Stunning in its depth and inclusiveness. The satirical chapters, in which Woland's retinue fools the Moscow inhabitants, interfere in the novel with the lyrical chapters dedicated to the Master and Margarita. The fantastic in the novel peeps out from behind the everyday, evil spirits roam the streets of Moscow, the beautiful Margarita turns into a witch, and the Variety administrator becomes a vampire. The composition of The Master and Margarita is also unusual: the book consists of two novels: the actual novel about tragic fate Master and four chapters from the Master's novel about Pontius Pilate.
The "Yershalaim" chapters are the content and philosophical center of the novel. The novel about Pilate refers the reader to the text of Holy Scripture, but at the same time creatively rethinks the Gospel. There are important differences between his hero Yeshua Ha-Nozri and the gospel Jesus: Yeshua has no followers, except for the former tax collector Levi Matthew, a man "with goat parchment" who writes down Ha-Nozri's speeches, but "records incorrectly." Yeshua, under interrogation by Pilate, denies that he entered the city on a donkey, and the crowd greeted him with shouts. The crowd, most likely, beat the wandering philosopher - he comes for interrogation with an already disfigured face. Moreover, Yeshua is not the main character of the Master's novel, although his preaching of love and truth is undoubtedly important for the philosophy of the novel. The main character of the "Yershalaim" chapters is the fifth procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate.
The main moral issues of the novel are connected with the image of Pontius Pilate, such as the problem of conscience and power, cowardice and mercy. The meeting with Yeshua forever changes the life of the procurator. In the scene of interrogation, he is almost motionless, but the external static character sets off even more strongly his excitement, dynamism and freedom of his thoughts, intense internal struggle with the principles and laws familiar to him. Pilate understands that the "wandering philosopher" is innocent, he passionately wants to talk with him longer. He sees in Yeshua an intelligent and truthful interlocutor, is carried away by a conversation with him, for a moment forgetting that he is conducting an interrogation, and Pilate's secretary drops the parchment in horror, hearing the conversation of two free people. The upheaval in Pilate's soul is symbolized by the swallow that flies into the hall during the conversation between the procurator and Yeshua; its quick and easy flight symbolizes freedom, in particular freedom of conscience. It was during her flight that Pilate decided to justify the "wandering philosopher" in his head. But when the “lèse majesté law” intervenes, Pilate follows the same swallow with a “frantic gaze”, realizing the illusory nature of his freedom.
Pilate's inner torment comes from the fact that his power, which is practically unlimited in Judea, is now becoming his weak point. Cowardly and vile laws, like the law of insulting Caesar, order him to sentence the philosopher to death. But his heart, his conscience tells him that Yeshua is innocent. The concept of conscience is closely connected in the novel with the concept of power. Pilate cannot give up his career in order to save the "holy fool" Yeshua. So it turns out that the outwardly omnipotent procurator, who inspires horror in his servants, turns out to be powerless in regard to the laws of conscience, and not the state. Pilate is afraid to protect Yeshua. scary ghost the image of the Roman emperor appears in front of the procurator in the semi-darkness of the palace: “... a rare-toothed crown sat on his bald head; there was a round ulcer on the forehead, corroding the skin and smeared with ointment; sunken toothless mouth with drooping lower capricious lip. For the sake of such an emperor, Pilate has to condemn Yeshua. The procurator feels almost physical torment when he announces, standing on the platform, the beginning of the execution of criminals, all except Bar-Rabban: “A green fire flared up under his eyelids, his brain caught fire ...”. It seems to him that everything around him has died, after which he himself experiences a real spiritual death: “... it seemed to him that the sun, ringing, burst over him and flooded his ears with fire. A roar, squeals, groans, laughter and whistles raged in this fire.
After the execution of the criminals took place, Pilate learns from the faithful Afranius that during the execution Ha-Nozri was laconic and said only that "among human vices, he considers cowardice to be one of the most important." The procurator understands that Yeshua read his last sermon for him, his excitement is betrayed by his “suddenly cracked voice”. Horseman Golden Spear cannot be called a coward - a few years ago he saved the giant Ratslayer, rushing to his aid in the midst of the Germans. But spiritual cowardice, fear for one's position in society, fear of public ridicule and the wrath of the Roman emperor is stronger than fear in battle. Too late, Pilate overcomes his fear. He dreams that he is walking next to the philosopher along the moonbeam, arguing, and they "do not agree with each other in anything," which makes their argument especially interesting. And when the philosopher tells Pilate that cowardice is one of the most terrible vices, the procurator objects to him: "this is the most terrible vice." In the dream, the procurator realizes that he now agrees to "ruin his career" for the sake of "an innocent mad dreamer and doctor."
