become useless, directly as someone who has no interest in concealing their uselessness exclaims in all simplicity: "But these people have been of no use to anyone for a long time past!"

* * * 

What do you think? Is Christianity compatible with military service? Can a nation armed to the teeth with missiles and bombs, and supplying such to the rest of the world, be considered a Christian nation?