Calling cowardice "the most terrible vice", the procurator decides his fate. Pontius Pilate's punishment is immortality and "unheard of glory". And 2000 years later, people will still remember and repeat his name as the name of the person who condemned the "wandering philosopher" to death. And the procurator himself has been sitting on a stone platform and sleeping for about two thousand years, and only on the full moon he is tormented by insomnia. His dog Banga shares the punishment of "eternity" with him. As Woland will explain this to Margarita: "... whoever loves must share the fate of the one he loves."
According to the Master's novel, Pilate tries to atone for Yeshua by ordering Judas to be killed. But murder, even under the guise of just revenge, contradicts Yeshua's entire life philosophy. Perhaps Pilate's thousand-year punishment is connected not only with his betrayal of Ha-Nozri, but also with the fact that he "did not listen to the end" of the philosopher, did not fully understand him.
At the end of the novel, the Master lets his hero run along the moonbeam to Yeshua, who, according to Woland, has read the novel.
How does the motif of cowardice transform in the "Moscow" chapters of the novel? It is hardly possible to accuse the Master of cowardice, who burned his novel, renounced everything and voluntarily went to the asylum for the mentally ill. This is a tragedy of fatigue, unwillingness to live and create. “I have nowhere to run away,” the Master replies to Ivan, who suggested that it is easy to escape from the hospital, having, like the Master, a bunch of all the hospital keys. Perhaps, Moscow writers can be accused of cowardice, because the literary situation in Moscow in the 30s of the XX century was such that a writer could create only things pleasing to the state, or not write at all. But this motive slips in the novel only as a hint, a guess of the Master. He confesses to Ivan that critical articles in his address it was clear that "the authors of these articles do not say what they want to say, and that this is precisely what causes their rage."
Thus, the motif of cowardice is embodied mainly in the novel about Pontius Pilate. The fact that the Master's novel evokes associations with the biblical text gives the novel a universal significance, saturates it with cultural and historical associations. The problematic of the novel expands endlessly, absorbing all human experience, forcing each reader to think about why cowardice turns out to be "the worst vice."
One of the worst human vices... Cowardice. Yes, we all experience fear, but cowardice is the quality of a cowardly person who is unable to take responsibility for his actions.
The great Russian writer, Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov, in the indicated passage of his novel, raises the problem of cowardice and reveals it through the image of the Jewish procurator Pontius Pilate.
He was punished for the death of an innocent person, whose innocence he did not doubt, but still sentenced him to death. Why did he go for it? Fearing to lose his unquestioned authority, even a man like Pontius Pilate was broken under pressure. populace. For the lack of a desire in him to prove the truth and, moreover, to save the life of a person who even helped him, he was punished.
Bulgakov's position is definitely clear - he believes that cowardice is the most serious vice. It is impossible not to agree with the opinion of the author. It is with the tacit consent of the cowards and the indifferent that the most terrible crimes happen, which carry irreparable consequences...
Reflecting on this problem, Valentin Rasputin's story "Live and Remember" comes to mind. Main character works - Andrey Guskov, also a coward. Yes, he defended his homeland, went under the bullets, but deserted. What was his cowardice? Not in his desertion, but in his inability to take responsibility for the act he committed. He wanted to justify his act by longing for his family and for Nastenka, his wife, and with a light soul he threw this burden on her shoulders. It was mean and cowardly of him. He was simply timid and timid.
As a second example, I would like to cite Vasil Bykov's war story Sotnikov. Partisan Rybak, in military operations, showed himself as a reliable comrade who can be relied upon in difficult times, but when he is captured along with Sotnikov, he is a coward and makes a deal with the Germans and becomes a policeman himself. In order to save his life, he betrays the principles of partnership, betrays his homeland.
Only a mentally weak person is capable of cowardice and betrayal. These vices have one root - cowardice and spiritual poverty. Such people are very dangerous to society, because in difficult situation it is impossible to predict whether they will be true to their words ...
Updated: 2018-03-01
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.
Useful material on the topic
The theme of cowardice links the two lines of the novel. Many critics will attribute cowardice to the master himself, who failed to fight for his novel, for his love and his life. And this is precisely what will explain the rewarding of the master after the completion of the whole story with peace, and not with light. Let's dwell on this in more detail.
At the end of the novel, when Woland leaves Moscow, Levi Matvey comes to him with an assignment (ch. 29).
“- He read the work of the master,” Levi Matthew spoke, “and asks you to take the master with you and reward him with peace. Is it really difficult for you to do, spirit of evil?
“He did not deserve the light, he deserved peace,” said Levi in a sad voice.
The question of why the master did not deserve the light remains to this day not fully clarified. It is analyzed in detail by V. A. Slavina. She notes that the most common opinion is that “the master was not awarded the light precisely because he was not active enough, which, unlike his mythological counterpart, allowed himself to be broken, burned the novel”, “did not fulfill his duty: the novel remained unfinished.” A similar point of view is expressed by G. Lesskis in the comments to the novel: “ Fundamental difference The protagonist of the second novel lies in the fact that the master turns out to be untenable as a tragic hero: he lacked the spiritual strength that Yeshua reveals on the cross as convincingly as during the interrogation by Pilate ... No one dares to reproach a tortured person for such a capitulation, he deserves rest."
Of interest is another point of view expressed, in particular, in the works of the American scientist B. Pokrovsky. He believes that the novel "The Master and Margarita" shows the development of rational philosophy, and the novel of the master himself takes us not two millennia into the past, but into early XIX in., to that point historical development when, after Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, the process of demythologization of the sacred texts of Christianity began. The master, according to Pokrovsky, is among these demythologists, and therefore is deprived of light (the master freed the Gospel from the supernatural - there is no resurrection of Christ). Moreover, he is given a chance to atone for his sin, but he did not see it, did not understand it (meaning the episode when Ivan Bezdomny in the Stravinsky clinic tells the master about his meeting with Boland, and he exclaims: “Oh, how I guessed! How I guessed everything! »
He accepted the testimony of the devil about the truth - and this is his second sin, more serious, Pokrovsky believes. And what many critics see as the reason for punishing the master with peace, Pokrovsky calls an act of heroism, because the hero did not make any compromises with the world alien to him, even in the name of his salvation. Here the master just corresponds to the idea of "good will" and "categorical imperative", which the author of the novel "The Master and Margarita" calls to follow, following Kant. In the first chapter, when the characters argue about the existence of God, Woland, referring to Kant, says that he first destroyed all the proofs for the existence of God, and then "built his own sixth proof." Kant’s sixth proof is the doctrine of good will, the essence of which, according to Vladimir Solovyov’s definition, is “the universal reasonable idea of good, acting on the conscious will in the form of an unconditional duty or a categorical imperative (in Kant’s terminology). Simply put, a person can do good in addition to and in spite of selfish considerations, for the very idea of goodness, out of respect for duty or moral law alone.
We emphasize what is important, in our opinion, to Bulgakov. In his novel, Yeshua is the bearer of good will. And then we ask the question: can Yeshua, following the "categorical imperative", punish the master for not being as strong as himself? He would rather forgive this shortcoming, as he forgave Pontius Pilate, than help the master finish his novel. Then Pokrovsky is right, who saw the sin of the master in the destruction of faith: “However, such a statement is paradoxical, but historically the master is the predecessor of the “educated” theorist Berlioz and the ignorant practitioner Ivan Bezdomny, Ivan before his rebirth. Pokrovsky is closer to the truth, in our opinion, but we cannot fully agree with him, because his truth is in faith, in religion only, and he believes that the Mind is to blame for everything (“the nightmare of the mind that absolutizes itself”).
According to V. A. Slavina, this is not entirely true with Bulgakov. While ideas and theories are often the cause of misfortune (think of Fatal Eggs and dog's heart”), although he denies social revolutions, preferring the “beloved and Great Evolution”, yet it is precisely on the conscious and rational will that he stakes on the path to good. And this is the essence of his philosophy, embodied in a brilliant art form in The Master and Margarita.
M. Bulgakov's archive contains the journal "Literary Study" (1938) with Mirimsky's article about Hoffmann. It was about her that Bulgakov wrote to Elena Sergeevna in Lebedyan: “I accidentally attacked an article about Hoffmann's fiction. I'm saving it for you, knowing that it will amaze you as it hit me. I'm right in The Master and Margarita! You understand what this consciousness is worth - I'm right! In this article, among those noted by Bulgakov, there are the following words: “He (Hoffmann) turns art into a military tower, with which, as an artist, he creates a satirical reprisal against reality.” This is also obvious for Bulgakov's novel, which is why, first of all, the work took so long and difficult to reach the reader.
We focused on the biblical chapters in most detail, since they contain the philosophical quintessence of the novel. Not without reason, the first remark of Ilf and Petrov after reading the novel by Bulgakov was: “Remove the“ ancient ”chapters - and we undertake to print.” But this in no way belittles the content of the chapters on modernity - one cannot be read without the other. Post-revolutionary Moscow, shown through the eyes of Woland and his retinue (Koroviev, Behemoth, Azazello), is satirical and humorous, with elements of fantasy, unusually bright picture with tricks and disguises, with sharp remarks along the way and comic scenes. .
During his three days in Moscow, Woland explores the habits, behavior and lives of people of different social groups and strata. He wants to know whether the Moscow population has changed and how significantly, moreover, he is more interested in "whether the townspeople have changed internally." Before readers of the novel is a gallery of similar Gogol's heroes, but only smaller than those, albeit capital ones. It is interesting that each of them in the novel is given an impartial characterization.
The director of the Variety Theater Styopa Likhodeev “gets drunk, enters into relationships with women, using his position, doesn’t do a damn thing, and can’t do anything ...”, the chairman of the housing association, Nikanor Ivanovich Bosoy, is a “burnout and a rogue”, Meigel is an “earphone” and "spy", etc.
In total, in the novel "The Master and Margarita" more than five hundred characters are not only those who are distinguished by some individual or specific features, but also "collective characters" - spectators of the Variety, passers-by, employees of various institutions. Woland, although he, according to Margarita, is omnipotent, uses his power far from being in full force and, rather, only in order to emphasize and more clearly show human vices and weaknesses. These are tricks in the Variety and an office with an empty suit signing papers, a singing institution and the constant transformation of money into ordinary papers, then into dollars ... And when in the theater the "chairman of the Acoustic Commission" Arkady Apollonovich Sempleyarov demands from Woland to expose the tricks, a real exposure of those present takes place in Variety Citizens.
“I’m not an artist at all,” says Woland, “but I just wanted to see Muscovites in bulk ...” And people do not stand the test: men rush for money - and to the buffet, and women - for rags. As a result, a well-deserved and fair conclusion “... They are people like people. They love money, but it has always been... Mankind loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether it is leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, they are frivolous ... well, well ... and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts ... ordinary people... in general, they resemble the former ones ... housing problem just ruined them…”
It is noteworthy that the action of the novel begins with Woland's acquaintance with Berlioz, the head of a writers' organization, editor of a thick magazine, one might even say a theoretician and ideologist, and Ivan Bezdomny, a poet who writes an anti-religious poem on Berlioz's order. The confidence of the educated Berlioz in his theoretical postulates and the poet's blind adherence to them is frightening, like any dogmatism that leads to thoughtless obedience and, as a result, tragedy. A tragedy not of an individual, but of a whole society forced to submit to a false totalitarian idea. For a lie, retribution is due, “retribution as part of the earthly law of justice” (V. Lakshin). This retribution in Bulgakov's interpretation sounds like the thesis "each will be given according to his faith", which is revealed by the example of Berlioz in the scene at Satan's ball.
“Mikhail Alexandrovich,” Woland turned softly to the head, and then the dead man’s eyelids lifted, and on the dead face Margarita, shuddering, saw living eyes full of thought and suffering. Everything came true, didn't it? Woland went on, looking into the eyes of the head, “the head was cut off by a woman, the meeting did not take place, and I live in your apartment. It is a fact. A fact is the most stubborn thing in the world. But now we are interested in the future, and not in this already accomplished fact. You have always been an ardent preacher of the theory that after cutting off the head, life in a person stops, he turns into ashes and goes into oblivion. I am pleased to inform you, in the presence of my guests ... that your theory is both solid and witty. However, all theories stand one another. There is one among them, according to which each will be given according to his faith. Berlioz goes into oblivion - he believed in it, he promoted it. He deserved this punishment. The fate of Berlioz's interlocutor, Ivan Bezdomny, is also interesting. In the final version of the novel, his punishment is much lighter than in earlier editions. He can't handle the spring full moon. “As soon as it begins to approach, as soon as the luminary begins to grow and fill with gold ... Ivan Nikolayevich becomes restless, nervous, loses his appetite and sleep, waits for the moon to ripen.” But in The Great Chancellor, an early version of The Master and Margarita, the fate of Ivan Bezdomny is more complicated. He appears at the trial dead (how he died, we don’t know) before Woland and to the question: “What do you want, Ivanushka?” - replies: "I want to see Yeshua Ha-Nozri - you open my eyes." “In other lands, in other kingdoms,” Woland tells him, “you will walk through the fields blind and listen. A thousand times you will hear how silence is replaced by the noise of floods, how birds cry in spring, and you will sing them, blind, in verse, and for the thousand and first time, on Saturday night, I will open your eyes. Then you will see him. Go to your fields." Ivan Bezdomny, due to ignorance, also believed in Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz, but after the events on Patriarch's Ponds, at the Stravinsky Clinic, he admits he was wrong. And although Bulgakov holds the idea that "blindness due to ignorance cannot serve as an excuse for unrighteous deeds," at the same time he understands that Berlioz's guilt cannot be equated with the actions of Ivan Bezdomny.
In this regard, the fate of Pontius Pilate is also interesting. In the last chapter of The Master and Margarita, which is called Forgiveness and Eternal Refuge, there is a connection between two novels (the Master's novel and Bulgakov's novel), the master meets his hero:
“They read your novel,” Woland spoke, turning to the master, “and they said only one thing, that, unfortunately, it was not finished. So, I wanted to show you your hero. For about two thousand years he has been sitting on this platform and sleeping, but when the full moon comes, as you can see, he is tormented by insomnia. She torments not only him, but his faithful guardian, the dog. If it is true that cowardice is the most grievous vice, then perhaps the dog is not to blame for it. The only thing the brave dog was afraid of was thunderstorms. Well, the one who loves must share the fate of the one he loves.
Pontius Pilate is tormented by the fact that he did not agree on something important with the prisoner, with whom he dreamed of going along moon road. This moment in the novel seems to be very important, as well as the “full of thought and suffering” eyes of Berlioz’s head. Suffering from having done or said something wrong, but cannot be returned. “Everything will be right, the world is built on this,” Woland says to Margarita and invites the master to end the novel “in one phrase.”
“The master seemed to have been waiting for this while he stood motionless and looked at the sitting prosecutor. He folded his hands like a mouthpiece and shouted so that the echo jumped over the deserted and treeless mountains:
- Free! Free! He is waiting for you!"
Pontius Pilate is forgiven. Forgiveness, the path to which lies through suffering, through the awareness of one's guilt and responsibility. Responsibility not only for deeds and actions, but also for the thoughts and ideas themselves.
Searched here:
- the problem of cowardice in the novel the master and margarita
- cowardice in The Master and Margarita
- cowardice in master and margarita
In the novel by M.A. Bulgakov "Master and Margarita two plots. In the Moscow chapters is depicted modern writer reality of the thirties of the twentieth century. The novel was written in the era totalitarian state during the period of Stalinist repressions. During this terrible time, people disappeared from their apartments without a trace and did not return there. Fear fettered people, and they were afraid to have their own opinion, to openly express their thoughts. Society was gripped by a mass psychosis of spy mania. Atheism became a part public policy, and denunciation was elevated to the rank of virtue. Evil and violence, meanness and betrayal triumphed. The humanist writer believed in the power of good and was sure that evil must be punished.
Therefore, in the Moscow of the thirties, by the power of his imagination, he places the devil, who in the novel bears the name of Woland. Bulgakov's Satan differs from the traditional image of the devil that exists in religious consciousness. He does not at all incline people to sins, does not tempt people with temptations. He exposes already existing vices and punishes sinners, bringing just retribution and thus serving the cause of good.
The second plot is presented as a master's novel about Pontius Pilate. To affirm the eternal spiritual values, the writer turns to the gospel images.
Christian motifs are associated with the images of Yeshua, Pontius Pilate, Levi Matthew and Judas.
Pontius Pilate appears on the pages of the novel in all the grandeur of a man with great power - "in a white cloak with a bloody lining, shuffling cavalry gait" he goes out into a covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great. The Roman governor is the fifth procurator of Judea. He has the right to sign death warrants. And at the same time, M. Bulgakov endows his hero with physical weakness - a painful headache - "hemicrania", in which half the head hurts. He suffers terribly from an "invincible" disease for which there is no cure, no escape. In such a painful state, Pontius Pilate begins the interrogation of the "under investigation from Galilee." The procurator must approve the death sentence of the Sanhedrin.
The image of Pontius Pilate in the novel is the most complex and controversial. The name of this hero is connected with the problem of conscience, posed very sharply. On the example of the image of the all-powerful procurator, the idea that "cowardice is the most terrible vice" is affirmed.
Pontius Pilate is a brave and courageous man, he bravely fought in the battle "under Idistaviso, in the Valley of the Virgins." “The infantry maniple got into the bag, and if the cavalry turma hadn’t cut in from the flank, and I commanded it, you, philosopher, wouldn’t have had to talk with the Ratslayer,” he says to Yeshua. In battle, the procurator is not afraid of death and is ready to come to the rescue of a comrade. This man is endowed with great power, he approves death sentences, the life of the convicts is in his hands. But, nevertheless, Pontius Pilate admits weakness and shows cowardice, condemning to death a man whose innocence he did not doubt for a minute.
To understand why the hegemon made such a decision, one should turn to the interrogation scene in Herod's palace. Great.
The interrogation episode can be divided into two parts. In the first part, Pontius Pilate decides to abolish the death penalty, since he sees nothing criminal in the actions of the wandering philosopher. Yeshua did not incite the people to destroy the Yershalaim temple. He spoke in figuratively and the tax collector misunderstood and distorted the thought of the philosopher. In the second part of the interrogation, Pontius Pilate stands before moral problem conscience, problem moral choice. On a piece of parchment, the procurator reads a denunciation of Yeshua. Judas of Kiriath asked a provocative question about state power. The wandering philosopher replied that all power is violence, that in the future there will be no power, but the kingdom of truth and justice will come.
The procurator is faced with a choice: not to sign the death warrant means violating the lèse-majesté law; to recognize Yeshua as guilty means to save oneself from punishment, but to condemn an innocent person to death.
For Pontius Pilate, this is a painful choice: the voice of conscience tells him that the arrested person is not guilty. When the procurator read the denunciation, it seemed to him that the head of the prisoner had floated away somewhere, and instead of it, the bald head of Herod with a rare-toothed golden crown appeared. This vision symbolizes the choice that Pontius Pilate will make. He is trying to somehow save Yeshua, sending "signals" to give up his words about the great Caesar, but the wandering philosopher is used to telling only the truth. The Roman procurator is internally not free, afraid of punishment and therefore insincere. “In the world there has never been and never will be a greater and more beautiful power than the power of the emperor Tiberius,” says Pilate, and looks with hatred at the secretary and the escort. He utters words that he does not believe in, fearing the denunciation of witnesses to his interrogation. Pontius Pilate made his choice, approving the death sentence, because he was not ready to take the place of a wandering philosopher, he showed cowardice and cowardice.
The main thing can no longer be changed, and the procurator seeks to change at least minor circumstances in order to drown out the pangs of conscience. Showing sympathy for the condemned, he gives the order to kill Yeshua on the cross so that he would not suffer for a long time. He orders to kill the scammer Judas and return the money to the high priest. The procurator is trying somehow to make amends for his guilt, to appease his remorse.
An important role in the novel is played by a dream that the Roman procurator saw after the execution of Yeshua. In the dream, he walks accompanied by his dog Bungy, the only creature to whom he feels affection. And next to him, a wandering philosopher is walking along a transparent blue road, and they are arguing about something complex and important, and neither of them can defeat the other. In the dream, the procurator convinces himself that there was no execution. He recalls the words uttered by Yeshua before the execution, which are transmitted by the head of the service, Athanius: "... among human vices, he considers cowardice to be one of the most important." In a dream, the procurator objects to the wandering philosopher: "... this is the most terrible vice!" He recalls his courage in battle: "... the current procurator of Judea was not a coward, but a former tribune in the legion, then, in the Valley of the Virgins, when the furious Germans almost killed the Ratslayer - the Giant." In a dream, the procurator makes the right choice. In the morning, he would not have ruined his career because of a man who committed a crime against Caesar. But at night, he weighed everything and came to the conclusion that he agreed to destroy himself in order to save "a decidedly innocent mad dreamer and doctor" from execution. Here it is shown that the procurator repents of his cowardice. He realizes he made a terrible mistake. But he is capable of feat and self-sacrifice. If it were possible to change everything or turn back time, Pontius Pilate would not have signed the death warrant. "We will always be together now," says Ga-Notsri. We are talking about the very immortality that the procurator for some reason thought about when he read the denunciation of Judas. Yeshua's immortality lies in the fact that he remained faithful to the preaching of goodness and ascended the cross for the sake of people. This is a feat of self-sacrifice. Pilate's immortality lies in the fact that he showed cowardice and, out of cowardice, signed the death warrant for an innocent person. No one would want such immortality. At the end of the novel, the procurator claims that "more than anything in the world he hates his immortality and unheard-of glory." He says that he would gladly exchange his fate with the ragged vagabond Levi Matthew.